231–240 of 253 posts
Why is this flagged? This is an important debate. Should RMS's private or political views unrelated to the work of the FSF debar him from FSF?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Supporters like OSI, a rival organization? No one cares about Stallman beside people who are already involved in open-source movements.
Supporters like the members of the FSF who are resigning and volunteers who have stepped away from the project in light of this decision. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/executive-director/management-team...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean hundreds of anonymous GitHub accounts or absolutely nobodies are risking something, as opposed to people who have proven track record of actually doing real work in the world of free software? Just wow.
Oh, wow. Maybe if you actually skimmed through the list of supporters you'd find that they're real people with real jobs strongly interested in FOSS from all around the world? Or are you, perhaps, a jingoistic xenophobe for whom only American opinions matter?
Will every RMS-support topic/petition get flagged on HN? Has HN became an enabler of a witch-hunt mob?
From the linked article: > Our opponents wish to destroy Free Software > Our opponent’s true target is not Richard Stallman; their real aim is to destroy the FSF by thoroughly infiltrating it (like they already have with organisations like the OSI and Linux Foundation). These people even started an online petition calling for RMS’s forceful removal and for the entire board of directors at the FSF to resign from their…
If you think Stallman stands for open source you don't understand free software, open source, nor Stallman.
A permissive license like MIT allow companies to take your code and make it their code and then companies make millions with your code sharing nothing/zero/nada with you. Funding Open Source developers are a big problem the community struggle with and it is by design. GPL, on the other hand, doesn't allow companies to take over your code. If they want your code in their products because your code is valuable they need to pay you, the developer, or share the code with the community so everybody can monetize the code.
The big problem is that companies don't want to pay for what they use. And it is not only in the tech industry, it is everywhere. Companies want you paying them for stuff you use from them, but they don't want to pay you for the stuff they use from you. As someone already wrote here, Open Source is just free labor for big companies to make them money. It's time to stop being stupid. This attack on RMS as a person and all his flaws are bullshit. Everybody knows that the Tech Industry are full of people worse than RMS. Tech industry are full of CEOs, CFOs, CTOs, COOs, manager, that are sexists, racists, transphobics, misogynists and and yet there is no public campaign to remove them from their roles. The same companies that are promoting this campaign against RMS are the companies that don't hire women or black, asian, latin, trans people for leadership and executive roles and yet, no public campaign. Why? Everybody seems to have some shit to say about RMS but not about these companies? Do they pay your salary so they are allowed to screw everybody without your criticism? Why moral, ethics, social justice are applied to some but not to all?
This campaign has one goal, to use RMS flaws to cancel RMS and censor him. Am I saying he is perfect? No. Am I saying he is good? No, because I don't know him. I don't know if he is a good or a bad person, if he deserves his position as a leader in Free/Libre Software community, I don't know if he did something bad or outlaw. If he did, he should pay. But this is not an excuse for these companies that do not like him and are ideologically opposed to him to try silence him with this cancel culture.
So one thing I'm noting here is that this letter has a heavy translation/international bent. Additionally, an extremely large portion of signers have Russian-language names, for example. Anecdotally, nearly everyone I have ever talked to or worked with in FOSS software has signed the "opposes RMS" letter, and I can't find anyone I recall or have even heard of on this one. But of course, I mostly have worked with peop…
The semantic problem with terminology which he pointed out at that time also seems to be US-specific, more or less (not sure how common it is to use that turn of phrase in the UK, to be honest).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whether somebody is called he, she, or them may reasonably fluster some people, but it certainly doesn't seem to warrant something as hateful as, "the world gone absolutely batshit insane, driven by purple haired Twitter trans-extremists". To me, this stance and its wording is much more extreme and "insane" (to use your choice of insult - I would say something like "irrational").
I can understand your perspective, but that's only held up if one subscribes to the (erroneous and misunderstood/misused version of) Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance: > A tolerant society should be tolerant by default, > With one exception: it should not tolerate intolerance itself. First, at face value, consider two individuals engaging about one's identity preference: Alice wants to be referred to by a non-binary…