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

Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

audio-video.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 841 posts

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#461

Post by luma »

bobsmooth wrote: post #444
luma wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You refuse to learn something because you are afraid that that thing might change and require you to learn new things? Maybe this isn’t the best industry for you.

WhatsApp isn't something you have to learn.

I don't think anyone was talking about learning to use whatsapp. Grandfather post directly says they won't bother to learn how to use public clouds as an example, because the APIs might change.

That's their decision, but it's a career limiting one, akin to saying the VAX has everything I need and it won't be changing so I refuse to learn any other system.

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#462

Post by hutzlibu »

bawolff wrote: post #423
hutzlibu wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We need absolutists like him who go to extremes and are known widely." But what is he known for, outside tech circles, if he is known at all? When you want to deliver a message, it matters a lot, how you deliver it.

Does it matter? His message isn't for non-programmers. What is plato known for among people who don't give a shit about philosophy?

"Does it matter? His message isn't for non-programmers."

I see. Well then, carry on.

But maybe then do not wonder when the rest of the world does not care about software freedom and also don't donate or support it in any way.

Oh and Plato is well known as a philosopher, but yes, most people do not know that he proposed a very totalitarian state and is rather known for platonic love.

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#463

Post by _cenw »

jraph wrote: post #451
op00to wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear stuff like "you need really subtle and careful reading"... it's just an excuse to discount the actual content of the message and invent the meaning you wanted all along. Like, how could I be so stupid to not pick up on this totally opposite point from what RMS was saying?

This point was discussed at length over the years. You have your opinion on it. Likely different from mine. At this point I don't think any of us can change their mind, we both have been forming our respective opinion for a long time now. Let me precise my phrasing: you might have read this thing with "really subtle and careful reading" and reached a different opinion from mine. I believe it. It's fine. But I do main…

That's a long way to say "I gave every statement the maximum benefit of doubt".

A lot of people need to learn that culturally engrained bad behaviors aren't the same as intentionally being a bad person. But neither does it free you from responsibility for your behavior.

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#464

Post by paulcole »

sulam wrote: post #335
vasco wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd bet there will be a blockbuster movie about this guy within 10 years of him dying and it'll be in the pop culture, and maybe even stoke a temporary privacy / freedom focus for a while in common consciousness. Unfortunately the world doesn't know how to really appreciate people as much when they're alive for some personality types.

I'll take the other side of that bet.

Hammering the under on # of blockbuster Richard Stallman biopics is free money.

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#465

Post by leidenfrost »

jraph wrote: post #388
Pannoniae wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I am open to changing my mind. What do you think, what's the reason then? From an outsider perspective, 10 years ago I've seen all those beautiful, perfectly usable UIs, and they have almost all disappeared by today. What happened? Why do you think GNOME does that?

I believe its maintainers truly believe they are taking the right decisions that are good for the project. They limit the feature set so they can stabilize on a smaller basis. They take UI/UX decisions they think are right. That's what I think. I also think they managed to build a beautiful UI that works quite well and that pleases many people. I also think they removed useful features, lagged on important features (…

> I also think they believe they know better than their users on what they need when they really don't

This. They have this kind of Apple syndrome of belittling use feedback, minus the part of being a billion dollar megacorporation

Also, things would have gone differently if they forked gnome 2 into a new project and left the original sources intact, instead of dragging all the userbase and distros with them.

To me, this was the shittiest move. Instead of saying "hey, we want to remake gnome into a very opinionated DE so we will make a new project for it", they said "we will use the same gnome2 sources so we will not listen to you but you are forced to listen to us!"

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#466

Post by geenat »

hutzlibu wrote: post #328
hkt wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are phases in which change happens: Stallman's preaching to people who can actually make free software (eg, people you might find on HN) has accomplished a huge amount of capacity building. He's tremendously good at encouraging it, and always has been. That provides the raw material for people who are perhaps a little more adoption focused (and apt) which is work that can't happen if there's no capacity.

Well, I am also good at making software, share the goal of a world where everyone fully controls their devices - yet I am appalled by many things around him. Mostly the "superior" ethical stance. You do things this (my) way, then it is ethical and you love freedom or you are not ethical and don't want freedom. Sorry, but I just have some different opinions about some things, but I rather feel not like working togethe…

The ego of anons who are "also good at making software", try to minimize Stallman, then step back into anonymity is hilarious.

You're comparing yourselves to a guy who has changed the face of software and privacy, probably forever- his license is quoted to be one of the most important decisions in Linux by Torvalds himself.

> Lots of open source and free software for tech people - everything closed down for ordinary people.

It just wouldn't get made. Software would be worse without OSS because there would be no fire under Microsoft's ass

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#467

Post by jraph »

_cenw wrote: post #463
jraph wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This point was discussed at length over the years. You have your opinion on it. Likely different from mine. At this point I don't think any of us can change their mind, we both have been forming our respective opinion for a long time now. Let me precise my phrasing: you might have read this thing with "really subtle and careful reading" and reached a different opinion from mine. I believe it. It's fine. But I do main…

That's a long way to say "I gave every statement the maximum benefit of doubt". A lot of people need to learn that culturally engrained bad behaviors aren't the same as intentionally being a bad person. But neither does it free you from responsibility for your behavior.

> That's a long way to say "I gave every statement the maximum benefit of doubt".

I don't agree. I questioned his statements quite hard. Because I already knew at the time that he was not well-behaved with women.

Now, be aware that I almost fully agree with the rest of this comment and your other comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37699851#37702338. [*]

What one thinks / what one's ideals are is different from how one actually behaves. Especially when speaking about sexism. Apart from obviously bad behavior, there are many things we do that are sexist without even us noticing and it's important to be aware of this so it can be fixed.

[*] With a difference: I understand a "misogynist" as someone who actively dislike women. See [1]. Sexism ≠ misogyny.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogyny

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#468

Post by hutzlibu »

hkt wrote: post #391
hutzlibu wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I am also good at making software, share the goal of a world where everyone fully controls their devices - yet I am appalled by many things around him. Mostly the "superior" ethical stance. You do things this (my) way, then it is ethical and you love freedom or you are not ethical and don't want freedom. Sorry, but I just have some different opinions about some things, but I rather feel not like working togethe…

Yet there are enormous amounts of cooperation within free software. There are the various organisations like the GNOME foundation, the Free Software Foundation, Debian, and many more beside. Thousands of volunteers keep these things going to produce well integrated, usable software. Not to mention the common principles in most free software around interoperability and loose coupling. Apple and Microsoft (and the rest…

So can you install gnu/linux on someones desktop and he can just use it on his own without the terminal? What do they do, when the next update tells them that some pgp keys are invalid?

Free software works for devs and geeks, yes and I happen to be one of them. But for common people? Usually not very good, as they don't know the terminal and don't know config files. I know, because I tried to spread linux. It is hard work.

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#469

Post by poorbutdebtfree »

jraph wrote: post #181

Here he is, 70, under chemo, giving a speech. He keeps being a force of nature. May he recover well, or at least have long enjoyable years ahead. He has/had arguable/unacceptable behavior, but I believe we strongly owe him. He has built incredible software, defined important stuff and kicked our asses in the right direction.

[flagged]

Re: Richard Stallman reveals he has cancer in the GNU 40 Hacker Meeting talk [video]

#470

Post by funcDropShadow »

jraph wrote: post #355
borbulon wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having cancer myself, I can tell you that there are a lot of misconceptions about what life “under chemo” is like. I’m in a clinical trial for pills now, but when I was doing infusions, the worst of them had me out of commission for about 4 days - chemo day (which was about schedule, not side effects), then days 4, 5, and sometimes 6 after chemo day. The rest were completely manageable, in fact I looked forward to wo…

> the worst of them had me out of commission for about 4 days - chemo day (which was about schedule, not side effects), then days 4, 5, and sometimes 6 after chemo day Isn't chemo tolerated differently in different patients? It's still anecdotes, but I've heard many stories of people, some usually very dynamic, being strongly weakened by it. To the point some even decide it's not worth it and stop the treatment altog…

> Isn't chemo tolerated differently in different patients?

Chemo subsumes a large number of different medications. What they have in common is that they are basically poison, and you hope that the cancer cells die faster than you. The effects differ wildly between different treatments and patients.

Post reply on HN