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

  • moilami
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post

    You're lying. He said sex with children doesn't cause harm to the children. He didn't specify 17 year olds. Nobody thinks that a couple of 17-yos having sex is pedophilia or even creepy, even if in some circumstances it's not prudent.

    Everybody that doesn't have their heads in the sand knows what's going on out there. Stallman is trying to normalize pedophilia.
    No he is not trying to do anything like that and has never tried to do anything like that. He has never went full steam campaigning pedophilia like he has done to several other agendas. I don't know how he said that stupid nonsense thing regarding kids and sex, but I guess it was just his eagerness to say what he think is logical opinion to every matter asked.

    If he tried to normalize pedophilia he would had actively campaigned for it and would had been special quest at that big pedo boss's parties.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnc
    replied
    Originally posted by IreMinMon View Post
    There's no such thing as "underage sex". Pubescent women, once they get their first period, are by all criteria, either natural, technical, biological or medical, entirely capable for the full process of reproduction.

    "Age" is not even a factor. Age is a legal parameter that is used to determine whether the subject is capable of taking responsibility for their own actions.
    Having sex with a 17yo is perfectly legal throughout entire Europe. Would getting rid of all European FOSS developers be a "GOOD RIDDANCE" by your standards as well?
    You're lying. He said sex with children doesn't cause harm to the children. He didn't specify 17 year olds. Nobody thinks that a couple of 17-yos having sex is pedophilia or even creepy, even if in some circumstances it's not prudent.

    Everybody that doesn't have their heads in the sand knows what's going on out there. Stallman is trying to normalize pedophilia.

    Leave a comment:


  • blackiwid
    replied
    This news as far as I understand it was a hoax... the GNU Project seems to be still fine but the FSF is our enemy...

    That said it starts to look good for Trump, the Identity Politics retards and Cancel culture Fascists and Femnazis make a compelling case to vote for Trump again. The current Impeachment process is also based on a similar lie than this one, they just took 2 half sentences cut 1000 words in between and fabricated evidence and somehow nobody goes to jail for forgery.

    The only candidate that makes a good case that she doesn't support this tactics against Trump Tulsi Gabbard has no Chance to get the nomination therefor Trump will win. Well every country becomes the Politicians they deserve !!!
    Last edited by blackiwid; 29 September 2019, 05:48 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

    This is the difference between leader and activist.

    A project/company leader has to be willing to accept claims of wrong doing without any evidence as information to be investigated. Once there is evidence one way or the other than the project/company leader can comment not before.

    Part of being a project/company lead comes with responsibility that does tie you hands where one serous things like rapes and assaults you can not just say no evidence. You have to have at least evidence of a proper investigation that found nothing before being able to say there is no evidence to the claim..

    Activist/advocate can say what Stallman said. Basically a Leader should not say that stuff but let PR department handle answers.




    That is the mistake. A project leader is required to work on evidence. Stallman did not have the evidence one way or the other so while a project leader really could not legally make a comment. A correct lead move in the position of lacking information is no comment. You don't attempt to defend someone until you have the facts on the matter.

    Aiding and abetting laws are a pain in but for CEOs and Project leads.

    There are responsibility with being a project lead or CEO to make sure you don't aide and abet a crime you can be done by for this offence by simple acting way that appears to show that you will not take a report of a criminal offence seriously even if that report is currently short in information.

    Like it or not there is a serous need for Activist/Advocates and Project/Company leads not to be the same person. What you can say in the two roles when it comes to crimes is very different and have very different legal issues.
    I agree with your definitions, but in this case none of the rapes/assaults were related to the FSF or GNU. They were infact related to MIT, and Stallman would have had no say in whether or not they were investigated, and how well. He was at best part of the CSAIL lab. Of course, he may or may not have had undue influence on the investigation, seeing as how he rubbed shoulders with many senior staff and potentially management, but other than that, he was not the deciding factor for anything. He was at best attempting to defend his dead colleague, so I don't see how what you're saying is relevant.

    Leave a comment:


  • moilami
    replied
    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

    That was a pro-Stallman metaphor.
    Ah, now I got it, I at first interpreted Stallman should gun himself. How stupid of me, but people have been wishing that. peace man, but lets charge anyway

    Leave a comment:


  • moilami
    replied
    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

    Hey Richard Stallman, what have you done?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the only one?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the Superman?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the one you want?
    Hey Richard Stallman, shotgun!

    It's a dark day for free software
    It's a dark day for a GNU software
    It's a nice day to start again
    So it started. This is just the beginning. You have won nothing. Cavalry is coming. If you want a holy war, you will get it. The charge of the light brigade!



    Leave a comment:


  • skeevy420
    replied
    Originally posted by moilami View Post

    This type of people want take over FSF.

    Can you people believe what sanitarium this has become?

    I remember how this has been foreseen right here in these forums. Now it became reality.
    That was a pro-Stallman metaphor.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by kravemir View Post

    I'm not a lawyer, just a software developer, and previously GPL-fanboy programming hobbyist. As, that "GPL-fanboy", I liked idea of must-publish source-code, from perspective of "taker", where I liked availability of software to all people poor/rich. However, as father feeding family via software development, I realize the need to be rewarded for work. Software is developed for months for "free", until it's finished (to usable degree), and then sold/made-available. GPL's viral requirement to publish source code, allows competitors to just copy the source-code and use it without the having to invest their own resources into research and development. Therefore, months of previous development get unpaid. So, GPL heavily enforces "free" as in free beer, and not "free" as in freedom of speech.

    In the end, software is a tool, or toy. And, if user/customer benefits from having the tool, he pays for it,... I like "charity aspect" of free software solutions available to end-users, but we don't live utopia, that freedom (as in free beer) can be enforced for one type of goods - software, because developers also need to get paid to acquire other types of goods needed for their survival and happy living.
    I am in the same boat too, but I must disagree that the GPL is entirely a disadvantage there - remember that any competitors who use GPL source code in their projects, must then reveal the source code for any binaries that ship the GPL'd source code they copied from you. So you get to see their code.

    In fact, I'd say that releasing source code under GPL while selling the binary may well be a profitable business. Although it depends a lot on the type of software, presence of secret keys/data, contribution policy etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • moilami
    replied
    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

    Hey Richard Stallman, what have you done?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the only one?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the Superman?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the one you want?
    Hey Richard Stallman, shotgun!

    It's a dark day for free software
    It's a dark day for a GNU software
    It's a nice day to start again
    This type of people want take over FSF.

    Can you people believe what sanitarium this has become?

    I remember how this has been foreseen right here in these forums. Now it became reality.

    Leave a comment:


  • skeevy420
    replied
    Originally posted by Templar82 View Post
    A dark day for free software.
    Hey Richard Stallman, what have you done?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the only one?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the Superman?
    Hey Richard Stallman, GNU's the one you want?
    Hey Richard Stallman, shotgun!

    It's a dark day for free software
    It's a dark day for a GNU software
    It's a nice day to start again

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X