LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 10-08-2019, 10:04 AM   #31
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: /dev/planet2
Distribution: OpenBSD
Posts: 2,327
Blog Entries: 6

Rep: Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
There has always been an appreciable overlap between computer hackers and people on the autism spectrum. One characteristic of even mildly autistic people is their general lack of social skills. They have no filters; they tend to blurt out whatever they think at the moment.
To my knowledge, Stallman is not autistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
If you want society to profit from the undoubted talents of such people, you must put up with their tactlessness.

People who always say the politically correct thing usually have nothing else worthwhile to say.
+1

As a project leader, Stallman had well published opinions, but was more tactful and "passive aggressive" than some other notables.

I remember reading OpenBSD's mailing list archives 10 or more years ago, where Stallman went 'trolling' the misc mailing list about supposed non-free software in OpenBSD and was quickly put in his place when developers and other users at the time pointed out non-free packages in some of the Linux distributions he was endorsing at GNU.org. Stallman was quite calm and calculated compared to some of those responding.

Last edited by cynwulf; 10-08-2019 at 10:08 AM.
 
Old 10-08-2019, 05:05 PM   #32
ChuangTzu
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix while testing others
Posts: 1,438

Rep: Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384
Interesting...

GNU update:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/i.../msg00008.html

FSF update:
https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-and-gnu

Stallmans post at GNU:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/i.../msg00004.html

Reddit thread that was locked:
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comme...n/fsf_and_gnu/

Last edited by ChuangTzu; 10-08-2019 at 05:10 PM.
 
Old 10-08-2019, 11:28 PM   #33
Turbocapitalist
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Distribution: Linux Mint, Devuan, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,160
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061Reputation: 2061
One of the objections some groups have to RMS is that he bandies the F-word around a lot: Freedom! For that, they go after him personally for his lack of necktie, grooming habits, personality traits, or many other personal characteristics, all to avoid addressing Freedom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuangTzu View Post
...
Reddit thread that was locked:
No surpise. Software Freedom threads and individual posts are usually locked and sometimes deleted. Reddit is owned by Condé Nast or its parent Advance Publications either of which hates any mention of Software Freedom regardless.

You may have noticed a change when Condé Nast had crushed Wired. Old articles from the mid-1990s are still online for the time being so you can read them and compare. They were quite cutting edge and forward thinking, like the EFF back in Barlow's day.

Anyway, I'll say again that this whole lynching of RMS is partially a distraction from Bill Gates, who unlike RMS, actually knew, liked, and hung out with Epstein. So while the heading of this thread is "Richard Stallman's resignation, Part II" its about as important to figure out who pushed him out and why as it is to figure out a way forward for Software Freedom, a way forward without an M$-oriented CoC.
 
Old 10-09-2019, 04:55 AM   #34
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: /dev/planet2
Distribution: OpenBSD
Posts: 2,327
Blog Entries: 6

Rep: Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626Reputation: 1626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbocapitalist View Post
Condé Nast
It's also the owner of Ars Technica (Microsoft loving, gutter 'journalism')...

//edit:

Also worth noting that Richard Stallman's Wikipedia page contains all of the references to Epstein - all of which have passed moderation and been published on the page. Attempts to change some of the content to be more fact based have been reverse and it currently reads as follows:

Quote:
Stallman resigned from MIT in 2019 after an email exchange related to Jeffrey Epstein, Marvin Minsky, and sexual assault of minors.[21]
Cite note 21: https://stallman.org/archives/2019-j...9_(Resignation)

Which is simply a first person statment by Stallman re: his resignation on his own page. However the wikipedia sentence, is very much a "draw your own conclusions" one. The citations falls well short of being a valid one for that kind of statement.

Quote:
In September 2019, it was reported that Stallman had made statements on an internal CSAIL listserv in defense of deceased MIT professor Marvin Minsky, in relation to Virginia Giuffre's deposition that she was directed to have sex with Minsky by Jeffrey Epstein.[118][119] As a response, Stallman resigned from both MIT and the Free Software Foundation.[21][120][121]
This statement is again missing the details of exactly what was said by Stallman and is descending into "journalism" rather than being material worthy of an "encyclopaedia"...

Cite note 118 is the Ars Technica trash.
Cite note 119 is Steven Levy of wired, very personally, laying in the boot with his "Clueless Nerd" article.
Cite note 120: https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-m-stallman-resigns
Cite note 121 is a Boston Globe newspaper article.

All of these so called "facts" are based on the typical media coverage only and some statements... (2 of the cite notes are Ars and Wired - Condé Nast).

The source for Ars and Wired is the vice.com article among others. The source for the vice.com article is the medium.com blog and leaked redacted emails.

Bill Gates' wikipedia page on the other hand contains no Epstein references, despite the fact that Gates flew on one of Epstein's plane, met Epstein after his conviction and donated money to MIT through Epstein...

If you check the page edit history you can see for yourself where a simple edit to Gates' page to add a similar section to the ones found on Stallman's page is quickly censored, whereas by comparison there is a virtual free for all of slander on RMS' page with little intervention. You also won't find any reference to that particular donation.

https://www.axios.com/bill-gates-jef...b74d1107d.html

Last edited by cynwulf; 10-09-2019 at 07:04 AM.
 
Old 10-09-2019, 07:28 AM   #35
Pastychomper
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Scotland
Distribution: Slackware, Android
Posts: 110

Rep: Reputation: 204Reputation: 204Reputation: 204
That wouldn't be the first time a Wikipedia page related to Bill Gates had some very favourable editing.

Fortunately (from a quick look), there has at least been some discussion of the relevant points on both articles' talk pages. That doesn't solve the problem, but there are some Wikipedia users (like me) who routinely check the talk pages in case the main page is biased or over-edited.
 
Old 10-09-2019, 07:39 AM   #36
ntubski
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Debian, Arch
Posts: 3,508

Rep: Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811Reputation: 1811
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
Cite note 118 is the Ars Technica trash.
Cite note 119 is Steven Levy of wired, very personally, laying in the boot with his "Clueless Nerd" article.
Cite note 120: https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-m-stallman-resigns
Cite note 121 is a Boston Globe newspaper article.
All those articles look pretty factual to me, e.g., none of them pull the trick of eliding the "presented as" before "willing". The wired article has a bunch of editorializing and opinion mixed in as well, but the factual part look accurate.
 
Old 10-09-2019, 04:37 PM   #37
ChuangTzu
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix while testing others
Posts: 1,438

Rep: Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384Reputation: 1384
Another GNU update from Stallman:
No radical changes in GNU Project
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/i.../msg00005.html

Quote:
As Chief GNUisance, I'd like to reassure the community
that there won't be any radical changes in the GNU Project's
goals, principles and policies.

I would like to make incremental changes in how some decisions are
made, because I won't be here forever and we need to ready others to
make GNU Project decisions when I can no longer do so. But these
won't lead to unbounded or radical changes.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
 
Old 10-09-2019, 04:49 PM   #38
Slackware_fan_Fred
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2018
Distribution: Slackware64-14.2 Multilib
Posts: 108

Rep: Reputation: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuangTzu View Post
Another GNU update from Stallman:
No radical changes in GNU Project
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/i.../msg00005.html
It's good that nothing will change, it's ridiculous that they basically forced him to resign over just saying something apparently controversial, after-all Stallman did not do any crime.
I don't agree with everything he says but I appreciate all he has done for Free Software.
Hope he has a good early Retirement.
 
Old 10-10-2019, 12:09 AM   #39
astrogeek
Moderator
 
Registered: Oct 2008
Distribution: Slackware [64]-X.{0|1|2|37|-current} ::12<=X<=14, FreeBSD_12{.0|.1}
Posts: 5,221
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171
As I will summarize briefly here, I see this whole episode as nothing other than the latest move in the continuing war against Truth, and our Freedoms. It is the very war joined by Dr. Richard Stallman when he considered, and recognized a simple, self evident truth. That truth changed his life in very public ways, leading him to launch the Free Software movement, from which he has never wavered and we have all benefitted enormously.

Dr. Stallman deduced from logic, ethics and personal experience the principle that Freedom in the software realm reduces to the simple principle of mutual respect among equals - that you not deny to others the respect and Freedom you want for yourself.

From wikiquote:
Quote:
I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share with others.
From GNU:
Quote:
“Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.
This same principle was the foundation of an earlier political philosophy which many considered to be revolutionary:

American Declaration of Independence:
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...
The foundation, the first principle on which all else must stand is the self evident truth that we are all equal at point of origin - not in the sight of any "law", but in the sight of each other! All else, including any system of authority which men may devise is only legitimate in so far as it acts to preserve this "community of free equals", and only by the consent of each otherwise Free and equal individual.

In other words, mutual respect among equals was recognized as the foundation principle of legitimate civilization. This was
not a new idea at the time, but one widely understood in western societies and cited for that reason. It is we who have forgotten.

Another famous person stated the same principle in still fewer words:

Quote:
Love your neighbor as yourself.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Mutual, reciprocal respect among equals, "as yourself", the whole and only basis of equity, peace and goodwill among men.

That such different characters as Dr. Stallman, an outspoken atheist, Thomas Jefferson, an agnostic politician, and Jesus Christ, who should need no introduction, all recognized the same principle as the single foundation of everything good in human relations only emphasizes the timeless, self evident nature of this simple principle, this truth.

Realize clearly that this was the foundation from which the Free Software movement sprang.

The current moves against Dr. Stallman are nothing other than a fight against this simple, self evident truth, by those whose profits and positions are best served by an unqueal, non-reciprocal relationship with others. That is and has always been the nature of this fight.

The original accusation against Dr. Stallman was untruthful in its characterization of his statements, and subsequent moves against him have relied on the noise of the mob and raising of new mobs, or "collectives", to increase that noise level. Truth has no part in it.

Similarly, the active removal and concealment of all truth concerning Bill Gates actual involvement in the matter which Dr. Stallman is only, untruthfully accused of having supported with a single comment, illustrates that truth is the enemy to be silenced. See comments and links provided by Turbocapitalist here and here for a few examples, others easily found by internet search.

The noise of the mob unrestrained by truth, and the deafening silence where truth should be shouted, serve the same cause.

I have said many times that we are entering a new dark age, and I can think of no better current example to illustrate that than this ongoing episode. If truth is the light that guides human progress, then we should all find something to hold onto, because the lights are being extinguished... the consequences for any with a high regard for Truth and Freedom are very serious indeed.

Genuine mutual respect among equals - the foundation of all equity, Freedom, privacy, stable societies, and of Free Software. Understand and assert the importance of that truth as clearly as Dr. Richard M. Stallman and others have done, or concede defeat.

Last edited by astrogeek; 10-10-2019 at 12:50 AM. Reason: grammar, emphasis
 
Old 10-10-2019, 12:28 AM   #40
freemedia2018
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2019
Distribution: various automated remasters
Posts: 152
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 108Reputation: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrogeek View Post
I have said many times that we are entering a new dark age
England in medieval times, Salem in colonial times, the world in the dawn of the age of AI and robots... each one has their own desperation and lack of humanity.

https://s.put.re/nggmei3L.jpg

Chairman: "We need a way to make ALL contributors feel more welcome..."

First board member: "Condescending new rules!"

Second member: "Witch hunts?"

Third member: "Or instead of throwing out folk heroes, we could show everyone matters with a public mediation."

(You know the rest.)
 
Old 10-11-2019, 09:41 PM   #41
dedec0
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 948

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuangTzu View Post
Well done. Let the open discussions and continue.

Perhaps, LQ or techrights would interview Stallman, surely this is pertinent "breaking news" within the *nix/FOSS/FLOSS ecosystem.
++1
 
Old 10-12-2019, 11:36 PM   #42
freemedia2018
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2019
Distribution: various automated remasters
Posts: 152
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 108Reputation: 108
I don't think it will do any good to interview Stallman yet.

It's not that I'm personally against the idea, it's that I have it on very good authority that Stallman is not making a fuss about this. All the questions we want to ask him in an interview are questions we've asked him outside of an interview, and he's actually being very focused on which things he replies to. These are things he's already quoted as saying. Sure, we have lots more questions-- but not answers.

There are even things related to this I'm personally keeping a lid on. They're not earth-shaking or anything, I have a diplomatic side is all. It's a question of giving things time to settle down, and I think that's what Stallman is doing.

Meanwhile, there are people who are crossing a line that some of us can't keep from responding to. such as Daniel Pocock's blogging on mailing-list censorship. If i were going to "just let things settle down" no matter what was said, I wouldn't be commenting on censorship he's documenting by the FSF, Google and Debian. Occasionally censoring something with just cause is one thing-- but the patterns he outlines are interesting to me. I think they're notable. I recommend looking those up and one of the censored emails is one that supports Stallman.

I'm very sceptical, incidentally, that this "lay low" approach is the right one. Stallman says "support the FSF" and a lot of us want to help in any way we can, but there are still things going on that we can't support-- no matter who asks. It's just not that simple at this point. So if I had to sum up what to do in light of all this, I would say "Choose carefully-- but use your best judgement."
 
Old Yesterday, 01:39 PM   #43
dedec0
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 948

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
It's also the owner of Ars Technica (Microsoft loving, gutter 'journalism')...

//edit:

Also worth noting that Richard Stallman's Wikipedia page contains all of the references to Epstein - all of which have passed moderation and been published on the page. Attempts to change some of the content to be more fact based have been reverse and it currently reads as follows:


Cite note 21: https://stallman.org/archives/2019-j...9_(Resignation)

Which is simply a first person statment by Stallman re: his resignation on his own page. However the wikipedia sentence, is very much a "draw your own conclusions" one. The citations falls well short of being a valid one for that kind of statement.


This statement is again missing the details of exactly what was said by Stallman and is descending into "journalism" rather than being material worthy of an "encyclopaedia"...

Cite note 118 is the Ars Technica trash.
Cite note 119 is Steven Levy of wired, very personally, laying in the boot with his "Clueless Nerd" article.
Cite note 120: https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-m-stallman-resigns
Cite note 121 is a Boston Globe newspaper article.

All of these so called "facts" are based on the typical media coverage only and some statements... (2 of the cite notes are Ars and Wired - Condé Nast).

The source for Ars and Wired is the vice.com article among others. The source for the vice.com article is the medium.com blog and leaked redacted emails.

Bill Gates' wikipedia page on the other hand contains no Epstein references, despite the fact that Gates flew on one of Epstein's plane, met Epstein after his conviction and donated money to MIT through Epstein...

If you check the page edit history you can see for yourself where a simple edit to Gates' page to add a similar section to the ones found on Stallman's page is quickly censored, whereas by comparison there is a virtual free for all of slander on RMS' page with little intervention. You also won't find any reference to that particular donation.

https://www.axios.com/bill-gates-jef...b74d1107d.html
o-=

wow
 
Old Today, 04:03 AM   #44
Pastychomper
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Scotland
Distribution: Slackware, Android
Posts: 110

Rep: Reputation: 204Reputation: 204Reputation: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemedia2018 View Post
....
Meanwhile, there are people who are crossing a line that some of us can't keep from responding to. such as Daniel Pocock's blogging on mailing-list censorship. If i were going to "just let things settle down" no matter what was said, I wouldn't be commenting on censorship he's documenting by the FSF, Google and Debian. Occasionally censoring something with just cause is one thing-- but the patterns he outlines are interesting to me. I think they're notable. I recommend looking those up and one of the censored emails is one that supports Stallman.

I'm very sceptical, incidentally, that this "lay low" approach is the right one. Stallman says "support the FSF" and a lot of us want to help in any way we can, but there are still things going on that we can't support-- no matter who asks. It's just not that simple at this point. So if I had to sum up what to do in light of all this, I would say "Choose carefully-- but use your best judgement."
Thanks for that post. I don't know who Daniel Pocock is but his blog makes some very... interesting assertions. Either he's a reasonable author of conspiracy fiction or there's something whiffy in Debian (besides the daemon-that-shall-not-be-named ) and the FSF.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stallman resignation thread cynwulf LQ Suggestions & Feedback 26 10-04-2019 10:14 AM
Richard Stallman's resignation Lysander666 General 78 09-30-2019 09:24 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:52 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration