Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Richard Stallman Reportedly Steps Down As Head Of The GNU Project

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Zoll View Post
    This really gives new context to Free Speech, which many western societies seem to take pride in. Oh sure, you can speak whatever you want, but be prepared to be dragged through the mud and have you career ruined for anything you say that does not conform to our sacred social norms. It's quite hypocritical.
    It's not hypocritical. You have free speech and so do people who disagree with you. Free speech does not mean free of consequences. It only means the government can't arrest you for speech. Apparently the people who actually worked with Stallman at MIT, at FSF and in the GNU Project told him they didn't want him around anymore. That's on no one's head but his own. Are you suggesting that they lose their own right, that of free association? Is Stallman supposed to be guaranteed a job or a leadership position for life, even when those he leads have lost confidence in him or his personal statements or activities shine a negative light on the organizations he associates with?

    Why is there an element who make the guilty the victim? Stallman has a decades-long history of making people uncomfortable, and yes norms have changed - we've gotten better as a culture. There are things we don't tolerate anymore and Stallman has shown he can't or won't change his behavior. It's all caught up with him. As The Register noted, for a man with a long list demanding how others use certain words around him, he failed repeatedly to apply any scrutiny or forethought to his own communications with others. It should come as no surprise that people would be outraged at the things he wrote, but he did it anyway and now the consequences have come. It's a shame he's just now learning his lesson so late in life. I honestly hope he lands on his feet and I feel sorry that the cult that surrounds him have apparently left him in such a financially vulnerable position. Someone told me years ago that he'd been moved out of his office and into a house of his own, but now it seems that may not be the case or the FSF was paying for it. He doesn't seem capable of holding down an actual programming job and despite a great MIT degree and thesis he doesn't seem to have done any meaningful academic work since either. I can't imagine he has has a 401K or retirement savings. Maybe people should stop throwing rose petals at the feet of the Free Software Buddha and start making sure he has a reliable roof, source of income, health care and savings account. He's not a savior; he's a man with a psychological obsession that has consumed his life and otherwise mentally healthy people that surround him have encouraged him in that endeavor to the expense of his own material circumstances. Let's stop worrying about people who find his speech offensive and all agree to worry together about why the man doesn't have a home of his own at age 66 and who's going to look after him, especially in another ten years. Stop worrying about The Great Cause and start worrying about the man behind it. There's got to be some sort of intervention or wellness check on Richard Stallman before he ends up living on the street.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by alcalde View Post
      Yet another exhibit of why people have gotten tired of trying to work with/put up with him. I'm surprised there was no mention of parrots.
      Note that he found a place that suits his purposes within about a week or less.

      He also spends a great deal of his life traveling around the world, which makes "home" more of a formality than it is for most people.

      Originally posted by alcalde View Post
      When did the Linux community start adopting Alex Jones-level conspiracy theories?
      Maybe around the time Microsoft bought GitHub, IBM bought Red Hat, and the new "init" core of the GNU/Linux operating system is now developed and hosted on joint IBM/Microsoft-controlled infrastructure, despite this not being the 1980s.

      I predicted the purchase of Red Hat immediately after the GitHub purchase, incidentally.
      Last edited by fsfhfc2018; 10-05-2019, 02:49 AM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by alcalde View Post
        When did the Linux community start adopting Alex Jones-level conspiracy theories?
        Really? I said I just wouldn't be surprised if it was confirmed that huge corporations worked against competition, as they always do, and if the military was interested in promoting software that can be used to gather personal information, not very unusual for intelligence agencies to do either...
        Last edited by teresaejunior; 10-05-2019, 05:47 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by alcalde View Post

          Yet another exhibit of why people have gotten tired of trying to work with/put up with him. I'm surprised there was no mention of parrots.
          So, despite of all the stuff that Snowden released, people don't care and actually make fun of those who try to avoid being caught up in the dragnet.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by alcalde View Post

            It's not hypocritical. You have free speech and so do people who disagree with you. Free speech does not mean free of consequences. It only means the government can't arrest you for speech. Apparently the people who actually worked with Stallman at MIT, at FSF and in the GNU Project told him they didn't want him around anymore. That's on no one's head but his own. Are you suggesting that they lose their own right, that of free association? Is Stallman supposed to be guaranteed a job or a leadership position for life, even when those he leads have lost confidence in him or his personal statements or activities shine a negative light on the organizations he associates with?

            Why is there an element who make the guilty the victim? Stallman has a decades-long history of making people uncomfortable, and yes norms have changed - we've gotten better as a culture. There are things we don't tolerate anymore and Stallman has shown he can't or won't change his behavior. It's all caught up with him. As The Register noted, for a man with a long list demanding how others use certain words around him, he failed repeatedly to apply any scrutiny or forethought to his own communications with others. It should come as no surprise that people would be outraged at the things he wrote, but he did it anyway and now the consequences have come. It's a shame he's just now learning his lesson so late in life. I honestly hope he lands on his feet and I feel sorry that the cult that surrounds him have apparently left him in such a financially vulnerable position. Someone told me years ago that he'd been moved out of his office and into a house of his own, but now it seems that may not be the case or the FSF was paying for it. He doesn't seem capable of holding down an actual programming job and despite a great MIT degree and thesis he doesn't seem to have done any meaningful academic work since either. I can't imagine he has has a 401K or retirement savings. Maybe people should stop throwing rose petals at the feet of the Free Software Buddha and start making sure he has a reliable roof, source of income, health care and savings account. He's not a savior; he's a man with a psychological obsession that has consumed his life and otherwise mentally healthy people that surround him have encouraged him in that endeavor to the expense of his own material circumstances. Let's stop worrying about people who find his speech offensive and all agree to worry together about why the man doesn't have a home of his own at age 66 and who's going to look after him, especially in another ten years. Stop worrying about The Great Cause and start worrying about the man behind it. There's got to be some sort of intervention or wellness check on Richard Stallman before he ends up living on the street.
            So, if there is a cult around him, what makes you think that some of those people wouldn't step up and personally look after him or otherwise provide for his well-being. I'm still waiting to see the terrible things he's said or done; see my previous comments about the referenced items thus far here. Granted, as far as I have seen, RMS does come across as arrogant or lacking empathy at times. I can imagine that it can prove to be difficult to work with him. However, based on his extensive experience in Computer Science and in leadership roles of different organizations; his academic background and qualifications; his personal and professional views and theories that have been proven (again, Snowden documents and ubiquity of "connected" devices, etc.); are you suggesting that none of that came with benefits or compensation? Furthermore, in the greater scheme of things, his apparent lack of interpersonal skills has not hindered him from contributing to our society or from benefiting, financially and otherwise, from his technical knowledge.

            Arguably, his notoriety is greater due to attacking corporate interests and even social norms that erode the health of our culture, our collective freedoms, and, ironically, even our public discourse. Therefore, for better or worse, he is given more leeway when it comes to those shortcomings in interpersonal skills. Then, as soon as he stumbles, there's a gleeful sect of people that pounce on it; case and point, the thing with parrots or even his personal right or privilege to demand that he stay off the dragnet and not to be treated as a product through corporate monetization that can be/ is being exploited. I never met the guy. I rarely hear about/from him. However, the majority of stuff that's out there shows him to be a staunch supporter of personal freedoms and egalitarian values. His work has shaped a world where his adversaries are abdicating their thrones of greed, even as they continue to ridicule his ideas as idealistic or plain crazy.



            Comment


            • Originally posted by alcalde View Post
              Free speech does not mean free of consequences. It only means the government can't arrest you for speech.
              This keeps getting said by people who are justifying dishonesty and lynch mobs.

              Is it even possible that the people being told they want "consequence-free speech" are actually just complaining about media dishonesty and lynch mobs, or are "being free of consequences" or media-led lynch mobs our only two options? Those seem to to be the only options acknowledged by the lynch mob side.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by azdaha View Post
                This borders inappropriate discussion, granted. If you are attempting to purely discuss a controversial issue on an intellectual basis, however, it does deserve to be taken with a grain of salt. Unfortunately, despicable people exist in all forums of life; whether it's academic or religious institutions, every-day-life, or even on the internet. Using that as a basis for expanding a police-state to the internet, which affects ALL of us (as presented in the Snowden documents) should be of concern to ALL of us. Whether it's "terrorism" or "pedophilia" (quotes added to indicate intended scary trigger words) or any other specific reason for a basis of garnering support around an issue, personal freedoms have been eroded and will continue to be eroded with the auspices of serving the public good. That's how and why this issue is seen by me. I am far from an apologist of any kind. If you are aiming to counteract a threatening phenomenon through intellectual means, however, you have to weaken its foundation through analysis and sometimes even speculative hypotheses.
                Problem here its more than inappropriate.

                FSF Richard Stallman was president of board with GNU he has been absolute CEO/Manager as the Head of GNU. Having these options counter to the law in these positions is problem for the organisation.

                Getting Stallman out of those positions is to protect the organisation and Stallman.

                I will run a hypothetical that has not happened.

                Lets say a git repo at GNU was found to be used for "pedophilia" exactly what do the police have not to presume the following.
                1) Stallman covered it up.
                2) Stallman would not have reported it to the police if he knew about it.

                In this example Stallman could be getting repeatedly held for questioning because of his beliefs not aligning with law and holding a management position. Result while that is going on he could be not functional to the organisation.

                There is a long list of thing when you have management position that you are not allowed a personal option on as you must have the same option as the law because you are required to report stuff.

                There are many activist groups trying to change laws where the CEO/president does not in fact believe at all in what they are doing and is just employed to keep everything in order.

                https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.co...w-south-wales/

                Thing to remember client legal privilege by law also does not cover a lot of things you listed.

                Personal freedoms that people claim are more often a work of fiction in the eyes of the law because lot of them are not part of most countries laws. We all ready live in police states pretending otherwise is really lying to ourselves. We really want to be living in a police state with decent laws.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

                  Problem here its more than inappropriate.

                  FSF Richard Stallman was president of board with GNU he has been absolute CEO/Manager as the Head of GNU. Having these options counter to the law in these positions is problem for the organisation.

                  Getting Stallman out of those positions is to protect the organisation and Stallman.

                  I will run a hypothetical that has not happened.

                  Lets say a git repo at GNU was found to be used for "pedophilia" exactly what do the police have not to presume the following.
                  1) Stallman covered it up.
                  2) Stallman would not have reported it to the police if he knew about it.

                  In this example Stallman could be getting repeatedly held for questioning because of his beliefs not aligning with law and holding a management position. Result while that is going on he could be not functional to the organisation.

                  There is a long list of thing when you have management position that you are not allowed a personal option on as you must have the same option as the law because you are required to report stuff.

                  There are many activist groups trying to change laws where the CEO/president does not in fact believe at all in what they are doing and is just employed to keep everything in order.

                  https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.co...w-south-wales/

                  Thing to remember client legal privilege by law also does not cover a lot of things you listed.

                  Personal freedoms that people claim are more often a work of fiction in the eyes of the law because lot of them are not part of most countries laws. We all ready live in police states pretending otherwise is really lying to ourselves. We really want to be living in a police state with decent laws.
                  You had me until the last paragraph. There's a difference between realism and cynicism. Although, I'm not saying that you are entirely guilty of the latter. However, it should be noted that striving for improvement or a better world is not the same as delusions; again, not saying you said that, but worth pointing out. Otherwise, great points.
                  Thanks for the thoughtful discussion.

                  By the way, I thought that it had been clarified that Stallman is still head of GNU. Is that wrong?
                  Last edited by azdaha; 10-06-2019, 01:44 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by azdaha View Post
                    By the way, I thought that it had been clarified that Stallman is still head of GNU. Is that wrong?
                    https://www.gnu.org/contact/

                    Stallman is still head of GNU PR as Stallman calls it "Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project" and of course he can still use the title Founder of GNU..

                    Management items of GNU on the other hand when you check out contacts and the like go to either the FSF foundation board that he is not a member of any more or parties who are not Stallman now.

                    Stallman is no longer the absolute head at GNU caused by:
                    1) Get out of the FSF foundation
                    2) Change to who picks up critical email accounts related to management.

                    Lot of people were not aware for a long time being the President of the FSF also made you the absolute CEO of the GNU project.

                    Stallman current position at GNU is safe for him and the project. Now Stallman can put is verbal or written foot in it and the GNU project or FSF will not have major problems.

                    azdaha is head of what. Stallman now has less hats on his head and the ones his is still wearing he is fairly good at doing.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                      The entire concept of comparing someone posting bs to a fucking murderer is kind of off the charts, but I think that given the trends it's probably going to happen within weeks.
                      Actually, I was figuring more the "irony" of them meeting because of "jail".... it could go a lot deeper than your thought.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X