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

51–60 of 1001 posts

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#51

Post by aazaa »

JaimeThompson wrote: post #20
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…

It is rather hard to support his statement of his "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."

Forget about the content of the statements for a moment.

Imagine a person expresses skepticism of an idea you consider "settled." Do you:

1. demand the person be let go from his/her current position

2. provide evidence that counters the skepticism

If the correct response is (1), then you yourself are at risk of a Stallman exit. Every one of us holds at least one point of skepticism that one or more groups will be deeply offended by.

The liberal idea, under assault form all shades of the political spectrum, depends on (2) being the correct response.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#52

Post by ineffectivtopos »

nemothekid wrote: post #16
jimrandomh wrote: post #8

Before jumping to criticize Stallman, be aware: there is a big difference between what today's round of headlines claim Stallman wrote, and what he actually wrote. Given the relatively clear-cut nature of the lies the press has told about him, I think he ought to be suing for libel.

What is the counter argument for what Stallman wrote? I've seen that the "press is going too hard on him", but, honestly, I think they were justified. What is the "big difference" to you? If someone, personally, said to me that that someone be absolved of a crime, because the other, coerced, party was "willing" at that moment, I'd seriously question their morals.

I mean, let's put aside whether the person might have reasoned the other party was willing. This line of reasoning is ridiculous. If someone appears 100% willing to you, and there's absolutely nothing different from a genuinely willing person, why should you be at fault because somebody else put that person under duress, or because they were lying (under duress or otherwise).

If someone does a 100% legal thing according the information they know, and is not otherwise negligent, there is no crime they should be charged with. As it happens, in the US, statutory rape is the only one I'm aware of that does not follow this criterion; even manslaughter requires negligence (although I'm not making a point about that).

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#53

Post by lgessler »

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 Stallman was trying to mitigate Minsky's culpability. I won't comment on whether I think that was indeed what he was trying to do, but it's not a good look, regardless of whether that is indeed what he was trying to do.

Many people will acknowledge the value of Stallman's stubborn, iconoclastic opinions. I'd count myself among them, and it's a little sad to see Stallman go from his pulpits. But on the other hand, I'm relieved: it might be in Stallman's constitution to be at all times a rational reasoning machine, impervious to emotion and sentiment, but this is not how most people are, and on many occasions Stallman has shown that he either doesn't understand or doesn't care about this. There are times when one should refrain from saying something that is merely correct because of the symbolic meaning it would have, or the emotional responses it would elicit.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#54

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

fiblye wrote: post #23
aurelian15 wrote: post #3

More information on‒what I guess‒is the relevant backstory (RMS making reprehensible statements related to the Epstein scandal) can be found (among other places) in this blog post [1] by Matthew Garrett (original source referenced in the post is [2]). [1] https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html [2] https://medium.com/@selamie/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec21...

>Again, this mailing list has undergraduate students on it. It is likely some of them are “18 years old or 17”. What a horribly asinine point. If you’re an undergraduate student and unable to deal with uncomfortable opinions, you are too immature to be a university student. The further infantilization of college students, and worse, college staff, never ceases to amaze me.

Please keep it civil. Otherwise any good points you make could be obscured by your tone.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#56

Post by ageofwant »

martinky24 wrote: post #26
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…

I'm sorry, did you read his blog post? It was disgusting. He was trying to argue the subtleties of child rape. There are no subtleties. Minor's cannot consent.

A 'minor' is a societal construct that varies over cultures and time. In Biblical Jewish cultures this was set at puberty ~ year 12. In some modern Islamic cultures its may be ~ year 9. In japan it used to be 13.

Minors cannot consent because society has removed that right from them.

Now I suspect we may agree on the general outcome of these rules, but I do find these 'religious' arguments distasteful, regardless from which camp they get issued.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#57

Post by westoncb »

jbarciauskas wrote: post #21
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…

Demanding the same standard of evidence we demand in court and science to disrupt human power structures helps those with power retain it and use it against those who have less power. Also what he said is fully public, so I don't understand what you, or he, is objecting to.

> Demanding the same standard of evidence we demand in court and science to disrupt human power structures helps those with power retain it and use it against those who have less power.

Okay sure, but you're talking about loosening a standard for accuracy of conviction... This means that you can decrease failures to convict truly guilty people—but in equal proportion you will also increase convictions of innocent people.

This does not sound like a well thought out strategy.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#59

Post by lone_haxx0r »

troydavis wrote: post #17
jimrandomh wrote: post #8

Before jumping to criticize Stallman, be aware: there is a big difference between what today's round of headlines claim Stallman wrote, and what he actually wrote. Given the relatively clear-cut nature of the lies the press has told about him, I think he ought to be suing for libel.

The full thread is public, so folks can read it for themselves: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ne8b47/two-researchers-re... Scroll down to the inline doc reader widget. Background: https://medium.com/@selamie/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec21...

On the same tabloid that blatantly lies on the headline of another article about the same issue?

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-sci...

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#60

Post by ywjanananz »

Kye wrote: post #9

I've always heard the person who brings a company to a turning point might not be the one to make the turn. Maybe it's the same for movements. Open source went a long way with his poor behavior, but now it's likely to become a liability as open source spreads further into a world of collapsed context and diverse experiences.

tech will thrive with the diverse experiences of morons too fragile to handle adult discussion
Post reply on HN