Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Stallman Report

stallman-report.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 208 posts

Re: The Stallman Report

#101

Post by oytis »

shadowgovt wrote: post #86
carapace wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's the obvious argument against this being a false flag operation: why would they bother, they already won. Is Bill Gates that petty? So that means that it's more likely that this is just backbiting on an old, sick man. E.g.: The People's Front of Judea vs. Judean People's Front https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WboggjN_G-4 Let the old nerd die in peace with his friends. (I'm done with this thread and this sub…

It's a bit hard to do that for the people who still care about the movement when the "old nerd" is still on the board of directors. You make an interesting point though: perhaps the FSF has made its bed and the best solution is to give up on it and rally behind another organization with similar goals. Maybe the 'net interprets Stallman as damage and routes around him.

I mean, yes, that would be an obvious alternative to bullying Stallman into resigning from the organisation that he himself created around his own ideas - why didn't it come to anyone's mind before?

Re: The Stallman Report

#102

Post by e844dbe8fb »

drewdevault wrote: post #4
h2odragon wrote: post #3

Anything more to these allegations than there was last time? Or is this yet another chapter of someone's envy resorting to character assassination instead of finding contentment in their own work? If these people succeeded in their apparent goal of making RMS less popular, do they think the world will love them for it? Why aint they signing their name?

I've read most of the report and it's got a lot more than "last time". Speaking as someone who has done a lot of my own research on Stallman's bullshit, the depth of this report is astonishing. The allegations it makes regarding the conduct of the rest of the FSF is particularly alarming. I think you should at least skim it before you comment.

Of course you've "read most of" it. You wrote it after all- or did you ask ChatGPT to write you an anti-free software screed and only read part of it before you posted it?

Re: The Stallman Report

#103

Post by e844dbe8fb »

oytis wrote: post #101
shadowgovt wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit hard to do that for the people who still care about the movement when the "old nerd" is still on the board of directors. You make an interesting point though: perhaps the FSF has made its bed and the best solution is to give up on it and rally behind another organization with similar goals. Maybe the 'net interprets Stallman as damage and routes around him.

I mean, yes, that would be an obvious alternative to bullying Stallman into resigning from the organisation that he himself created around his own ideas - why didn't it come to anyone's mind before?

But the real organization still exists and continues to behave in a decent manner, so it would foil their wicked goals.

Re: The Stallman Report

#104

Post by madahin »

o999 wrote: post #65

Puberty was considered the adulthood age for mellinia, that is suitable for marriage (and is still considered so in several places). Why is this a very controversial topic?

Because children can begin puberty super early [1] Because puberty begin on average at 10-12 [2]

The fact that some countries/cultures are okay with child marriage doesn't mean that it's not absolutely disgusting.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precocious_puberty [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty

Re: The Stallman Report

#105

Post by bayindirh »

fsflover wrote: post #79
bayindirh wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate and put them in the proper context? ...and as far as I understood, that comment was not completely retracted, but amended to change the "age bar" to 14?

This: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41847507

Leaving the mental, emotional and physiological damage of being treated as a "matured adult" the moment you start your 14th year (or puberty) as a human on this planet aside, not because it's small, but it's the contrary.

On the other hand, the freedom of speech does only guarantees that you can tell what you believe openly, but never ever protects you from the consequences of your actions.

Just because some communities believe that entering puberty is enough for these things, it doesn't make it right or harmless. I can find many examples of wrong things which range from funny to atrocious but harmful at the same time.

I'm a big believer of GNU and GPL, and use the four freedoms as the blueprint of what I develop or participate in, however being right and wise in these subjects doesn't make one free from consequences of other actions one may take.

So as a result, linking to a comment telling that being 14 is enough for these things doesn't put the words into context or vindicate the person saying these things.

I may equally say that these words should be punished with a mouth pear (which I do not support in any way, honestly), but we decided that people should be punished in more honorable, better and ethical ways as a planet.

Then, just because some communities prefer mouth pear to this day, it doesn't make the device a legitimate and correct way to punish people.

So, your link to a comment doesn't provide anything in context. Just adds another person who believes in things which are heavily damaging the person who receives this treatment.

Re: The Stallman Report

#107

Post by shadowgovt »

oytis wrote: post #101
shadowgovt wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit hard to do that for the people who still care about the movement when the "old nerd" is still on the board of directors. You make an interesting point though: perhaps the FSF has made its bed and the best solution is to give up on it and rally behind another organization with similar goals. Maybe the 'net interprets Stallman as damage and routes around him.

I mean, yes, that would be an obvious alternative to bullying Stallman into resigning from the organisation that he himself created around his own ideas - why didn't it come to anyone's mind before?

Probably for similar reasons people would rather change leadership at, say, Mozilla than fork Firefox. Again. To create another fork nobody cares about. Again.

Politics is, often, about centralization and coordination of power. It's a lot more effective to change leadership at an organization with good ideas but questionable people than to split power and focus by forming a competing organization. The two resulting organizations may end up politically weaker than one organization (especially if they can't coordinate their efforts because the membership of one of them expects their org to boycott the other org for the reasons they split in the first place).

Jill Stein may, for example, have ideological purity over the Democrats but she'll never be President.

In any case, I hear the FSFE decided to split from working with the FSF when the FSF re-instated Stallman. I'd prefer to have an org with more direct influence over US law and policy, but I'll happily support FSFE since it's the closest thing I have to supporting free software as a concept without supporting continued discussion of age of consent on the side.

Re: The Stallman Report

#108

Post by shadowgovt »

holmesworcester wrote: post #99
narrator wrote: post #92

If there was criminal conduct, someone should file a criminal complaint and have it adjudicated in a court of law with evidence, a jury and witness testimony and once convicted the accused should be appropriately punished. Otherwise, how is anyone going to determine the truth of the allegations? If the behavior was non-criminal then the decision should be made through normal non-profit governance mechanisms. We have…

Having read this, I don't think there is any accusation of criminal behavior in this report. The accusation is that he made people uncomfortable, didn't do enough to change that when it was raised, and defended criminal behavior by insisting on distinctions that the authors of the report consider immaterial or harmful. I worked for RMS/FSF briefly and I think there is something about his radical refusal to compromise…

And this is kind of key to the whole argument. It's not just about his behavior and questionable views on consent and age (though those are the disqualifying issues). Beyond that... The movement is stagnating because its leadership can't compromise and the computing world is moving beyond the era of personal computers and one-org mainframes that Stallman concocted the Four Freedoms in.

How do the Four Freedoms apply when it's not your computer, but a cloud service instead? FSF has struggled to find an answer because it's a philosophically different arrangement than the simpler "I should be able to control my own hardware" argument. Their dominant advice is "Don't use cloud," which is so out-of-touch it's laughable. You might as well tell people in the late 1800s to not use lightbulbs because it gives the electric company too much power over their lives.

Re: The Stallman Report

#109

Post by bringen »

Interesting to note that the A record for stallman-report.org was, up until a few days ago, the same as the A record for drewdevault.com:

https://i.ibb.co/RNBGcTJ/securitytrails-drewdevault.png

https://i.ibb.co/NYtTQnh/securitytrails-stallmanreport.png

So even though the report is anonymous, we can be almost certain that Drew is behind it, as he was for the previous hit piece.

Re: The Stallman Report

#110

Post by felipec »

cassepipe wrote: post #14

Whether you find the people who want RMS to resign obnoxious or not, this is a very well documented and clear-headed collection of what they think (and convinced me) is wrong with the man

Since when is it a crime to be wrong?
Post reply on HN