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

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#761

Post by criley2 »

eloff wrote: post #736
colechristensen wrote: post #679

RMS was defending his friend who, at the age of 74, is accused of having sex with a 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island. There is not a defense for what RMS was writing or how he was trying to defend Minsky. The prevalence of comments trying to turn this against "SJW"s or whatever "other" they can because they're a fan of RMS is disturbing. This isn't us vs. them. This is a man who said something wildl…

How is it we value free speech, but there are certain discussions you just cannot have, even in a rational and measured way, without risking making yourself completely unemployable. You should be able to have a questionable viewpoint in a discussion, without worrying about the lynch mob ending your career. The consequences here are out of line. You can be reprimanded to take your discussions to a non company venue, i…

>Stallman said “it is morally absurd to define ‘rape’ in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17.”

Stallman had no comment on whether consent mattered or whether his red herring of age was intentionally designed to excuse a rape or not.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#762

Post by colechristensen »

eloff wrote: post #736
colechristensen wrote: post #679

RMS was defending his friend who, at the age of 74, is accused of having sex with a 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island. There is not a defense for what RMS was writing or how he was trying to defend Minsky. The prevalence of comments trying to turn this against "SJW"s or whatever "other" they can because they're a fan of RMS is disturbing. This isn't us vs. them. This is a man who said something wildl…

How is it we value free speech, but there are certain discussions you just cannot have, even in a rational and measured way, without risking making yourself completely unemployable. You should be able to have a questionable viewpoint in a discussion, without worrying about the lynch mob ending your career. The consequences here are out of line. You can be reprimanded to take your discussions to a non company venue, i…

I value free speech in that I value the government's inability to limit anyone's expression with only a few reasonable exceptions.

I don't take "free speech" to mean anyone can say anything without consequence. The government has a whole lot of power and it comes with limits like free speech.

That doesn't mean that people in my employ can say awful things and I should just ignore it.

Free speech doesn't extend to being protected from consequences for how you express yourself.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#763

Post by blub »

roguecoder wrote: post #724
syrrim wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He disagreed with the wording "assault" which he felt was ambiguous. He would almost certainly have been fine with the wording "had sex with a 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island". I'm sure a number of other wordings that call into question said girl's consent, the legal status of said girl on said private island with regards to sex, and so on would have been fine as well.

That is what “defending” means: he took objection to what Minsky allegedly did being accurately characterised as assault and a crime. Plenty of criminals take objection to their crimes being described as crimes, but “men should be allowed to have sex with underaged girls” is a particularly self-serving and gross position for a man in a position of power over young women to take.

The age of consent in a large part of the world (including a large part of the US) is 16. In Europe it goes down to 14, with some protections from abuse over those with power over the teen (e.g. teachers).

Some(?) European countries do legally differentiate between children and teens and that seems reasonable bases on what we know about biological and developmental differences.

I also regrettably used "child sex abuse" inaccurately before when referring to Epstein. This reflects the legal status in the US I believe, but paints the wrong picture of actual children instead of teens being harmed. It pays to be accurate, because discussions around this topic are completely hysterical as it is.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#764

Post by widowlark »

eloff wrote: post #736
colechristensen wrote: post #679

RMS was defending his friend who, at the age of 74, is accused of having sex with a 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island. There is not a defense for what RMS was writing or how he was trying to defend Minsky. The prevalence of comments trying to turn this against "SJW"s or whatever "other" they can because they're a fan of RMS is disturbing. This isn't us vs. them. This is a man who said something wildl…

How is it we value free speech, but there are certain discussions you just cannot have, even in a rational and measured way, without risking making yourself completely unemployable. You should be able to have a questionable viewpoint in a discussion, without worrying about the lynch mob ending your career. The consequences here are out of line. You can be reprimanded to take your discussions to a non company venue, i…

Stallman hasn't been silenced in any way. Free speech does not mean you can say whatever you like without consequence from private institutions and citizens, only that you may say whatever you like without consequences from the government et al.

Your conflation that free speech is under attack is disappointing - That's not what is happening here.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#765

Post by tombert »

t0astbread wrote: post #743

Regardless of whether it was right to ditch Stallman as the president of the FSF, here's my "wishlist" for his successor (in case they don't revert it): - Someone who is less of a hardliner: Stallman's dedication to free software is a good thing but his absolutist style of expressing it might have put a lot of people off who would otherwise not be opposed to the idea of free software - Someone who understands the pro…

I agree with your second two points 100%, though not with the first at all.

I think that Stallman's hardliner stance, while it has scared away a lot of people, has also been a good thing in a lot of regards; if nothing else, it shows that there is a position to be had in the extreme copyleft.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#766

Post by TeMPOraL »

roguecoder wrote: post #724
syrrim wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He disagreed with the wording "assault" which he felt was ambiguous. He would almost certainly have been fine with the wording "had sex with a 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island". I'm sure a number of other wordings that call into question said girl's consent, the legal status of said girl on said private island with regards to sex, and so on would have been fine as well.

That is what “defending” means: he took objection to what Minsky allegedly did being accurately characterised as assault and a crime. Plenty of criminals take objection to their crimes being described as crimes, but “men should be allowed to have sex with underaged girls” is a particularly self-serving and gross position for a man in a position of power over young women to take.

> That is what “defending” means: he took objection to what Minsky allegedly did being accurately characterised as assault and a crime.

That "and" is pretty disingenuous here, turning the sentence from accurate to grossly misleading. RMS took objection to the act being characterized as assault. Not as crime. And the truth is, it does matter what crime was committed, not only that a crime was (allegedly, as it turns out). It would matter to you if your deceased friend was accused posthumously that their record is at least kept accurate, if it isn't straight.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#767

Post by Sacho »

reuven wrote: post #665

People seem to be saying a variety of things about RMS: He's a genius, so let him be. He doesn't understand interpersonal communication. He didn't say the things people thought he said. People are too quick to judge. And so forth. I was there, about 20 years ago, when he sent e-mail urging all free-software advocates to protest a bill under consideration in the US Congress. I asked him if he had read the bill. "No,"…

Your argument against Stallman seems to hinge on him defending Epstein, which is something he didn't do. He was defending his late friend, Minsky. Specifically, he was unhappy with the language used to describe his conduct evoking imagery worse than the actual conduct.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#768

Post by widowlark »

lanevorockz wrote: post #748
eloff wrote: post #736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it we value free speech, but there are certain discussions you just cannot have, even in a rational and measured way, without risking making yourself completely unemployable. You should be able to have a questionable viewpoint in a discussion, without worrying about the lynch mob ending your career. The consequences here are out of line. You can be reprimanded to take your discussions to a non company venue, i…

Completely agree with you and it makes me depressed that we are living on an age that we are giving up the imperfectness of humans in exchange for fake puritanism on a standard that cannot be achieved by anyone. I bet everyone here has one opinion that can definitely and very quickly destroy their lives. Let people be wrong, let them speak, let them think ... We can then convince and converge into a common good. Canc…

... MIT fired him not Facebook - you are not required to have perfect opinions that everyone agrees with to survive in this world, you are just required to voice them appropriately and at the correct times, which Stallman did not. Stop pretending that Free Speech is something that applies to anything other than citizens having protection from governments

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#769

Post by keiferski »

ixtli wrote: post #717
colechristensen wrote: post #679

RMS was defending his friend who, at the age of 74, is accused of having sex with a 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island. There is not a defense for what RMS was writing or how he was trying to defend Minsky. The prevalence of comments trying to turn this against "SJW"s or whatever "other" they can because they're a fan of RMS is disturbing. This isn't us vs. them. This is a man who said something wildl…

Let's be honest, the people who disagree with your comment are worried that eventually someone will out them for their terrible behavior as well! It's shocking to me how unaccustomed to being held accountable some people are. Here's a radical supposition: it's actually good when speech has consequences in society.

> Here's a radical supposition: it's actually good when speech has consequences in society.

Let's consider the logical conclusions of "society" being able to inflict consequences upon someone if they speak an unpopular opinion.

If you're an individual human being, it's likely that you have at least one opinion about something that isn't inline with the overarching culture. The particular issue of Epstein or Stallman or whomever is irrelevant; while you may agree with the mob in this case, next week or next month you might not. Under your proposition, that leaves you with three options:

1. Keep your opinion to yourself and refrain from telling anyone for fear of reprisal. In other words, self-censorship.

2. Changing your opinion to match society's, out of fear of being ostracized.

3. Expressing your opinion and then having your personal or professional life ruined, or at the very least, affected to the point where you suffer financially, mentally, emotionally, or socially.

Which of those three options sounds beneficial to you?

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#770

Post by yibg »

eloff wrote: post #736
colechristensen wrote: post #679

RMS was defending his friend who, at the age of 74, is accused of having sex with a 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island. There is not a defense for what RMS was writing or how he was trying to defend Minsky. The prevalence of comments trying to turn this against "SJW"s or whatever "other" they can because they're a fan of RMS is disturbing. This isn't us vs. them. This is a man who said something wildl…

How is it we value free speech, but there are certain discussions you just cannot have, even in a rational and measured way, without risking making yourself completely unemployable. You should be able to have a questionable viewpoint in a discussion, without worrying about the lynch mob ending your career. The consequences here are out of line. You can be reprimanded to take your discussions to a non company venue, i…

Free speech while extremely important cannot be used as a blanket cover to say whatever you want and expect not to suffer consequences. I’m free to call my girlfriend stupid every day, but I should expect the consequence of soon being single.

There are clearly mob reactions to things, but there are also clearly inappropriate speech that should have consequences.

What he said here wasn’t in isolation as some idle musing. context matters. He wasn’t talking about the theoretical of a 19 year old. He was talking about this in context of Minsky being a 74 year old man with a 17 year old girl. Maybe he wasn’t aware of the impact of his words, but that shouldn’t get him a free pass.

Post reply on HN