Live data from Hacker News

25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

lists.gnu.org

91–100 of 186 posts

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#91

I'm hoping this is a joke, otherwise > Could people please start working on the features that are needed? sounds far too like the completely detail-less requirements we get through from our clients like "please provide robust MI".

Visualize RMS as like the patron saint of a religion, which is full of schism and sub-sect. He's using his position to influence mindshare, and he doesn't think he's got a handle on the details. He just wants some of his devotees to start kicking the problem around.

Does this style of management work for them? I'm not close enough to know if this is all that it takes.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a pain to see "Dr" next to bullshit like this: > "Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software." You don't like skype, fine. I am prety sure what it enables millions of people to do: freely communicate no matter the distance, but I don't really get what freedoms it denies. Do I lose som freedom just but installing it, or must I use it for that to take an effect?

Freedom, in Stallmans words, is not meant to be 'free as in beer' (like free skype calls). Instead he refers to the freedom to read, modify, understand, and ultimately choose everything about the software that you use. I.e. be able to answer these questions (say about Skype): - Is any communication not properly encrypted - Is your communication being spied on / being recorded - Is there a way to add feature "x" to th…

"Free software is a matter of liberty, not price." - Richard Stallman

So to understand the word freedom in the context of free software, I tend to lean back towards liberty as a philosophy question. What freedom means, is a question famous people have pondered over for ages. So to ask a single simple question if Skype gives freedom, here is a quote from John Locke:

"Persons have a right or liberty to not be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, and arbitrary wills of others."

Since the developers of skype can subject their users to any number of inconstant, uncertain, unknown, and arbitrary decisions, like including the NSA as secret listeners to private communications, Skype can not be defined as providing liberty.

For more details and guide to more reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#93
post #77
post #36

> I don't know how to use Org mode, and don't know what it does (it seems to do so many things), but if it displays through Emacs then there are many formatting features that it can't display in a WYSIWYG fashion like Libre Office. I can't believe Stallman doesn't know how to use Org mode. If he is interested in selling people on Emacs, then Org mode is one of the killer features for the presentation. I don't expect…

I completely believe it. First of all, Stallman isn't known for hiding his opinions, or masking his version of the truth. But beyond that, Stallman has often failed or refused to use technologies that the rest of us take for granted. Years ago, I spoke with him about a proposed bill in the US Congress that would have affected intellectual property laws. (I can't remember the specifics.) At some point, Stallman, who h…

Yes, he doesn't surf the web:

"I generally do not connect to web sites from my own machine, aside from a few sites I have some special relationship with. I fetch web pages from other sites by sending mail to a program (see git://git.gnu.org/womb/hacks.git) that fetches them, much like wget, and then mails them back to me. Then I look at them using a web browser, unless it is easy to see the text in the HTML page directly. I usually try lynx first, then a graphical browser if the page needs it." [1]

[1] http://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#94
Quite simply, explicit markup makes it very easy to see what formatting will be applied to what text.

WYSIWYG only shows you the end result, with no clean way to see how you got there. Was this font introduced because of some theme? Was it applied because of some toolbar button? Is it the result of some template? Was it copied from somewhere else, thereby baking someone else's theming into the copied text?

These are the questions that make WYSIWYG so confusing. These are the things that make explicit markup so straight forward. I don't think you can have WYSIWYG without the confusion or while maintaining the power of explicit markup.

If anything, Markdown or RST or Org provide a compelling middle ground: Markup is still explicit but minimal, and styling tries to come as close as possible to WYSIWYG without sacrificing control.

This, I think, is a far more compelling route to take than WYSIWYG or LaTeX-style explicit markup.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visualize RMS as like the patron saint of a religion, which is full of schism and sub-sect. He's using his position to influence mindshare, and he doesn't think he's got a handle on the details. He just wants some of his devotees to start kicking the problem around.

Does this style of management work for them? I'm not close enough to know if this is all that it takes.

Read the thread of comments, people take him seriously and are discussing the problem. I'd say, in the short term at least, it does work.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#98
post #85
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But to flat-out refuse to read things on the Web As you described it, he did not actually flat-out refuse. He simply stated that he hasn't read all the documented published on the world wide web, since he don't "surf" the web. His approach to the web has been described many times. When someone sends him a link that they want him to read, stallman uses the program wget to download the file and reads it offline.

When I specifically asked him if he had read the bill in question to which he was objecting, which was available on the Web, he said that he had not, because he doesn't surf the Web. He, not I, equated "surfing" with "reading documents." The impression I got from that conversation was that Stallman makes no effort to go out and find things that would be useful and of interest to him. I don't call that "surfing," but…

His lack of research about issues that he expresses strong opinions about leads to things like this:

http://lee-phillips.org/StallmanOnFinkelstein.html

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#99
post #85
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But to flat-out refuse to read things on the Web As you described it, he did not actually flat-out refuse. He simply stated that he hasn't read all the documented published on the world wide web, since he don't "surf" the web. His approach to the web has been described many times. When someone sends him a link that they want him to read, stallman uses the program wget to download the file and reads it offline.

When I specifically asked him if he had read the bill in question to which he was objecting, which was available on the Web, he said that he had not, because he doesn't surf the Web. He, not I, equated "surfing" with "reading documents." The impression I got from that conversation was that Stallman makes no effort to go out and find things that would be useful and of interest to him. I don't call that "surfing," but…

>I worry that Stallman is ignoring arguments that may inform his own, or even change them.

Of course he is! It is called confirmation bias. It is very very strong, especially with people like Stallman who hold strong beliefs. We are all guilty of it to some extent.

Here's some reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/06/23/confirmation-bias/

http://socialpsychologyeye.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/confirma...

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

----

The most interesting is the last link. They did a study about the show The Colbert Report, which is satire, He plays a parody of conservative political pundits. The study looked at the viewer's political beliefs and what they thought of Colbert's.

"More liberal participants believed Colbert was liberal and that the show was satirical. More conservative participants believed Colbert was conservative and genuinely believed his “satirical” arguments. Essentially, viewers of liberal and conservative orientations tended to perceive Colbert as supporting whatever views they personally held."

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#100
post #78
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely believe it. First of all, Stallman isn't known for hiding his opinions, or masking his version of the truth. But beyond that, Stallman has often failed or refused to use technologies that the rest of us take for granted. Years ago, I spoke with him about a proposed bill in the US Congress that would have affected intellectual property laws. (I can't remember the specifics.) At some point, Stallman, who h…

> But to flat-out refuse to read things on the Web As you described it, he did not actually flat-out refuse. He simply stated that he hasn't read all the documented published on the world wide web, since he don't "surf" the web. His approach to the web has been described many times. When someone sends him a link that they want him to read, stallman uses the program wget to download the file and reads it offline.

The concerning part with that anecdote is that Stallman dodged the real issue --- reading the bill he was encouraging people to complain about --- by brushing it off because of the medium through which it was available. It's not unreasonable to expect someone to have read, in part at the very least, a bill they're actively campaigning against.
Post reply on HN