Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are surprised because you equate two things that are qualitatively different. Some people advocating for arresting someone for something they did, even if it is way too crazy is quite different than tools that enable discrimination based on an opinion. Remember these people are just supporting RMS, not advocating for slavery or exterminating the Jews (and even then I don't know whether you could support such a th…
>Some people advocating for arresting someone for something they did, even if it is way too crazy is quite different than tools that enable discrimination based on an opinion. It isn't different at all. Both are forms of discrimination based on an opinion. What Molly De Blanc "did" was express an opinion. On the one hand, you have a Chrome plugin that highlights public information, and on the other hand you have Stal…
A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS
271–274 of 274 posts
Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS
#272> A competing letter in support of RMS exists and has accumulated considerably more signatures than the letter condemning RMS. > In response someone created a Chrome extension that marks repositories owned by a signatory of this support letter with red text on GitHub. This is incredible worrying. This is basically maintaining a repository of people with "incorrect" opinions. How long before such repositories are inte…
Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS
#273> A competing letter in support of RMS exists and has accumulated considerably more signatures than the letter condemning RMS. > In response someone created a Chrome extension that marks repositories owned by a signatory of this support letter with red text on GitHub. This is incredible worrying. This is basically maintaining a repository of people with "incorrect" opinions. How long before such repositories are inte…
It surprises me that so many people are outraged by a Chrome extension that highlights names - and does nothing more as far as I know - denouncing it with all of the righteous anger that Hacker News can muster (including wanting to blacklist anyone who contributed to the extension, and wanting to see everyone with progressive politics purged from free software entirely) yet no one seems too bothered when RMS supporte…
Respectfully, you seem a bit confused. There are three such extensions that I know of. Some people on Twitter already talk about "no hire" lists. Not that I would would care to work for such people and their bullshitware. But it is clear that a lot of supporters are afraid to speak out, while I do not think the same holds at the other camp. I bet that some signatures in the attack letter are only there due to fear. Yet the votes in support are almost exactly twice as many and (important) it is translated in double the number of languages (30+).
Do not forget that the supporters are defending someone. While you may not agree about everything every single supporter says, this is all in response to the other campaign, which is attacking. The attack letter is such an incompetently written and fierce text that I am really baffled. Do they really believe the things they are writing? Did they just do it intentionally? I do not think a single explanation applies to all people related to that campaign. I have at least three in mind. In the end they and their obscene accusations and demands are backed by corporate money anyway. Livelihoods and careers are threatened. Why?
RMS actively supports all these groups that the letter claims he is against. Just look (besides his general character and actual actions) at his thousands of political notes, not just the three that are supposedly bad. He is not paid to write them. And it is not the same generic, colorless, tasteless, mechanically generated copypasta that is thrown around by people that are paid shitloads of money and claim to care about diversity.
Just look at the bigger picture.
Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS
#274I'm still not sure why people consider it appropriate to exclude someone like Stallman from serving on the Board of the FSF while continuing to allow Mr. Rafael Reif, for example, to remain president of MIT after sending a personally signed "thank-you note" to one of the most notorious alleged sex-traffickers and convicted child-rapists in US history:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2020/01/12/after-epstei...
Nor would it be any more appropriate to allow Mr. Seth Lloyd back onto the MIT campus with just a slap on the wrist:
https://thetech.com/2021/02/25/mit-administration-epstein-op...
Or Mr. Martin Nowak for that matter either:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03/26/metro/harvard-sanctio...
On the subject of Nowak's role in aiding and abetting a child rapist, this hacker news thread is worth reading again:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25442060
So why has nobody drafted petitions to cancel Rafael "Thank You So Much Mr. Epstein -- And Don't Forget to Show My Letter to Federal Prosecutors" Reif, Benedict "Epstein is an Ideal Donor for Harvard" Gross, Alan "Dershbag" Dershowitz, Martin "Punishment Serves No Noble Purpose" Nowak, Steven "Using the Internet to Entice a Minor into Prostitution is A-Okay" Pinker, Seth "So What If I Make Female Undergraduates at MIT Feel Uncomfortable" Lloyd, Neri "Epstein was Always a Reliable Supporter of Israel" Oxman, Frank "I Never Saw any Girls that were Underage" Wilczek, and all of the other pedophilia-tolerating two-faced phonies that attended EDGE Foundation dinners hosted by the convicted child rapist and/or visited him on "Pedophile Isle," where FBI reportedly found instruction manuals that Mr. Epstein had ordered on Amazon that describe how to create a so-called "sex slave," in addition to video tapes containing child pornography that he allegedly recorded using secret cameras that were installed throughout his various residences?
Mr. Stallman blaming his "being on the spectrum" for all of the troubling statements cataloged on the website cited below may not entirely excuse him for making them since there is no evidence that someone on the spectrum is more likely than the general population to hold similar views on child rape:
https://geekfeminism.wikia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman
But the most important question today that Mr. Stallman still needs to address directly, because many of his critics on this issue continue to hold him in the highest regard for his role in advancing the free software movement, is a very frank one:
Were his remarks in support of pedophilia designed to persuade Mr. Epstein to donate part of his $500 million estate to the Free Software Foundation, much like he observed role-models such as MIT president Rafael Reif do for Mr. Epstein when Dr. Reif sent Mr. Epstein a personally signed thank-you note for his donation to the Media Lab, or colleagues like Martin Nowak do for Mr. Epstein when Dr. Nowak created a web page on a university website and an office in his department for a convicted child-rapist in exchange for tens of millions of dollars in donations that were promised to his academic program at Harvard and hundreds of millions of dollars in donations, often laundered through Epstein's fellow billionaire pedophile friends like Les Wexner, Glenn Dubin, and Leon Black, to Harvard University, where Mr. Nowak is a professor?
I'm not entirely convinced by the naysayers on this one yet, but Stallman is most deserving of the benefit of doubt thus far, and not because of his autism, but rather because of all of his contributions to free software in spite of it.
On the other hand, many of the other Epstein co-conspirators cited above who directly accepted money from the convicted child-rapist as a form of reputation laundering for an individual who they knew, or should have known, was about to face racketeering charges in federal court for the sex-trafficking of hundreds of underage girls over the past 30 years deserve to spend some serious time in the same jail cell where Mr. Epstein (allegedly) killed himself because he was too much of a coward to stand trial for all of the crimes that he knew he had committed.