Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Former Linux Developer Hans Reiser To Remain Locked Up

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by jacob View Post
    He's a murderer. Any Linux contributions he did are insignificant in comparison.
    He is. And he is paying for his crime. This does not mean that he shouldn't be given a chance to redeem himself for the rest of his life. People make mistakes. He who is sinless should cast the first stone....

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by r08z View Post
      15 years should be enough.
      Tell that to his victim.

      Comment


      • #23
        This nonsense of over-exaggeration by the contemporary SJW/cancel-culture needs to end.

        The thing of it is that there is a nearly infinite number nuances in between "He/she/it/they did nothing wrong" and "He/she/it/they did nothing right".

        Murder is bad. No one is denying that, no one is diminishing that in any way, shape or form. No one should. He is guilty, he confessed and pleaded guilty. He should be made to serve time for that. And lots of it. I would be fine with him not being paroled in 2023 either. But...

        ... he did NOT do nothing right.

        If we go down the right of simply cancelling someone's effort over one mistake in their life, why not cancel the entire Linux kernel while we're at it? No one here is denying that Linus Torvalds is an asshole if he wants to be. He's shown this time and time again over the years. And I can guarantee that there are people out there that would like to see the Linux kernel cancelled just over that fact alone. But, we should not allow that.

        Nor should we allow blanket judgement being passed on Reiser's code and contributions.

        If we allow that stance to continue, I can guarantee you now that within 5 years tops, nothing will be allowed anymore. Because no one is entirely innocent. Everyone, at some point in their life, did something to someone out there that, even objectively, was hurtful. Be it emotional, physical, financial or otherwise.

        Our entire global society benefits from the current or historical exploitation or abuse of some group or another. Literally, every single human alive today is benefitting from exploitation. Dig deep enough and you will find it. Should we just cancel the species now? No, of course we should not. Let's end the SJW/cancel-culture, here and now. Reiser is where he should be, where he deserves to be. Let's not add insult to injury by dragging what he did into areas that were not relevant to the situation to begin with.

        I've got a suggestion that could work -- Let's just rename his work. So no one will be reminded of it. That should be a workable compromise, shouldn't it? It would allow for the technology he developed to remain accessible while also considering the feelings of those he hurt in the process of his heinous act.

        Comment


        • #24
          partition my wife

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by yoshi314 View Post

            i do not understand why should we equate both of them.

            modern medicine benefits from inhumane research done during the WW2, and nobody bats an eye.
            Don't forget animal testing. I don't want to sound like an activist, which I'm absolutely not btw, but we're talking about lives here, so in that regard, animals are living creatures too.
            Last edited by Vistaus; 03-22-2020, 12:51 PM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Chugworth View Post
              Tell that to his victim.
              If 15 years wasn't enough, then the judge has made a terrible mistake by only sentencing him to 15 years minimum.

              Comment


              • #27
                It was pretty much to be expected that he'd be out sometime soon considering the prosecutors would have had to go to trial without a body and a whole lot of non-conclusive evidence had he not made a plea deal where he told them where he buried his ex wife's body. I kind of forgot it was that long ago and seeing the year my first thought was one of "So how is he not out yet?".

                Looked up the sentencing guidelines in California and it sounds to me like he wasn't a very good negotiator or had Lionel Hutz as his lawyer. Absolute worst he could have gotten is first degree murder that carries a 25 to life sentence and that would have come with a non-insignificant chance of being found not guilty due to a conviction requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt. What he negotiated it down to by providing the location of the body and actually giving them a solid case was only one step down to second degree murder and 15 to life.

                Maybe I've got a skewed perspective seeing celebrities and other rich people get huge reductions in sentences by negotiating these sorts of things, but I expected him to be have been able to negotiate down to third degree murder a.k.a manslaughter. That apparently only carries a maximum sentence of 11 years.

                Oh and before anyone starts moaning about me being too lenient I will point out that as a first time offender, here in Finland he would have been out by now. Unlike in the U.S and its' downright barbaric prison system our prison system is less about just plain punishment and more about rehabilitation.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post
                  And he is paying for his crime. This does not mean that he shouldn't be given a chance to redeem himself for the rest of his life.
                  The point of incarceration has tended to be claimed to be some combination of retribution (punishment/repayment to society for the crime), incapacitation (preventing further harm to others), deterrence (dissuading others from doing the same thing) and rehabilitation (helping the individual return society as a productive law abiding person)(*). Depending on societies attitudes across the years different points have taken priority in the overall system. Hans, like everyone incarcerated with an indeterminate sentence, deserves the opportunity to demonstrate that he is no longer a threat to society, and has been rehabilitated, and deserves to reenter society. The parole board (which has extremely wide latitude in their decisions) has determined that Hans has not yet achieved the necessary benchmarks. That says nothing about future decisions on parole, which will be based on actions that are largely in the control of Hans himself.


                  (*) Some will add in profit motive, as both for profit private facilities, and prison work requirements, can be profitable to some companies and some states.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
                    It was pretty much to be expected that he'd be out sometime soon considering the prosecutors would have had to go to trial without a body and a whole lot of non-conclusive evidence
                    Except, of course, for the fact the prosecution already had the 1st degree conviction (they proved the case to the jury). The prosecution agreed to a plea deal (with agreement of the family) after the conviction for a reduced charge of 2nd degree murder in order that he would show them the body, and provide closure for the family (and Hans also agreed to not dispute the conviction and the sentence).

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Vistaus View Post
                      If 15 years wasn't enough, then the judge has made a terrible mistake by only sentencing him to 15 years minimum.
                      The judge probably did that for the sake of the victims to give them closure, knowing that Hans probably wouldn't be paroled that soon, especially with the way he acts. I'm going to guess he's not a model prisoner and we know he's already been involved in one altercation. Also, by allowing Hans to lead them to the body, he lost a lot of grounds to appeal on. The initial case against him was shaky until he took the stand

                      EDIT: I responded without reading CommunityMember 's posts, which basically agree with mine.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X