61–70 of 110 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Per https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-March/235091.html , Stallman's last code contribution to GCC was in 2003, and before that 1997.
I viewed it more as a managerial committee akin to a board of directors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
please explain to us where it stops. For instance lets say I find it toxic to use comma in sentences. how many people do I need to find that agree with me on this before I can ban you from hacker news for toxicity?
Well you both seem to think it's acceptable to start a sentence with a lower case letter, so I think you'll get along just fine.
Another interesting comment from the thread: > 4. Regarding morality. This letter (like many other sjw creatures) says many words about morality, diversity, but at the end of the day it boils down to removing Stallman from position. As a citizen of post-soviet country I can vividly see that this letter is enterely about politics and looks very similar to communist agenda which likes to hide authoritarian policies beh…
The stated reason for removing Stallman is the belief that he is "toxic". You may disagree with that but it has nothing to do with Stallman's political views.
A very similar pursuit of ideological purity (in name only; it was a power game) was a characteristic of daily life in the Soviet Union.
Even until the very end, things like the fact that your grandfather used to own more than 10 cows before the revolution (a wealthy oppressor!) or that your family celebrates Christmas (unloyal to the party!) were used to morally judge you and deny things like an apartment allocation (there was no real estate market) or a permit to buy a car. The government had massive databases of personal histories of people (several generations deep, going back many decades) to assess their "morals", supplemented with characterizations people had to write about each other. Almost every hiring, foreign trip, university application etc was checked against these databases. Every organization of had a committee for this. All companies too (because they were all state-owned).
Instead of "toxic", they used the phrase "ideologically unsound", and once you had been deemed as such, many doors in life remained closed for you.
Kinda strange to see the free world slowly re-inventing this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like GCC is going to go down the same path as the Gnome Foundation, focusing on pursuing a political agenda at the expense of developing quality software.
In a couple of decades we will be back to public domain and shareware software models, while a couple of people will get some money selling books and conference talks about the golden age of FOSS. It is bound to happen to any movement that outgrowns its grassroots, while those that achieve their positions thanks to the movement betray it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tolerance generally excludes the intolerant, yes
please explain to us where it stops. For instance lets say I find it toxic to use comma in sentences. how many people do I need to find that agree with me on this before I can ban you from hacker news for toxicity?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a couple of decades we will be back to public domain and shareware software models, while a couple of people will get some money selling books and conference talks about the golden age of FOSS. It is bound to happen to any movement that outgrowns its grassroots, while those that achieve their positions thanks to the movement betray it.
It is becoming more and more dispiriting to see how FOSS is used to build massive empires of surveillance which gather oceans of private data with almost no oversight. And the strategy that has become well-established now is to build a 'product' using FOSS and then lock them up behind a bootloader or a key. Rampant proliferation of binary modules built on top of the Linux kernel are simply not addressed because of fe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tolerance generally excludes the intolerant, yes
please explain to us where it stops. For instance lets say I find it toxic to use comma in sentences. how many people do I need to find that agree with me on this before I can ban you from hacker news for toxicity?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tolerance generally excludes the intolerant, yes
please explain to us where it stops. For instance lets say I find it toxic to use comma in sentences. how many people do I need to find that agree with me on this before I can ban you from hacker news for toxicity?
But instead of talking about the merits of the behavior, folks want to throw out the “tolerance” card.
You want that to stop? Then stop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, because welcoming all regardless of irrelevant background details precludes quality software.
you don't seen to realize the irony that under the appearance of "being welcoming", those committees are only welcoming to whoever complies with their political agenda.
In order to be tolerant we must remove everyone that does not agree