Richard Stallman has resigned from the Free Software Foundation and MIT

Quoting: Patolathere is no discussion

Quoting: PatolaBy the way, weren't you who said the comments should not even had been opened? That seems to prove exactly what I said, if it depended on you there was still another discussion cancelled. Fortunately was Liam who decided on this and so far it is still open.

Patola, aren't you a university graduate/academic (or do I remember this wrong)?
We are in a discussion you stated could not happen.
You're self-contradicting.

@monnef
May I suggest taking that conversation to the following thread: An Open Letter to Liam Dawe on Censorship

I predict that the topic at hand will generate a lengthy debate as it is without crossing the streams, so to speak.


Last edited by Salvatos on 17 September 2019 at 6:17 pm UTC

Quoting: Salvatos@monnef
May I suggest taking that conversation to the following thread: An Open Letter to Liam Dawe on Censorship

I predict that the topic at hand will generate a lengthy debate as it is without crossing the streams, so to speak.

Yes, please direct any more posts about closing/opening comments to the Forum. I will not discuss it here any more as it's nothing to do with the article.

Wait. So paraphrasing RMS he said "how about using a less guilt implying term" when it came to accusing a deceased (i.e. not able to protect themselves) faculty member that hasn't actually been accused by the victim of the crime... further along the discussion gave a dispute of a difference between moral and lawful definition of rape as an argument supporting that idea (because there are differences and if there weren't the law around the world would be unanimous on the subject)... and was forced to resign? For asking someone to change the wording of a Facebook event so that it'd represent the truth about the situation and not an opinion? Or am I missing something.

@monnef, I see you have strong opinions connected to many philosophical concepts. Most people (including me) are too lazy to try to have a respectful conversation discussing and explaining the intricacies of those concepts with each next guy who hasn't consumed enough varied sources (videos, or preferably books). I recommend learning more about the topics of ethics and morality. Otherwise we would spend a lot of energy and time arguing about basic concepts and questions that other, more smart people (philosophers) have already explained and solved. Since you will probably accuse my sources of having a liberal agenda (as almost all scientists and artists and thinking people seem to have), I recommend consuming information from varied sources, but being equally skeptical of all of them. And giving all of them a fair chance of explaining themselves. I don't expect you want to spend a lot of time though, so I will just mention a single video that deals with slightly related topics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ESU5ONMMxs&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR&index=29

Quoting: KithopKind of off-topic here, but I mean, 'mouth pieces of the public opinion because they want to get re-elected' is pretty much modus operandi for politics, isn't it?

It is, nobody likes it, yet we got so accustomed to it that we think it's better for everyone to follow that line of behavior. Makes no sense to me. That's why I'm baffled.

Quoting: KithopAlso, I'm a bit confused here, on 'shitty social rules'.

I'm referring to the behavior mentioned above as shitty social rule.

Quoting: KithopIf you're the spokesperson for an organization, be it a non-profit or a C-level exec of a megacorporation, the opinions you air in public reflect on that organization, no matter how much you try to qualify it as personal vs. professional. That's part of being a public figure and spokesperson. Yeah, it sucks [...]

I know how it sadly is right now. It shouldn't be. Everybody can decide on how to act: Make your footprint on society as a silent person, or someone who speaks out loud for what he thinks is right. I absolutely know how chilling the pressure can be, and that's why I wish it wouldn't be there.


Last edited by Doc Angelo on 17 September 2019 at 6:51 pm UTC

Quoting: tonRSometimes, it's better to keep your mouth shut than say something that will stirring up many hornet nests.

This is gold. Thank you.

Quoting: cprnWait. So paraphrasing RMS he said "how about using a less guilt implying term" when it came to accusing a deceased (i.e. not able to protect themselves) faculty member that hasn't actually been accused by the victim of the crime...

The word you are looking for is: allegedly

--

Blame the Media for being Entertainment and not Genuine Journalism or News.

Blame Richard Stallman for socially being a dumbass and putting his foot in his mouth (figurateively and literally apparantly from videos
:\ )

Everyone is debating whether or not the Individual's freedom of speech superceeds the freedom of a group.

I think it's clear that when an individual suchas RMS accepts a lofty position -- say at MIT: they agree to exchange some of their freedoms to fit the required behavior of the role.

This is why CoC exist, because at places like M.I.T. trending social political science issues are not within the scope of of the institutions mission and are just noise distracting from keeping a functional and productive forum.

The institutions mission and scope is technology.

RMS on the other hand has always personally had those additional activist opinions that are inappropriate in the context of his job.

He has "foot in mouth syndrome" and based on the things he has said the institution is probably affraid someday a RMS Scandal will come to light and they want nothing to do with it.

Edit: Also, the last thing MIT wants is for someone to stir the pot on what sounds like a possible Sexual Assault Scandal at MIT, they just fucking noped out of that -- so they took away any representation power he had in relation to their name so they don't come under fire for dumb shit he says and loose millions of dollars.

Edit 2: Also noteworthy, in regards to freedom of speech -- he had the right to say it, and he did. But he didn't have the right to say it and keep his privilege of position partially representing M.I.T.

Freedom of Speech and Responsibility of Leadership are somewhat mutually exclusive, this is why Liam Dawe is held to a higher standard than the rest of us plebs and we can get away saying things he could NEVER say from his podium and come away completely unscathed. It's a shitty thing, and bless him for doing what he does, but it's the truth.


Last edited by ElectricPrism on 17 September 2019 at 7:18 pm UTC

Quoting: GustyGhostDon'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.

This is exactly what I think, too.
There is a lot more going on behind the scenes.

I also read every day linux news form "lxer.com". There you can read some more "facts" what is going on at FSF - I really don't like it.
I simply can't understand how it is possible that such companies like MS or Apple can even get a seat at FSF?! Something bad is going on IMHO.

Quoting: johndoe

Quoting: GustyGhostDon'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.

This is exactly what I think, too.
There is a lot more going on behind the scenes.

I also read every day linux news form "lxer.com". There you can read some more "facts" what is going on at FSF - I really don't like it.
I simply can't understand how it is possible that such companies like MS or Apple can even get a seat at FSF?! Something bad is going on IMHO.

Frankly, I think that's tin-foil hat level stuff there.

I'm not sure if this can not be understood as some kind of an insult.

Quoting: GustyGhostI 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.

Respecting someone doesn't mean you ignore it if they do something bad. Also the word "feelings" in these kinds of contexts can imply that there is a battle of between rational people and irrational people going on. With your side always being the rational ones. Whilst people can never be neatly fitted into "rational people" and "irrational people". No-one is truly rational probably. And no-one is entirely irrational either. And generally rather than there being tendencies of the side I don't like in a conflict being less rational, it is enormously more probable that I am being biased in interpreting the situation.

Quoting: GustyGhostSo 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.

Yeah. Apparently if you make comments about things that upset or offend many people in a topic you're not an expert in, you get held responsible for your actions. What a surprise. You can't say whatever you want even if you're somewhat powerful or significant.

Quoting: GustyGhostDon'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.

You might or might not be a nihilist, but that wouldn't be connected to anything you said. If you want to use a trendy word for yourself that fits what you said a bit more, then "conspiracy theorist" is what you're looking for. But it's okay. It's normal for all of us to see patterns where there exist none and jump into conclusions. I just think that we can accomplish great things if we try to notice and avoid it.

Quoting: Liam DaweFrankly, I think that's tin-foil hat level stuff there.

MS is using and selling FOSS everywhere... especially with Azure and now Windows (SSH+WSL).
Yes they gave us SQL 2007, .Net Core, WSL, etc. These are all things to prevent people to move away from MS+Windows.
Where is Office for Linux? And much more important where can I download all source code from them?
Aren't they "loving Linux"?
Isn't InXile and Double Fine beeing aquired by MS?

Sure, I see some things different than others, but cannot ignore facts.

Edit:
Currently I don't see anything, that MS or Apple did to enrich the FOSS ecosystem, however Stallmann.


Last edited by johndoe on 17 September 2019 at 9:48 pm UTC

How can I filter out these kind of not (really) gaming related topics?
I tried adding in the filter the tag "Misc" (the tag for this article), but then I loose good gaming related articles that happen to carry the same "Misc" tag.

Quoting: dubigrasuHow can I filter out these kind of not (really) gaming related topics?
I tried adding in the filter the tag "Misc" (the tag for this article), but then I loose good gaming related articles that happen to carry the same "Misc" tag.

Non-gaming related articles are usually extremely easy to spot on the main page.
Plus, they are not that common.
You make it sound like we get hundreds of articles a day.

Seriously, where is the problem? :)

Or is it just that you want to tell us that you absolutely don't like this topic. ;)

Quoting: sub

Quoting: dubigrasuHow can I filter out these kind of not (really) gaming related topics?
I tried adding in the filter the tag "Misc" (the tag for this article), but then I loose good gaming related articles that happen to carry the same "Misc" tag.

Non-gaming related articles are usually extremely easy to spot on the main page.
Plus, they are not that common.
You make it sound like we get hundreds of articles a day.

Seriously, where is the problem? :)

Or is it just that you want to tell us that you absolutely don't like this topic. ;)

Well, there's an "Content preferences" option on the users control panel, allowing to filter out certain articles based on topics/tags. I'm just asking how can use I use that option for articles like this. Isn't that the reason that option is there?

Curios what is the best way to handle this.
Should an organization terminate all contacts with an individual for their opinions ?

Don't agree with what Stallman said but don't think he should be fired for it/forced into resignation.
They could just issue a statement publicly saying "we don't agree or hold these views" and privately message him"wtf dude"
Not sure how much this applies to him being head of the FSF but those were mailing lists and opinions not a public statement.
And like someone said , a lot of these "news" sites are more clickbait than actual journalism.
Also worried anything someone said at one point that's a bit controversial can be spun to get rid of them.
How many dark jokes have all of us heard and told in private with close friends that we dare not say to random passers by on the street.

Seems we are still figuring out this digital age , and time will tell what it evolves into.

My take on this:
Stallman is opinionated, pedantic, and tries to be precise in his thinking. And in certain respects not very social. So his comments on this stuff involved a certain amount of what many would consider hair-splitting: Trying to define things carefully both in terms of what they are and what they are not, looking at things dispassionately and parsing them. (I also think he somewhat underestimates the complexity of this sort of thing and so overestimates his ability to come to good conclusions without any relevant background) Given that approach, no matter what his specific position it was going to end up looking bad in a situation where people are upset (for damn good reasons) and calling for broad, blanket moral condemnations.
Probably I wouldn't agree with the specifics of what Stallman thought about the subject, although the one specific quote I've seen in this thread seems reasonable within the very specific point it is making. People may draw implications from that quote, like that Stallman had more general ideas that were apologetics for similar bad stuff, but I don't think that follows--he was making a specific point about a specific definition and its application to a specific act. If you'd asked him if Minsky was doing a total douche move, or committing some other crime that wasn't rape, he might well have said yes. He was being pedantic, and tone deaf about the fact that this was the wrong time to be pedantic.

So OK, I think this is clearly throwing Stallman overboard. And it has nothing to do with "cancel culture" or "SJWs" or whatever bullshit--Epstein was horribly evil, and lots of people were colluding with him, and people are furious and want some blood, whether they're "SJWs" or not. And once they get their blood up they don't want to hear someone being dispassionate about it and they're not going to look at the fine print when they see something that looks bad. This tends to be true of people whatever their politics, and I would hope that people are none too pleased with scuzzbucket rich folks using kids for sex, whatever their politics. If there's someone whose politics are OK with that, I'm fine with cancel-culturing them.

But what I notice is that it's clear a fair number of other MIT people did actual things, like taking Epstein's money and defending taking Epstein's money and probably knowing all along just how much of a douchebag he was and helping to cover it up. But it's Stallman, who wasn't involved in any of that, and who would be far more likely to have refused the money than any of these Negroponte types, who gets hung out to dry. Note the way only Stallman's name stays on that email string. Stallman's an easy sacrifice because he wasn't a power broker and always made the powerful types uncomfortable. It's the upper echelon sleazebags that actually need to be burned at the stake; Stallman is a convenient patsy to take the heat.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 17 September 2019 at 11:55 pm UTC

Opinions about other stuff should be just that. Opinions about other stuff. Has nothing to do with the work the guy was doing. He also has not been put in jail or anything so he has not done anything wrong. Simple as that. Someone/something clearly wanted to smoke him out.

The only sin Stallman committed here is to forgot that PEOPLE CANT HAVE AN OPINION THESE DAYS, you have to shut the f/*c up or follow the hypocrite standard of having the same opinion of the all SJW media.

And you cant tell anyone what you really think, we live in a de-facto censorship, not email, not social networks, anyone!!. Remember that guy that told a joke to his friend on the ear about "big dongle" in a computer conference and a feminist just heard him and make it public? He lost his job. And the SJW media was fine with it.

Human relationships are overrated. SJWs destroyed freedom of speech. It doesnt matter if opinions are unpopular or arent political correct, you should respect them and not make a fuss about it.

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: johndoe

Quoting: GustyGhostDon'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.

This is exactly what I think, too.
There is a lot more going on behind the scenes.

I also read every day linux news form "lxer.com". There you can read some more "facts" what is going on at FSF - I really don't like it.
I simply can't understand how it is possible that such companies like MS or Apple can even get a seat at FSF?! Something bad is going on IMHO.

Frankly, I think that's tin-foil hat level stuff there.

Well, frankly Liam, I think if we'd told you a year or two ago that a respected tech billionaire who went around donating tons of money to science was a vicious pimp rapist who coerced children into sexual slavery and had bunches of the best and brightest going to his sex parties and they were all in on keeping it quiet, you'd have said that was tin foil hat stuff. But here we are.