Support us on Patreon
PayPalRichard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation has resigned and he's also left his position in CSAIL at MIT.
Why is this significant? Stallman and the FSF were responsible for the creation of the GNU Project, widely used GNU licenses like the GPL, the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) and more that were used in the creation of Linux.
Posted on the FSF website last night was this notice:
On September 16, 2019, Richard M. Stallman, founder and president of the Free Software Foundation, resigned as president and from its board of directors. The board will be conducting a search for a new president, beginning immediately. Further details of the search will be published on fsf.org.
Stallman also noted on stallman.org how he's stepped away from MIT as well, with the below statement:
I am resigning effective immediately from my position in CSAIL at MIT. I am doing this due to pressure on MIT and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations.
The question is—why? Well, an article on Vice picked up on comments Stallman made around convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Unsurprisingly, this caused quite a lot of outrage inside and outside the Linux community.
Not long after Neil McGovern, the GNOME Executive Director, made a blog post about it where they said they asked the FSF to cancel their membership. McGovern also noted that other people who they "greatly respect are doing the same" and that GNOME would sever their "historical ties between GNOME, GNU and the FSF" if Stallman did not step down.
McGovern of GNOME wasn't the only one to speak out about it, as the Software Freedom Conservancy also put out a post calling for Stallman to step down and no doubt there's others I'm not aware of.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
GustyGhost Sep 17, 2019
I am coming at this from a fairly isolated position as I do not dip my toes into social politics. All I know is that a figure which I respect has come under attack for what appear to be opinions and feelings.
So we have the head of a computer movement stepping down because... commentary on the latest headline case? Which also has nothing to do with computers.
Don't be surprised if in the next few days, articles are published detailing: John Smith, CEO/PR Rep/Analyst/whatever of Microsoft has graciously assumed the role of president of the FSF.
Maybe I am a nihilist for seeing a coordinated takedown in all of this but it's not like that kind of thing hasn't happened before.
Last edited by GustyGhost on 17 September 2019 at 11:53 am UTC
So we have the head of a computer movement stepping down because... commentary on the latest headline case? Which also has nothing to do with computers.
Don't be surprised if in the next few days, articles are published detailing: John Smith, CEO/PR Rep/Analyst/whatever of Microsoft has graciously assumed the role of president of the FSF.
Maybe I am a nihilist for seeing a coordinated takedown in all of this but it's not like that kind of thing hasn't happened before.
Last edited by GustyGhost on 17 September 2019 at 11:53 am UTC
8 Likes, Who?
SirLootALot Sep 17, 2019
I personally don't like rms at all. He is very vocal with his political opinions and I disagree with many of them. Everybody else would have been fired years ago for what he said about necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, incest and pedophilia.
However I do think you should be able to voice your thoughts without losing your job. On the other hand he is a spokesperson and the fsf can choose who they want to be represented by.
However I do think you should be able to voice your thoughts without losing your job. On the other hand he is a spokesperson and the fsf can choose who they want to be represented by.
6 Likes, Who?
Quoting: SirLootALotI personally don't like rms at all. He is very vocal with his political opinions and I disagree with many of them. Everybody else would have been fired years ago for what he said about necrophilia
Seriously?!? :O
0 Likes
randomgamerguy1997 Sep 17, 2019
So all because of a smear article claiming that stallman said things he didn't actually say, now cancel culture has come after Stallman. I'm not a stlamman fanboy nor a fan of the free software ccult, but come on. He shouldn't be kicked off from his creation over a fucking smear article.
12 Likes, Who?
Quoting: EikeQuoting: spayder26Actually he was not defending Epstein (he called him rapist), but declaring his opinion against laws against consented paedophilia, which is somewhat much more controversial.
You seem to have information differing from mine.
I read that he found the "most plausible scenario" that the girls have been "entirely willing".
Does anybody find it appropriate to do such talk about possible severe crimes without any knowledge of what actually has happened?
You fell into the misinformation trap laid by some SJW.
What RMS said :
QuoteWe can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing.
What Selam Jie Gano concluded :
Quotehe says that an enslaved child could, somehow, be “entirely willing”.
What Vice wrote :
QuoteEarly in the thread, Stallman insists that the “most plausible scenario” is that Epstein’s underage victims were “entirely willing” while being trafficked.
What the headlines are
QuoteComputer scientist Richard Stallman, who defended Jeffrey Epstein, resigns from MIT
This is absolute bullshit. RMS is very clear on the gullibility of Epstein in his emails (calls him a rapist). He barely defended the use of the appropriate wording when speaking about Minsky affair. Which is that from his (Minksy) POV, the girl was consenting, even if she was in fact coerced by Epstein.
16 Likes, Who?
Quoting: minidouQuoting: EikeQuoting: spayder26Actually he was not defending Epstein (he called him rapist), but declaring his opinion against laws against consented paedophilia, which is somewhat much more controversial.
You seem to have information differing from mine.
I read that he found the "most plausible scenario" that the girls have been "entirely willing".
Does anybody find it appropriate to do such talk about possible severe crimes without any knowledge of what actually has happened?
You fell into the misinformation trap laid by some SJW.
What RMS said :
QuoteWe can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing.
What Selam Jie Gano concluded :
Quotehe says that an enslaved child could, somehow, be “entirely willing”.
What Vice wrote :
QuoteEarly in the thread, Stallman insists that the “most plausible scenario” is that Epstein’s underage victims were “entirely willing” while being trafficked.
What the headlines are
QuoteComputer scientist Richard Stallman, who defended Jeffrey Epstein, resigns from MIT
This is absolute bullshit. RMS is very clear on the gullibility of Epstein in his emails (calls him a rapist). He barely defended the use of the appropriate wording when speaking about Minsky affair. Which is that from his (Minksy) POV, the girl was consenting, even if she was in fact coerced by Epstein.
Thank you!
Btw, you should avoid the word SJW even if you have to force yourself. ;)
4 Likes, Who?
wvstolzing Sep 17, 2019
Quoting: NanobangHeadline:
Famed Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims As 'Entirely Willing'
What Stallman actually wrote:
Quoting: StallmanWe can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing.
Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.
Exactly this discrepancy has been bothering me since yesterday -- on THIS SPECIFIC POINT there does indeed seem to be a mischaracterization.
5 Likes, Who?
Nevertheless Sep 17, 2019
I am very thankful for Mr. Stallmans ideas about proprietary and free software! I think there is at least some truth in his "You cannot trust proprietary software". As a gamer and Steam user I'd say it differently obviously, but I do think it's a good idea to make sure to use as much free software in the base software of your computers as possible and to sandbox proprietary software whenever possible.
I find it incredible to see how much something Mr. Stallman saw in the 70s is applicable today on software from Google, Facebook, Microsoft...
So all I can say is: Thank you for your contribution to GNU/Linux Mr. Stallman!
PS)
What make me nervous is the AI systems of the near future. We will give more and more control over our lives to them. The underlying software they are build with, is in part open source, but the AIs reasoning is not. In fact it's not even closed source. It's self learned neural networks, and their parameters are controled by non public organizations. They can do and will do good things with AIs, but it's also possible these systems get abused (by someone we empowered to do so now or at some time in the future) to manipulate crowds, and they will be very effective doing that, because they know more about humans than we tend to do ourself..
I find it incredible to see how much something Mr. Stallman saw in the 70s is applicable today on software from Google, Facebook, Microsoft...
So all I can say is: Thank you for your contribution to GNU/Linux Mr. Stallman!
PS)
What make me nervous is the AI systems of the near future. We will give more and more control over our lives to them. The underlying software they are build with, is in part open source, but the AIs reasoning is not. In fact it's not even closed source. It's self learned neural networks, and their parameters are controled by non public organizations. They can do and will do good things with AIs, but it's also possible these systems get abused (by someone we empowered to do so now or at some time in the future) to manipulate crowds, and they will be very effective doing that, because they know more about humans than we tend to do ourself..
4 Likes, Who?
rustybroomhandle Sep 17, 2019
Quoting: PatolaQuoting: rustybroomhandleQED. This is a hallmark of cancel culture, there is no discussion, simply personal attacks, sometimes quite vicious ones. Some subjects cannot be discussed. Some opinions cannot be uttered. This is the new, more radical form of making something taboo. It has grave personal consequences.Quoting: PatolaAnother victim of cancel culture...
Nobody who uses the phrase "cancel culture" with a straight face can be taken seriously. Off to the kids table with you.
No, holding people accountable for their actions, and then having a horde of apologists hop on board by dismissing it as "cancel culture" as if this is somehow a valid argument.
It's just a simple case of "someone did a bad and got rapped on the knuckles". There's no greater conspiracy or oppression of free speech or whatever the heck else.
9 Likes, Who?
SirLootALot Sep 17, 2019
See more from me