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

Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

techrights.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 943 posts

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#891

Post by angry_octet »

It is now clear that the FSF will never denounce the behavior of RMS, as they are his creature forever. As such, the organization is inherently toxic. That many of you cannot recognize the problem of having RMS in a leadership position, or indeed see nothing wrong with his words or behavior, is itself a savage indictment on tech culture. Please wear FSF and Free Stallman badges prominently so I know to avoid you at conferences and warn others from using your software. You are pariahs.

Flag this all you like, it's something I'll keep repeating. You're on the wrong side of history.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#892

Post by user-the-name »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #8

I think it is strange that, on the one hand, the tech world has been advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people – society should accept that people on the autism spectrum are different and that’s OK. But at the same time RMS has been attacked for some statements very probably stemming from his autism that, while they may seem a bit shocking and at odds with the mainstream, were not illegal or intentionally of…

How dare you use neurodivergent people as a shield for a sexual harasser.

How dare you.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#893

Post by mjg59 »

mjg59 wrote: post #849
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #837

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feel free to quote or link the passage where he says it does no harm. If you cannot find one, you’ll issue an apology to RMS for falsely defaming him, right? That’s what it’s called when you claim someone says pedophilia does no harm when they didn’t say that.

"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children" - if it's not harming children, who or what is it harming?

And if you can't make a coherent argument on that point, maybe you should apologise for suggesting that JohnHaugeland was "willfully, blatantly lying"?

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#894

Post by Rule35 »

nostrademons wrote: post #41
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #8

I think it is strange that, on the one hand, the tech world has been advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people – society should accept that people on the autism spectrum are different and that’s OK. But at the same time RMS has been attacked for some statements very probably stemming from his autism that, while they may seem a bit shocking and at odds with the mainstream, were not illegal or intentionally of…

Ribbonfarm called this a couple years ago: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2018/03/06/a-quick-battle-field-g... Specifically battlefront #8. He calls it consequential because the the neurodivergent/PC conflict highlights an inherent paradox in the PC worldview. Most applications of political correctness focus (at least on the surface) on defending a marginalized group against the verbal attacks of a privileged one. When a…

The article mentions the Damore incident but doesn't capture the essence of the war. It wrongly draws many self-aware groups whereas it's really two, marxists and lulzites, fighting a war for territory on top of everyone's homes, randomly causing a bit of allegiance to whoever was winning in their area.

Gamers aren't a coherent group or right wing in general (think of the ages...) but "their side" (the side trampling on them) is anti-left, so the gamers were lumped together and drawn on the right. The 'Autism Spectrum' is the most "centrist" I've ever seen, but because the left uses them to launch its attacks from they're drawn as 'left territory'.

Specifically, the Neuro-divergent group isn't an active group, kind of by its nature. ND people on the map are more of a victim pool who just get picked on because they're easy to maneuver into mistakes. Like the whole Damore incident was Google saying "Does our HR policy look fat" and only James was tricked into engaging. He was more a convenient scapegoat to hurt to consolidate their power than he was an ideological enemy.

Certain groups have all-or-nothing ideological traps laying around everywhere and I think it's that these groups, like armies using landmines in areas with children, are especially harmful to societal non-combatants.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#895

Post by selfishgene »

Both MIT and Harvard have admitted to helping Jeffrey Epstein avoid prosecution on federal racketeering charges for the sex-trafficking of minors after they were exposed by whistle-blowers.

Not sure why it would be appropriate then to exclude Stallman from serving on the Board of the FSF while allowing Rafael Reif, for example, to remain president of MIT after sending a personally signed "thank-you note" to one of the most notorious alleged sex-traffickers and convicted child-rapists in US history:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2020/01/12/after-epstei...

Nor would it be any more appropriate to allow Mr. Seth Lloyd back onto the MIT campus either:

https://thetech.com/2021/02/25/mit-administration-epstein-op...

What are the allegations against Stallman regarding the aiding and abetting of sex-trafficking and/or child rape?

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#896

Post by selfishgene »

Both MIT and Harvard have admitted to helping Jeffrey Epstein avoid prosecution on federal racketeering charges for the sex-trafficking of minors after they were exposed by whistle-blowers.

Not sure why it would be appropriate then to exclude Stallman from serving on the Board of the FSF while allowing Rafael Reif, for example, to remain president of MIT after sending a personally signed "thank-you note" to one of the most notorious alleged sex-traffickers and convicted child-rapists in US history:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2020/01/12/after-epstei...

Nor would it be any more appropriate to allow Mr. Seth Lloyd back onto the MIT campus:

https://thetech.com/2021/02/25/mit-administration-epstein-op...

What are the allegations against Stallman regarding the aiding and abetting of sex-trafficking and/or child rape?

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#897

Post by CJefferson »

ddingus wrote: post #889
CJefferson wrote: post #866

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be honest, I'm a bit annoyed you think I care less about software freedom, because I don't like Stallman. I'd like to separate two things out. I believe it severely hurts the cause of software freedom to have Stallman at the helm. I think software freedom is bigger than any one person, and Stallman has been, for many years, damaging to the cause. Do you think "the ideas or Stallman" are more important?

It was not my intent to annoy you. It is my intent to understand. Edit: and let us be clear we are just two good people having a tough discussion. I just want to understand you and your position better. I agree software freedom is more than a given person. So far, I have not really seen the ideas put into question here, right? One of the originators of those ideas is in question. And that person has done things other…

You can wish for people to remain focused on the ideas, but it is my strong belief that will not happen. People, in general, do not associate with people they dislike (for person or moral reasons).

Even if I was willing to work with Stallman, I believe many, many people will not.

If Stallman wished for this to be "just about the ideas", he could have never told jokes about "deflowering female virgins" because they have not used Emacs. I assume he told these kinds of jokes because he hoped it would make him, or the FSF, more popular. He was (in my opinion) wrong.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#898

Post by ddingus »

CJefferson wrote: post #897
ddingus wrote: post #889

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was not my intent to annoy you. It is my intent to understand. Edit: and let us be clear we are just two good people having a tough discussion. I just want to understand you and your position better. I agree software freedom is more than a given person. So far, I have not really seen the ideas put into question here, right? One of the originators of those ideas is in question. And that person has done things other…

You can wish for people to remain focused on the ideas, but it is my strong belief that will not happen. People, in general, do not associate with people they dislike (for person or moral reasons). Even if I was willing to work with Stallman, I believe many, many people will not. If Stallman wished for this to be "just about the ideas", he could have never told jokes about "deflowering female virgins" because they ha…

Then the ideas will die, and we will relearn these lessons again in the future, hopefully.

And they will die because it's just not a priority otherwise. Our opponents know that and absolutely will exploit it.

Solidarity on things is hard. It does require dealing with people we do not like, and it often also requires we accept our enemies, and "those other people" benefit same as we do.

I entertained this chat to see whether similar dynamics are in play on this matter, and they are. I have experience in this from labor politics.

Know when they win? They win with high degrees of solidarity rooted in mutual benefit. They always lose when personal judgement is a higher priority than the mutual benefit is.

Put simply, even the assholes need to pay rent, feed the kids, spend time with family, see the doctor, etc.

If it is more about who is the bigger asshole than it is the ideas, we will be left with a solid understanding of who the bigger asshole is, not a more robust, solid state of software freedom.

Now, that said, don't go blaming Stallman for your own choices. I won't blame him for mine.

He said very undesirable things. Lots of people do that, and it would be better if they didn't.

As painful as all that is, the hard truth of it has nothing to do with software freedom.

I think he can be a ripe ass, frankly. Maybe better choices are in his future. I hope so.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#899

Post by ddingus »

CJefferson wrote: post #897
ddingus wrote: post #889

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was not my intent to annoy you. It is my intent to understand. Edit: and let us be clear we are just two good people having a tough discussion. I just want to understand you and your position better. I agree software freedom is more than a given person. So far, I have not really seen the ideas put into question here, right? One of the originators of those ideas is in question. And that person has done things other…

You can wish for people to remain focused on the ideas, but it is my strong belief that will not happen. People, in general, do not associate with people they dislike (for person or moral reasons). Even if I was willing to work with Stallman, I believe many, many people will not. If Stallman wished for this to be "just about the ideas", he could have never told jokes about "deflowering female virgins" because they ha…

Thanks, by the way. You are a pretty great discussion partner. Frank open and honest. I appreciate that.
Post reply on HN