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

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#851

Post by shams93 »

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…

I do a great job do triple overtime and get fired so they can save money it's hard to feel sorry for celebrities when us ordinaries are trashed so hard in the course of regular work why should I feel sorry for Epstein when the industry treats me as trash disposable labor it's refreshing that people are standing up for women finally.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#852

Post by benatkin »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #317
benatkin wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there was more social pressure for him to resign from FSF, and more institutional pressure for him to resign from MIT/CSAIL. The institutional pressure probably wasn't as painful, but was more forceful. I think he'd probably been holding back the pressure he felt to get the FSF thing over with for a while, but hoping for the controversy to die down, but when he was forced (or practically forced) to resign fro…

Did he resign from MIT? If so, he won't be sleeping well- he actually lived in his office (it was also his residence)

Yes. [0] And indeed he used to live there. He hasn't lived there in years, though. [1]

0: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/17/20870050/richard-stallman...

1: https://stallman.org/rms-lifestyle.html

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#853

Post by manfredo »

lame88 wrote: post #596
dexen wrote: post #447

Just as much as RMS was right[1], ESR was right[2]. The "cancel culture" is harming the free software movement by practicing human version of Microsoft's EEE[3]. The cancel culture enters the community, establishes interests groups, and starts knocking down prominent contributors. The demands are backed by angry crowds on social media rather than by contributions. It's time for us to defend each other, and to hold co…

Using the term SJW alone destroys the credibility of any substantial claim using it. If you really want to persuade people, find a term that isn’t mainly employed as incendiary jargon of far-right ideology to categorically dismiss anyone left of their viewpoint.

Far from it, plenty of staunchly liberal people use the acronym SJW. Getting riled up by the term is analogous to people on the right objecting to "white privilege" and complain that it's categorically dismissing white people's opinions.

The bigger irony is that your comment claims that the term is used to categorically dismiss people, while simultaneously categorically dismissing the above poster's commeent.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#854

Post by ng12 »

yibg wrote: post #785
mieseratte wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I welcome anyone to provide a counter-argument. Here's a counter. You're ascribing intent to one's writing, and unless you have a special relationship with Mr. Stallman - you don't know anything. Because of a radical, illiberal mob, Stallman's life's work has been taken from him. Few years ago I had had a Junior engineer on my team begin telling me how he finds certain speech so intolerable that he feels he has the…

Divining intent isn’t the right threshold to judge speech. If it were then I can say whatever I want in whatever environment, because how would you prove my intent? I yell fire in a crowded theatre, that’s ok it wasn’t my intent to cause panic.

Only because your words caused actionable harm. If you didn't intend to cause harm and there were no harmful consequences should you still be punished?

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#855

Post by [deleted] »

rrss wrote: post #759
craigsmansion wrote: post #722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RMS was pointing out inaccuracies in how a deceased colleague who was being accused of a heinous crime might simply have slept with a prostitute, if at all (which turns out probably wasn't the case). > This is a man who said something wildly inappropriate in an MIT forum and got fired. This is a man who said something mildly inappropriate in a forum, as is his wont. > He deserved it. A completely appropriate and reas…

> pointing out inaccuracies But, he wasn't? 1. "Minsky has been accused of assault" 2. RMS: "you shouldn't call it assault - might give people the wrong idea" 3. "It would have been literally rape in the relevant territory, 'assault' is a fine word for it" 4. RMS: "ok, even if it's legally rape, it shouldn't morally be considered rape, so don't call it assault if it was 'just' statutory rape." What inaccuracies did h…

[deleted]

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#856

Post by twoheadedboy »

paggle wrote: post #302
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…

That’s why I mostly use pseudonymous channels these days, like this one. I treat everything I say with my real name like I’m publishing it on the front page of the New York Times and submitting three copies to the Library of Congress. Many fewer of my current associates hear any real thoughts of mine compared to 20 years ago. I used to get into all kinds of arguments like Stallman’s, on public email lists, which than…

Isn't that just indicative of the sad state of things.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#857

Post by jameslk »

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…

Valuing free speech and valuing what others say are not one in the same.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#858

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

astine wrote: post #794
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…

" 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. " I agree with this statement. Stallman has been a problematic person for a long time. I'm no fan of his. If a…

> If Stallman's position is wrong, we should be able to rationally come to that conclusion as a society. He should be allowed to be wrong.

I share this frustration, unfortunately with many HN discussions as well.

When someone states a position that the majority finds repugnant, IMHO the most productive (long-term) approach is this:

Step 1. Identify where the minority and majority views diverge in terms of logical justification. With majority-repugnant views, this may require going back to very basic assumptions. E.g., rape is morally wrong, it's appropriate public policy to prevent moral wrongs, etc.

Step 2. Starting from there, try to understand why the views diverge, and debate which side (if either) has better justification.

I think this approach fails at least half the times I try it, though. A few guesses why:

- During Step 1, people jump to the assumption that I'm advocating the majority-repugnant position, rather than working within this two-step process. Once my character / motives are impugned, reasoned discussion seems to end.

- Many people are unable to engage in logical debate regarding ethics. And in frustration, or to subconsciously avoid having to accept that gaps exist in their ability to logically debate some topics, they are unwilling to engage in proper debate.

- Something in my mannerism is off-putting, or I'm in a forum where few people are willing to engage in a debate lasting more than several minutes :(

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#859

Post by jjtheblunt »

marble-drink wrote: post #505

I'm so relieved to find that at least on hacker news people can still evaluate this situation with reason. Out there it's a witch hunt and Stallman is now a witch. RMS is a great man but sadly has difficulties communicating with the wider world. This has been true of many great minds throughout history. It's sad to see it happen to one of my own heroes but I believe history will do him justice if we continue to fight…

The world wants fewer people justifying pedophiles.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#860

Post by lone_haxx0r »

EpicEng wrote: post #815
cf141q5325 wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. Which until a few years ago was completely legal in for example Switzerland. As long of course as no one is coerced into anything. Playing the Advocatus Diaboli, why should i view this outcry as anything different then the Saudis stance on sex before marriage? Fundamentalist puritan…

>As long of course as no one is coerced into anything In what insane hypothetical does a 17 year old girl have consensual sex with a 74 year old man on a billionaire's island? At best it's prostitution, c'mon.

And there's nothing wrong with prostitution per se.
Post reply on HN