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

Richard M. Stallman resigns

fsf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#131

Post by hncomment »

codyb wrote: post #81
tehjoker wrote: post #41

This is very sad that the leader of the FSF took such actions. We benefited from his insights and advocacy on software, but the defense of Epstein, who essentially had a child abuse production line and defense of pedophilia is not something I can support and it is proper that someone new takes over. Stallman's views were a variety of American libertarianism. While there are a few good points within that tradition reg…

From reading his comments isn’t he defending someone named Minsk who had sex with a 17 year old and didn’t know she was being coerced into it by Epstein? It seems to be a bit of a far fetched theory to me that this guy would meet a 17 year old through Epstein and not really be aware of what Epstein was doing, but it doesn’t really seem to be a defense of sexual trafficking, pedophilia or rape. That being said this is…

In they were in Massachusetts, Minsky might have asked, "Are you here willingly, and how old are you?" And he could have received the reply, "Absolutely, I'm having the time of my life with Jeffrey and all the famous people he introduces me to, and I'm 16."

And the sex might then have seemed consensual and legal to Minsky, because even now in 2019, the age of consent in Massachusetts is 16.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#132

Post by eropple »

simplecomplex wrote: post #84

People have to have a path to redemption. Stallman apologized and admitted he was wrong. Why is it not acceptable to make a mistake with words? Isn't it impractical to expect everyone to never say something they regret? These are words we're talking about. It's not like Stallman raped a child. Kicking him out of FSF and MIT seems quite excessive for somebody saying something and then apologizing for it. Whether they…

Constructing a situation in which Marvin Minsky somehow was blameless for his relationship with a known pedophile and child sex trafficker and situations directly resulting from that relationship, then projecting the reactions of other people through that situation, is not merely a mistake with words. Coupled with his at-best-real-gross chinstroking about minors, consent, and statutory rape in the past, it demonstrates a pattern. And it's a pattern that, obviously, made enough people uncomfortable as to want to not associate with him--as is their right.

MIT doesn't have to give Richard Stallman a do-nothing job. The FSF doesn't have to give Richard Stallman a (nearly) do-nothing job. Everybody makes mistakes, sure. You make up for those mistakes by doing good and doing right and if Stallman wants redemption, literally nobody is stopping him from going after it. They're just not bankrolling it. There's a difference here.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#133

Post by rosser »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #125
rosser wrote: post #97

I find the volume of the noise being made over whether or not the "entirely willing" bit was quoted out of context by the media for sensationalist purposes — which it 100% was — quite curious. To me, the place Stallman screwed up was in trying to quibble over terms in defense of a man who we have reason to believe had sex with an woman of an age in a jurisdiction where that might have constituted rape. Because that's…

>Stallman quibbled over the definition of rape. Hell yes he did . Wouldn't you? If I made my own country where "rape" was defined as "sex without first doing twenty jumping jacks," wouldn't you "quibble"? >everyone admits knowingly slept with an woman of an age in a jurisdiction where that constituted rape. So what? I drove 37 in a 35 today, who cares? You can't outsource your morality to the legal system like that.…

Really?

You're going to make a moral comparison between a minor traffic violation (not even a primary offense!) and having sex with a coerced child?

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#134

Post by RHSeeger »

geofft wrote: post #73

> Washington had slaves, that doesn't mean we should hate him. Counterpoint: yes it does. Judging Washington by the standards of his time and his peers , slavery was abhorrent. Take the case of Quock Walker, who sued for his freedom in 1781, for instance. The chief justice of Massachusetts (and later Washington's own nominee for chief justice of the US) wrote: > As to the doctrine of slavery and the right of Christia…

I'm not saying that Washington thought he was right to have slaves. He was wrong to have slaves and it reflects poorly on him that he did. Rather, I'm saying the amount of good he did for this country far outweighs his wrongs.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#135

Post by fiction_cake »

coconut_crab wrote: post #12

The Internet doesn't forget, so everyone can be branded mysogynist/mysandry/pedophile/etc.. just by making mistakes or having taken quotes out of context. People have limited attention and the media profits on showing the ugliness of others. This is not how it should be but I don't know how to fix that...

The internet _does_ forget though. Brendan Eich was forced out of Mozilla, a project he co-founded, and now nobody seems to bat an eye at him being at Brave.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#136

Post by solipsism »

scrollaway wrote: post #96
mikeash wrote: post #61

I’m allowed to criticize him after reading what he actually wrote, right? Because I did and came away from it with the conclusion that he’s evil and shouldn’t be anywhere near anything resembling a leadership position.

He is many things, and shouldn't have been in a leadership position for a long time, but he is definitely not evil. I have a hard time even imagining how you reach the conclusion that he might be evil. Even the worst out of context headlines on his recent quotes just put him in the "gross" category. I say this, and I'm very glad he stepped down. I've argued for years that he should have stepped down a long time ago.

What about his less recent quotes?

I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.

By my book, it's okay to call that evil.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#137

Post by anarazel »

iamnothere wrote: post #43

RMS was defending Minsky, awkwardly. As someone who has a history of social awkwardness, he should be forgiven for this. He's been a good steward of the FSF, which has doing important work in the service of free (read: non-backdoored) hardware lately. I know there are good people still at the FSF, but I can only hope they are as incorruptible and dogged as RMS. The way this attack came suddenly out of the depths make…

> He's been a good steward of the FSF

Howso? He's held back gcc development repeatedly. He regularly forbids the emacs developers and maintainers to use their own judgement. Glibc as well.

Independent of the current issue, this should have happened a long time ago.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#138

Post by AlexandrB »

Donald wrote: post #2

Context: RMS waded into the MIT Epstein scandal https://medium.com/@selamie/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec21... > I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual assault” in an accusation.

"Waded in" is exactly the right phrase. RMS is neither a legal expert nor a moral philosopher. Commenting on the definition of assault and the nature of consent is outside his field of expertise and he should have just replied with a curt "I will not be attending".

My personal takeaway is that it's important to understand the limitations of your own knowledge before succumbing to the urge to comment on something.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#139

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

UncleMeat wrote: post #103
aazaa wrote: post #14

I've seen some online cheering Stallman's resignation from MIT. I suspect they'll also be cheering about this resignation as well. But this is nothing to cheer about. Regardless of what low regard the man might be held as a person, he's being persecuted for having expressing ideas, demanding proof of claims, advocating for objective standards, and asking questions. These are all hallmarks of scientific inquiry. It se…

"Asking questions" that deny people's humanity over and over isn't exactly a positive intellectual exercise. We pretty conclusively decided that race based chattel slavery was wrong a while ago. But why? Can we keep expressing ideas and demanding proof of these claims? Can we do it forever? Can we do it while holding positions of power at institutions that are attended by black students?

> We pretty conclusively decided that race based chattel slavery was wrong a while ago. But why? Can we keep expressing ideas and demanding proof of these claims?

Obviously yes? How else would we know that we are right?

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#140

Post by roenxi »

lgessler wrote: post #53
aazaa wrote: post #14

I've seen some online cheering Stallman's resignation from MIT. I suspect they'll also be cheering about this resignation as well. But this is nothing to cheer about. Regardless of what low regard the man might be held as a person, he's being persecuted for having expressing ideas, demanding proof of claims, advocating for objective standards, and asking questions. These are all hallmarks of scientific inquiry. It se…

In its most literal form I don't know if I would say I disagreed with the core of what Stallman was saying in the email (that "sexual assault" should perhaps be revised in its usage), but Stallman was tone-deaf at best to have pontificated on such a comparatively minor (and highly arguable) matter when he did and where he did. Worse, with what he wrote, there is a reading of the email where the subtext is that Stallm…

> In its most literal form I don't know if I would say I disagreed with the core of what Stallman

You qualify this, but that is basically the core of what Stallman supporters are looking at.

Saying something that is literally true, in an industry which is known to be stuffed with some very literal minded people, should not be grounds for anyone resigning. It should be grounds for doing nothing, apologising or clarifying depending on what was said.

It is risky to punish people for what they did not literally say. Particularly if they are the sort of person who is well known for striving to be literally correct.

Post reply on HN