Richard Stallman back at Free Software Foundation, says he won’t quit again(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
Richard Stallman back at Free Software Foundation, says he won’t quit again
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/03/richard-stallman-returns-to-fsf-18-months-after-controversial-rape-comments/
27 comments
Big discussion yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535224
This is good news. The FSF is better with Stallman around whether you agree with him on software and licensing or not. I had not read the details of what he had "done" to deserve being forced to resign the first time; in reading it now I kinda have to roll my eyes that it was his awkward wording in the defense of Minsky that was the source of this. How many computer scientists and programmers have perfectly flawless command of their communication even when not emotionally aroused by accusations against someone close to them? Not to mention the possibility that social awkwardness or being on a spectrum is considered to be a disability by many so to castigate someone with such a communication disability is arguably immoral or unlawful.
I don't agree with Stallman's views on software licensing or his politics, but banning him from the FSF on a malapropism sends the message that intellectual diversity isn't as important as the appearance of political correctness.
I don't agree with Stallman's views on software licensing or his politics, but banning him from the FSF on a malapropism sends the message that intellectual diversity isn't as important as the appearance of political correctness.
> it was his awkward wording in the defense of Minsky that was the source of this.
It was not the source. It was the catalyst - there was a media firestorm that precipitated the action, but the free software movement had been deeply unhappy with him for years.
Some reading:
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html
https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and...
https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25193674
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21000374
Refusing to listen to so many GNU contributors and former FSF board members sends the message that the FSF is more about Richard Stallman as a person than about the free software community / movement.
It was not the source. It was the catalyst - there was a media firestorm that precipitated the action, but the free software movement had been deeply unhappy with him for years.
Some reading:
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html
https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and...
https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25193674
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21000374
Refusing to listen to so many GNU contributors and former FSF board members sends the message that the FSF is more about Richard Stallman as a person than about the free software community / movement.
>Refusing to listen to so many GNU contributors and former FSF board members sends the message that the FSF is ore about Richard Stallman as a person than about the free software community / movement.
I am not a huge Stallman fan. Personally he has many flaws. Then again who among us is perfect, particularly in that respect? But when it comes to his philosophy and hard line on free software, I fully support his position. Even if I don't 100% ascribe to all of it. Because without people like him willing to maintain a hard line stance for at least a sliver of the greater whole, nothing gets advanced. It's the 1% that change the world, not the "community".
Indeed - what the "many members" you reference were upset about was a bunch of political bullshit that had zero to do with the free software movement, and RMS does not suffer fools when it comes to the core principles of the free software movement.
I may not agree with all of those either, but in that respect as well I do agree with him far more than all the near-do-well hangers-on that were more than happy to show up well after RMS established the movement to try and co-opt it for their own agendas.
Movements like this do need someone that can rule with an iron fist and maintain the core principles and save them from dilution. Again for his personality faults, Linux would not be near the force it is today if Linus didn't rule the kernel with an iron fist.
Is that going to rub some people the wrong way? I'd hope so - because if you aren't at least pissing a few people off then you really aren't accomplishing anything.
I dunno where we seem to have allowed our greater society expect that we should be able to go through life without being offended. Aside from being completely unrealistic and going against literally millennia of the human condition, if that was ever accomplished this would be the most boring planet in the universe to live on. No thanks!
As others have commented, the bigger issue that there doesn't seem to be anyone with a fraction of RMS's zeal for purity around the free software movement and without someone to be that torch bearer and standards enforcer if the "community" ends up ruling then free software will get watered down with so much crap it will cease to exist but in name only.
In trying to accommodate all you will please no one. Again this principal is as old as recorded history but newer generations think this time they have the magic key that their predecessors were just too dumb to grasp and this time it will be different. Ha!
I am not a huge Stallman fan. Personally he has many flaws. Then again who among us is perfect, particularly in that respect? But when it comes to his philosophy and hard line on free software, I fully support his position. Even if I don't 100% ascribe to all of it. Because without people like him willing to maintain a hard line stance for at least a sliver of the greater whole, nothing gets advanced. It's the 1% that change the world, not the "community".
Indeed - what the "many members" you reference were upset about was a bunch of political bullshit that had zero to do with the free software movement, and RMS does not suffer fools when it comes to the core principles of the free software movement.
I may not agree with all of those either, but in that respect as well I do agree with him far more than all the near-do-well hangers-on that were more than happy to show up well after RMS established the movement to try and co-opt it for their own agendas.
Movements like this do need someone that can rule with an iron fist and maintain the core principles and save them from dilution. Again for his personality faults, Linux would not be near the force it is today if Linus didn't rule the kernel with an iron fist.
Is that going to rub some people the wrong way? I'd hope so - because if you aren't at least pissing a few people off then you really aren't accomplishing anything.
I dunno where we seem to have allowed our greater society expect that we should be able to go through life without being offended. Aside from being completely unrealistic and going against literally millennia of the human condition, if that was ever accomplished this would be the most boring planet in the universe to live on. No thanks!
As others have commented, the bigger issue that there doesn't seem to be anyone with a fraction of RMS's zeal for purity around the free software movement and without someone to be that torch bearer and standards enforcer if the "community" ends up ruling then free software will get watered down with so much crap it will cease to exist but in name only.
In trying to accommodate all you will please no one. Again this principal is as old as recorded history but newer generations think this time they have the magic key that their predecessors were just too dumb to grasp and this time it will be different. Ha!
> Movements like this do need someone that can rule with an iron fist and maintain the core principles and save them from dilution.
Movements like this WOULD NOT EXIST without people like RMS. He has many unpolished and rough edges but he gets things done that move computer science forward.
Movements like this WOULD NOT EXIST without people like RMS. He has many unpolished and rough edges but he gets things done that move computer science forward.
By "move computer science forward," you mean the part where he intentionally technically weakened GCC because of his ideology and refused to accept LLVM (an academic project to build a better compiler) because he thought it was too powerful?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535789
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535789
This reads exactly as how in politics the left attacks the right and the right attacks the left. Attacks with nothing but headline grapping one-liners and oft repeated slogans.
RMS hasn't gotten anything done in years, if not decades.
Then there is no distinction between the free software movement and RMS, and then longstanding, well-respected contributors (the author of that first post literally won the Free Software Award from the FSF two days ago) can be cast aside and dismissed as "fools," on the principle that you need to piss people off, and so let's find someone to piss off.
There are plenty of people around with RMS's zeal for the free software movement. There are few people around with RMS's zeal for RMS.
There are plenty of people around with RMS's zeal for the free software movement. There are few people around with RMS's zeal for RMS.
Yeah. Here's some from GNU on RMS:
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-pr...
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-pr...
[deleted]
> it was his awkward wording in the defense of Minsky that was the source of this.
Not at all, it was an awkward interpretation by the people who had an agedna. RMS is a very logical person - what he said was factually true and coherent. What made some people upset was an invalid interpretation of his words.
Not at all, it was an awkward interpretation by the people who had an agedna. RMS is a very logical person - what he said was factually true and coherent. What made some people upset was an invalid interpretation of his words.
It's pretty incredible that after years and years of searching, all what cancel-activists[0] could find against Stallman was
- Stallman reminding folks of the lack of key evidence in the allegations against Minsky.
- A graffiti on his door at MIT
- The fact he had a mattress in his office
- Some awkward social interactions he allegedly had (it's all anonymous, there's no way to know)
All from a blog-post.
[0] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix...
- Stallman reminding folks of the lack of key evidence in the allegations against Minsky.
- A graffiti on his door at MIT
- The fact he had a mattress in his office
- Some awkward social interactions he allegedly had (it's all anonymous, there's no way to know)
All from a blog-post.
[0] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix...
Stallman is still a straight-up weird guy, but every year reality proves his hardline stance on software freedoms more and more relevant.
Thank god people are finally waking up that placating the malcontents doesn't make them go away - indeed, all it does is embold them to destroy more stuff.
Good. The more you placate these people the more you just encourage them.
Time to cancel cancel culture :p
Time to cancel cancel culture :p
Did Stallman basically attempt to say Minsky should not be ashamed or ridiculed because Minsky was propositioned by an Epstein victim?
No.
From a verge article: 'Stallman said that “the most plausible scenario” was that Epstein’s victim “presented herself to [Marvin Minsky] as entirely willing.”' e.g Epstein ordered the girl to say she was willing, when she very much was not.
Unfortunately, that got mangled in subsequent reporting to "Stallman said that Epstein's victims were entirely willing." Cue the firestorm.
edit: better quoting
Unfortunately, that got mangled in subsequent reporting to "Stallman said that Epstein's victims were entirely willing." Cue the firestorm.
edit: better quoting
Not only this is untrue, but most media outlets repeating this lie didn't ever bother to correct and apologize.
The guy is almost 70. Whether or not he is ever again going to voluntarily quit, the FSF needs to find someone equally able to carry the torch and figure out how to live without him if it's going to have any level of continued long run viability as an organization. You can't rely on milking labor forever out of people past retirement age.
Joe Biden in 78 years old.
Stallman is the FSF. Just create another movement and move on....
Good.