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

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#971

Post by concordDance »

reuven wrote: post #946
flippinburgers wrote: post #937

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sweet irony of you criticizing him of not reading something when you yourself clearly didn't read what he had to say!

I did read his e-mail, actually. And what's why I wrote: > To defend Epstein, or the people who were associated with him, is unacceptable. He's defending Minsky, who was indeed an inspirational genius in many ways, for being part of Epstein's sex trafficking. Sorry, but there's no possible defense there. Trying to say something nice, or claim that Minsky didn't know, or say that we shouldn't use terms like "sexual as…

Why the heck is pointing out those facts bad?

Is it because it makes the dogpiling seem less justified? That we shouldn't just try and destroy everything that magical thinking can link to Epstien?

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#972

Post by 693471 »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #529
kelnos wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we please stop excusing bad behavior with some form of "oh because autism"? It's an insult to the many, many neuro-atypical people who don't say shitty, stupid things online, who don't act creepy around women, who don't have a sign on their MIT office that says "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)", who don't have a gross mattress in their office where they encourage people to lie topless, who don't try to pres…

Can you link to sources regarding Stallmans behavior towards women? It’s not that I don’t believe you but because I tried to google “Richard Stallman suicide threat” and couldn’t come up with anything... I do want to believe you, but I can’t propagate information without evidence.

https://geekfeminism.wikia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#974

Post by GoblinSlayer »

armitron wrote: post #352
paggle wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Wait until the AIs get a little better at forensics. Might not be wise to post comments you wouldn't want to come back at you at a forum that doesn't let you delete them, pseudonymous - for now - or not.

That would be stalking, a criminal offense. And GDPR is must have too.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#975

Post by mtrower »

jzymbaluk wrote: post #579

I'm pretty damn disappointed with the discourse here. What RMS wrote in the MIT mailing list was so reprehensible, that I'm pretty sure the people here defending him must have not read it. So here is the comments he wrote to a major MIT mailing list where he victim-blames child sex trafficking victims in the wake of MIT media lab accepting money from credibly accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein: > The announcement…

No, you just have a wildly differing opinion from the people you speak of (well, most of them, anyway... there does seem to be more than one crowd of defenders).

It goes both ways - Stallman's words seem pretty accurate to me, and it's totally alien to me that you would find them reprehensible. In particular, I cannot understand how you came to the conclusion that he "victim-blames" Giuffre - even though he writes that she "was being coerced into sex" and "She was harmed".

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#976

Post by concordDance »

csb6 wrote: post #378
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…

The wrong opinion? Stallman questions whether the victim, who he admits was coerced into sex, was actually sexually assaulted. This is an incredibly shameful take on the situation. If any politician or public figure said this statement in the past 70 years, they would have ended their career. There are no Internet vigilantes hunting down dissenters. There are people trying to downplay sexual assault. As the internet…

Is whatever he said (I doubt he used the words "sexual assault") actually untrue?

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#977

Post by DanBC »

concordDance wrote: post #976
csb6 wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The wrong opinion? Stallman questions whether the victim, who he admits was coerced into sex, was actually sexually assaulted. This is an incredibly shameful take on the situation. If any politician or public figure said this statement in the past 70 years, they would have ended their career. There are no Internet vigilantes hunting down dissenters. There are people trying to downplay sexual assault. As the internet…

Is whatever he said (I doubt he used the words "sexual assault") actually untrue?

> I doubt he used the words "sexual assault"

A child who had been captured by Epstein and coerced into sex with a bunch of people said that Minsky was one of those people.

RMS said let's assume it did happen, and then started defending Minsky by quibbling about the definition of assault.

RMS said that minsky having sex with a coerced child shouldn't be called assault because assault requires force or violence.

He's wrong. Assault has an every day English definition and it doesn't require violence or force. Assault has legal definitions and they don't require force.

His position on the word "assault" makes no sense.

This follows on from earlier comments where he said that children can be willing participants in incestual abuse, or that he thinks it's unlikely that children who are abused are harmed by that abuse. He retracted some of those after people told him that yes, in fact, children who are abused are often harmed by that abuse.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#978

Post by concordDance »

kjeetgill wrote: post #414
csb6 wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The wrong opinion? Stallman questions whether the victim, who he admits was coerced into sex, was actually sexually assaulted. This is an incredibly shameful take on the situation. If any politician or public figure said this statement in the past 70 years, they would have ended their career. There are no Internet vigilantes hunting down dissenters. There are people trying to downplay sexual assault. As the internet…

> If any politician or public figure said this statement in the past 70 years, they would have ended their career. I mean, given everything in the news these days, this is blatantly untrue. I suspect it wasn't ever quite that true before either. Maybe it should be but I don't think it's quite that easy. > The wrong opinion? Stallman questions whether the victim, who he admits was coerced into sex, was actually sexual…

I very much disagree that defending the reputation of your dead friend should be called "splitting hairs".

On a partially related note, the abuse of language that has lead to the current definitions of "rape" and "sexual assault" is distressing. :(

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#979

Post by concordDance »

journalctl wrote: post #366
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…

I wouldn’t call “not actively espousing hateful or bigoted views” “self-censorship”. And if people are afraid to be hateful or creepy in public, I’d call that a win. You don’t get to proclaim the advantages of chattel slavery and be magically immune from everyone’s responses, and afterwards you can’t complain about self-censorship when you think twice about writing or saying something abhorrent.

I'm picturing someone from China saying "if people are afraid to say things that undermine the stability of our country in public I'd call that a win".

The fun is always in defining what exactly should be in the category "hateful"/"undermining stability of our country".

As a side note, I've advocated for chattel slavery in the past, it actually didn't go too badly.

Re: Richard M. Stallman resigns

#980

Post by dangerface »

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,"…

> He's a genius, so let him be

I haven't seen anyone actually make that argument, but I have seen a lot of people arguing against it.

Post reply on HN