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

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#341

Post by ryan_lane »

robocat wrote: post #207
noelsusman wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying we wouldn't have anyone left in power of they were held up to this standard seems more damning to our current power structure than the moral standard at play here

The underlying moral story of all this is: 1. If you are attacked by the media, you will lose in the court of public opinion (I expect we wouldn't know about this at all except for the egregiously misleading "news" headlines). 2. Never ever discuss toxic topics (particularly if you are either a little odd, or politically weak). 3. If you publically question anything about a witch hunt, you too will be branded as a wi…

As to #4, if you're actively defending particular people's views on sex with underage people, then yeah, people are going to view you negatively by association. The vast majority of people vehemently disagree with that view, and for the most part, people assume that if you defend the view, it's probably because you agree with it.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#342

Post by eecc »

cpach wrote: post #328
panny wrote: post #303

I never thought in a million years I'd see the Silicon Valley bubble become so deranged that they'd reverse polarity. Watching HN eat their own liberal legends like Stallman, at the direction of Fox News and NY Post. This is truly astonishing.

Both RMS and ESR are nut jobs. There are other people who can be better ambassadors for FLOSS than they are.

I wonder if those thinking they could do a better job at “being FLOSS ambassadors” are taking their chance right now, using this moral panic to hoist themselves into the voids

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#343

Post by nabla9 »

RMS has called himself "borderline autistic". His socially clueless black and white thinking makes it look like he is far in the spectrum. RMS is anal about meanings of terms and their use. That's not working well in the current climate where words carry perceived intent. I find myself agreeing with RMS with most of the terminology and its use in this case. Women who tell stories about him paint a picture of lonely socially incompetent man who makes super creepy attempts to connect opposite sex.

I have worked in jobs where there have been very strange creepy people, both women and men. Some are angry and tense. Some are odd and talk restless or slightly disturbing stuff that make everyone uncomfortable. But if they do their work well they can stay. Others give them some room. It's called tolerance.

If RMS was just random superhacker doing his thing. I would defend him. His boss should find a position for him where he can contribute and other people should feel free to feel uncomfortable and avoid him.

But RMS is de facto leader and public figure in movement that is also political. He does not deserve the same level of consideration as normal HR headache would. Even if everything against him would be completely unjust, there is no requirement for just treatment for top leaders. They can be sacked for any reason whatsoever.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#345

Post by mrtksn »

xlii wrote: post #254

I, as many others, never personally liked Dr. Stallman and didn’t agreed with many of his views. That being said, the way that that happened is absolutely terrifying. Fact, that people rather crucify someone instead of argue, explain or prove him wrong is the sign of our times. End of free speech is here. It’s free only if it doesn’t offend group powerful enough to destroy you, and it’s narrowing every single day. We…

This seems like a false positive for the defence system of the society. When you don't have it, I mean, when a behaviour or opinion is not crucified worse things happen(angry mobs, oppression of groups etc.).

Recently I have been reading Sapiens, it the book Homo Sapiens is singled out about its ability to function in groups of up to 150 people. Other humanoids were not able to do that.

I think, however, that discussing thigs on Twitter/Reddit is the same thing as discussing things with thousands and even millions of people that are gathered in a single place. Our species does have the tools to make this possible(the internet) but lacks methods to make it functional. The only thing we have is to detect an idea that somewhat sounds band and oppress it before bad things happen. That way we have some wrongfully vilified people but at the same time, we are able to stop the creation of a group of extremists(some people will not understand the discussion, mistook it for a validation of their sick ideas and if no vilification happens they will take action).

Anyway, that's why we need privacy. We should be able to discuss things in small enough groups without fear of being vilified, in a group with no outsiders we would know if someone is up to something bad or and take an appropriate action instead of overreacting and mislabeling. High-quality public discussions are beyond our capability.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#346

Post by csb6 »

Shinkei wrote: post #291
bad_user wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with technology. If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal, won't your friends and family raise some questions about your character? Unless we're talking of morally flexible individuals. And at least parents should raise an eyebrow, since we have this natural reaction to protect our children. > information wants to be free Whomever said that was…

Yet another person who throws around the word 'pedophile' in a very inaccurate way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia There is no evidence that he was a pedophile. In fact, many of the 'girls' he had relations with were by their own admission consensual and involved compensation. He certainly broke the law in this country and his morals and character are in question, but what he did is (and has been throughout…

I am absolutely floored by your comment. I sincerely hope that it is parody.

Jeffrey Epstein was convicted in 2008 of soliciting a prostitute and of procuring an underage girl for prostitution. He plead guilty and was convicted. How much more clear does this have to get? He is a pedophile. How could he not be? He straight up solicited children for sex and has had dozens of credible accusations by women stating that he sexually assaulted them while they were underage. In what planet does this kind of behavior count as okay, even if only a single accusation was true? He solicited a child for sex!

No matter what fucked up views of what is/isn’t pedophilia you have, surely you see how employing underage girls and encouraging them to have sex with adult guests is objectively bad and so justifiably illegal? I mean these are children. Them getting paid makes it no better. Would you be ok with your child being employed by an older man to have sex with rich friends of his? I wouldn’t. Am I just too “self-righteous” to see such employment as exploitive and inherently immoral/fucked up?

It doesn’t matter if it was consensual. It is statutory rape, and 16 year olds are not emotionally and mentally as developed as 22 year olds - no matter what you claim. Ask any 22-year-old woman if she is the same person emotionally/intellectually as when she was 16. How many would say yes? Not many.

If saying, “Hey, Epstein built a secret harem of underage girls and solicited them to adult men - regardless of the children’s consent to be solicited - is a bad thing” is considered a “self-righteous political agenda”, then I guess I’m a full-on self-righteous prick.

The fact that I’m arguing that systematic, coerced sex between rich adult men and underage girls is bad and condemnable and that a lot of people in this comment section would disagree with me makes me lose hope for this world. It should be obvious that statutory rape laws protect minors and are a good thing. But here we are. Something truly is rotten in the state of Denmark.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#347

Post by fatbird »

snowwrestler wrote: post #242
naringas wrote: post #114

it's rather interesting how all the information technology (social media, etc...) is slowly moving our culture towards increasing self-censorship. One has to have the right opinion or stay quiet. Having the wrong opinion about certain topics is getting more expensive. Stay away from taboos or else... never mind the fact that what we regard as wrong changes across different societies over time. Weirdly all the informa…

> it's rather interesting how all the information technology (social media, etc...) is slowly moving our culture towards increasing self-censorship. It's not. Take it from me, a guy who predates social media by decades. If you go back and look at what Gary Hart dropped out of the 1988 presidential race for, and compare it to what Donald Trump said on social media before, during, and after being elected President, the…

I hate that the parent is being downvoted. It speaks to the poor quality of the community at HN. Parent is absolutely right: twenty or thirty years ago, you were driven from the public sphere for merely a fraction of what passes today as 'within bounds'. Every cry of how we're self-censoring and being chilled rings hollow with every tweet by the pussy-grabber-in-chief. Whining about the boundaries now is just a confession of how little history you know.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#348

Post by PaulRobinson »

Anybody who has spent time around RMS knows there are problematic behaviours in almost every interaction. This is not just about this one incident, but this one incident where he defends "voluntary pedophilia" was obviously the last straw.

I've met him a few times, put him up on my sofa once. I'd say almost every 15-30 minutes in his presence I would stop myself from saying "that's not an appropriate way to behave" or "please don't say that in that way, you're being rude", for fear of insulting him. Perhaps if more people had done that rather than being in awe and reverence (and there are many people who treat him that way), or just looking for a quiet life (my excuse), we wouldn't be here now.

It is clear to me that he has very low EQ or at least empathy for other people. I have spoken to others who have interacted with him who have suggested he might be on the autistic spectrum, and whilst I am not qualified to make a diagnosis, should such a diagnosis be made it would not surprise me.

At the weekend whilst this was blowing up I suggested he needed help. I think he is genuinely completely unaware why any of these statements would cause others to question his values. Freedom of speech is not a right to be a jerk, and he is unaware that he is seen as a jerk by a lot of people because of the many things he has said and done over many years.

It seems there are many people here who likewise are blind-sided as to why suggesting an underage girl would be entirely willing to have sex with an adult and presented herself willingly would be nothing more than a 'controversial opinion'. There are also people who think this is the only thing he's done that has caused problems - it's not.

I think there are deeper issues at play here, and he would benefit from counselling or therapy of some sort. Most people could even without his behaviour, so I'm definitely going to suggest it would be useful in his case. At a minimum it would help him navigate having a huge chunk of his life disappear over the last 24 hours.

I wish him well, but like almost every ex-colleague of his I've spoken to or who has been outspoken on social media about this: the FSF and MIT/CSAIL will now be a better place to be for others, and I hope that RMS gets the help he has needed for a long time.

I wish him well, but I also know that a large number of people will breathe a sigh of relief now that they can go about their work and studies without having to navigate him.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#349

Post by cjslep »

xlii wrote: post #254

I, as many others, never personally liked Dr. Stallman and didn’t agreed with many of his views. That being said, the way that that happened is absolutely terrifying. Fact, that people rather crucify someone instead of argue, explain or prove him wrong is the sign of our times. End of free speech is here. It’s free only if it doesn’t offend group powerful enough to destroy you, and it’s narrowing every single day. We…

> End of free speech is here.

No, it's not.

There have always been consequences to speech. Before social media, the traditional media would be the method of choice of stirring up people into a mob demanding resignations. It's not new.

What is new, is that it is no longer a power centralized to owners of traditional media. It is now distributed, and thanks to Twitter specifically, in a way that promotes "tyrranny by the mob" which the founding fathers themselves abhorred.

This isn't the death of free speech. Instead, view it as tech kicking itself in the balls because the people making software didn't understand how humans would leverage it at a society level scale.

It's why many of us are working of federated but social public forms of media, like the 90s and early 2000's, because that worked at scale without a "tyrranny of the mob".

All that being said, it is hard to be all "free speech is over" doom-sayer when the person in question has repeatedly (and we're talking decades) said creepy things that cumulatively sets up a pattern of behavior. This isn't Joe Shmoe hopping onto the internet the first time and losing his job. It's disingenuous to try to spin this event that way.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#350

Post by aptwebapps »

xlii wrote: post #254

I, as many others, never personally liked Dr. Stallman and didn’t agreed with many of his views. That being said, the way that that happened is absolutely terrifying. Fact, that people rather crucify someone instead of argue, explain or prove him wrong is the sign of our times. End of free speech is here. It’s free only if it doesn’t offend group powerful enough to destroy you, and it’s narrowing every single day. We…

Do you really think he was canned because of this one incident? There are years of bad behavior here.

"We will, as always, be treated to much examination of the precise nature and mass of the last straw, with observations that it would not by itself be sufficient to cause spinal damage in camels, and is therefore utterly harmless."

https://twitter.com/mattblaze/status/1173796229131767808

Post reply on HN