Goodbye, RMS
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
> I would like to ask details of his popularity (e.g. do people usually know his name and face but do not know well what he does?
He's incredibly popular in terms of the numbers of people working in tech who know his name and know of his amazing accomplishments. What he did and the code he wrote was nearly impossible for anyone else to do. And yet, without it, we almost certainly would not have a freely available internet, or any legitimate free software movement at all. Thousands of medical and scientific discoveries that used supercomputers and cluster computers would have been nearly impossible without his contributions.
At the same time, he's very unpopular among many of those same tech workers because he challenges their laziness, and their willingness to give up their freedoms if it seems to make their lives a bit more comfortable.
He is an outspoken and uncompromising person. Uncompromising people will always have problems being popular with the masses. Stallman is viewed as being better than most because he literally wrote by hand many of the technological foundations that they stand on today. So, in the eyes of many he has earned the right to be uncompromising in any way he wants.
In conclusion - he is both very popular and very unpopular at the same time, depending on who you talk to. Anyone who really understands his accomplishments is very likely to hold him in the highest regard.
If one has achievements, people cannot say anything in principle if they have not put a lot of time and effort into something as much as the one.
I wonder why it is unpopular with people to live hard and honestly and passionately. There seems to be no other way to satisfy life. The way must relieve the fear of death, though. I think maybe soul remembers the fact. Maybe that's why evil people's death is full of fear. Maybe their souls know they will be downgraded to hell. But, sure, after lost even one pawn, concentrating to recoup the loss is maybe the most difficult thing. How can they who are used to underestimating life because they thought power will solve every miss without accepting responsibility do such a hard work... Derailed!
But maybe I should have asked "How famous he is". I think you understood, though. It is the dictionary's fault. Anyway, good luck, Mr. Stallman.
Edit: typo
> Maybe their souls know they will be downgraded to hell.
Ironically, Stallman is also an atheist. So, his tormenters' souls may end up in hell, but it's not something he appears to believe exists. I don't know how passionate he is about his atheism. But it does bring a small and amusing bit of irony to the situation.
name at domain wrote:
> He is an outspoken and uncompromising person. Uncompromising people will
> always have problems being popular with the masses. Stallman is viewed as
> being better than most because he literally wrote by hand many of the
> technological foundations that they stand on today. So, in the eyes of many
> he has earned the right to be uncompromising in any way he wants.
Barbra Streisand is still well-known despite that on March 22, 2019 she was
interviewed by the Times of London and said something less than clearly
supportive of Wade Robson and James Safechuck, two men who were the subject
of a 2019 documentary ("Leaving Neverland") in which they said they were
sexually abused as children by famous pop singer Michael Jackson.
The Times of London interview:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/barbra-streisand-at-76-dog-cloning-art-collecting-and-being-a-grandma-rvcgqd5cb
Some of the coverage quoting Streisand from that interview including noting
that the alleged Jackson sexual abuse "didn't kill them [Robson and
Safechuck]" and that "His [Jackson's] sexual needs were his sexual needs":
https://variety.com/2019/music/news/barbra-streisand-michael-jackson-accusers-thrilled-1203170747/
3 days later the Times of London reported that she apologized for that
March 22 interview:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/streisand-apologises-for-playing-down-pain-of-jackson-accusers-rkwknjv6w
> Barbra Streisand has said that she is “profoundly sorry” for an
> interview in The Times in which she played down the consequences of
> Michael Jackson’s alleged sexual abuse of two young boys.
So, like Richard Stallman, she said some things people found objectionable
regarding the same topic -- sex involving children -- and both later
apologized for what they respectively said.
Stallman lost his position as FSF President. Streisand doesn't appear to
have lost anything but she has some things that can still be taken away:
she's called an "EGOT-winning singer" (EGOT meaning that she has won 4
major awards from the entertainment industry: each of an Emmy, Grammy,
Oscar, and Tony awards). As far as I know none of those awards were taken.
According to https://www.songkick.com/artists/274358-barbra-streisand she
held concerts for paying customers as recently as August 6, 2019.
One wonders, since so-called "cancel culture" has established that due
process doesn't matter and jobs, awards, contracted gigs, and the like
should be canceled as a consequence of uttering speech they don't like
(apparently even after apologies are given): which of her awards should be
rescinded now? Who should vet all of her speech before she's allowed to be
heard from again? Should any concertgoers receive refunds? Or should they
too be named and shamed for paying to attend a concert for someone who said
such things? Where was the group that pushed for getting Stallman out of
the FSF regarding Streisand's "playing down the consequences of Michael
Jackson's alleged sexual abuse of two young boys" (as the Times of London
put it)?
They deprived RMS of his livelihood, but we lost more.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/28/style/is-it-canceled.html
Hollywood doesn't ever rescind awards. Roman Polanski was given 2 Oscars 14 years AFTER admitting to illegal sexual intercourse with a 13 year old and fleeing the US to avoid prosecution. Not only did they not take away any of his awards, they gave him more.
Stallman wasn't working in Hollywood though. From what I've read, there was a faction of people at MIT that were trying for years to destroy Stallman and several other MIT old-timers. It would appear that the faction finally got their wish.
https://medium.com/@selamie/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794
https://medium.com/@selamie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
#cancelstallman
@sarahmei
@_sagesharp_
On twitter.
I do not believe these women are all lying. I
do not know if stallman has committed
decency offenses. He has a
continued record of misbehaving towards
women. In itself unacceptable. If conducting himself
like this while being in any official free
software foundation capacity, he has
disqualified himself from such a post. It has
damaged the free software foundation. How can you
expect anyone wanting to promote an organization
were you can expect people asking, is your
president a proponent of pedophilia and does
he offend women? Because I did not know how he has
treated women and I dismissed what he has said
about pedophilia as a stupid fallacy,
I have spoken favorable about free software and stallman. I
will speak favorable about free software and tell
people what I think about stallman.
Until now I have regarded fsf as a stagnate, inward
looking entity. Having a tremendously important
task. I rated that it would get difficult to find
another leadership campaigning that strictly on
free software and also get more people interested
in free software.
https://twitter.com/sarahmei/status/1174498641504923649
Most of it is valid. About some of it,
she appears to get it wrong on purpose.
This is fsf going amateurism. It can be a qualified public
relation manager costs more than fsf can pay. Here we
get the result. A capable pr manager would
have ensured no one talks on behave of fsf without him
approving the message. If fsf's leadership would not
have accepted such an arrangement, it would have
shown how incompetent they are in their capacity. There
is no statement from fsf decrying pedophilia. No
statement saying, sexistic and offensive behavior has no
place.
This is sad news.
A moral man's life's work soiled by online bullies.
Thank you, RMS, for all the good you've done and will continue to do!
Hmmm... food for thought?
http://techrights.org/2019/09/15/media-attention-has-been-shifted/
and
http://techrights.org/2019/09/16/stallman-removed/
Associate RMS with *paedophilia* so he's ruined, free software is tarnished and any advocate of "stallmanism" is disgraced. A perfect purge.
It's easy.
I searched for "stallmanism", here's what I get. It rhymes with "stalinism". When people start typing these words together, the search algorithm will start showing these results together, enforcing the connection with his name and the paraphilia.
How do I get out of this mailing list?
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 at 2:32 AM
From: name at domain
To: name at domain
Subject: Re: [Freedom-misc] Goodbye, RMS
Associate RMS with paedophilia* so he's ruined, free software is tarnished
and any advocate of "stallmanism" is disgraced. A perfect purge.
It's easy.
https://listas.trisquel.info/mailman/listinfo/trisquel-users
I think this is the place to unsubscribe.
Thank you. Have a good one.
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 at 12:28 PM
From: name at domain
To: name at domain
Subject: Re: [Freedom-misc] Goodbye, RMS
https://listas.trisquel.info/mailman/listinfo/trisquel-users
I think this is the place to unsubscribe.
"Joaquin Carvajal" <name at domain> wrote:
> name at domain wrote:
>> "Joaquin Carvajal" <name at domain> wrote:
>>> How do I get out of this mailing list?
>> https://listas.trisquel.info/mailman/listinfo/trisquel-users
>>
>> I think this is the place to unsubscribe.
>
> Thank you. Have a good one.
Any proper mailing list, including this one, inserts, among others, a ‘List-Unsubscribe’ header with links for unsubscription to every letter that passes through it. Good MUAs provide their own interface to handle it, but it’s almost always easier just to look at headers and click a link directly.
Also, there is nearly standard way to unsubscribe from a list by sending a letter with ‘unsubscribe’ subject to the ML address _with ‘-request’ appended_ prior ‘@’, e. g.:
mailto:name at domain?subject=unsubscribe
I have watched and listened to many speeches by Richard Stallman about freedom, free software and the dangers of surveillance capitalism. I truly think he is one of the greatest philosophers of our time on these subjects. I fear that his comments have been misunderstood. There is no doubt in my mind that such a principled man as RMS is totally against exploitation of minors. If you haven't already read it I strongly recommend learning more about some of the things Richard Stallman really stands for by reading the attached collection of essays "Free Software Free Society" - its a very convenient set of bite-sized essays ideal if you are travelling on a train journey or have 15-30 minutes to kill.
| Anexo | Tamaño |
|---|---|
| fsfs3-hardcover.pdf | 1.54 MB |
Truth of the matter is, jxself is right. RMS is being kicked out because of things he DID NOT SAY.
They could have kicked him out for the things he actually said and they would be in their right to do so, RMS has always said things that some people don't like, but kicking him out over things he DID NOT SAY, it's just stupid.
If person A forces person B to do something, person C might not be aware of it. Totally logical thinking and in no way defend person A. I read the whole thing and RMS was not wrong in this one. Like I said, he could have been kicked out over other things in the past, they choose to kick him out in the wrong time over the wrong thing.
I wonder if anyone has heard from him as of late?
RMS interview.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/09/17/richard_stallman_final_interview/
| Anexo | Tamaño |
|---|---|
| rms_last_FSF_interview_register_091219.txt | 20.9 KB |
https://jorgemorais.gitlab.io/justice-for-rms/
| Anexo | Tamaño |
|---|---|
| rms_justice_morais_neto.txt | 9.43 KB |
https://lwn.net/Articles/799566/
lwn.net
In defence of Richard Stallman [LWN.net]
Posted Sep 17, 2019 21:56 UTC (Tue) by
coriordan
I've met Richard dozens of times, we've talked by mail, I've read a lot of his writings. I was never a close friend or advisor, but I know him somewhat.
I've seen him around women and I've gotten to know a lot of the women that are in Richard's line of work. And I've heard no complaints.
In MIT he teaches no courses and has no staff. He just has a room for responding to email, where he sleeps on the floor. So, talk of his position of power is strange. In the FSF office, they're among the top in terms of gender balance for software organisations. And there he does have power, and has had for 30+ years. Number of complaints? Zero that I know of.
He's missing the skill of guessing what others are thinking. In dating, this means his option 1 is to not try, due to fear of rejection, and live the rest of his life alone, or option 2, which he chooses, is to be direct and ask. Asking someone for a date always means risking personal pain and risking making the other person uncomfortable - disappointing someone whose made themself vulnerable is never fun.
I remember collecting him from an airport, around 2004, and he asked me if I knew any women that might be interested in him. I laughed it off because it was an unusual question, but then I realised that he's lonely and he knows women aren't going to just throw themselves at him. Time's not on your side when you're 52 (in 2004), constantly travelling, and lacking a social skill. Fifteen years later, his lack of success has proven he was right that finding a sweetheart (his word) was going to be difficult.
His other weakness is his sense of humour, which he loves. He has a page on his website with jokes he's proud of coming up with. The first two are:
How can you sleep under water?
Use a snore-kel.
and
Parent 1: My son became a Little Leaguer to play baseball.
Parent 2: Watch out! When the child is a Little Leaguer,
the parents can become hypereager.
(That said, after years of work, he did manage to put a lot of humour into his speeches and got a lot of laughs from audiences.)
So for him, it's hilarious to have the opposite of a business card. A pleasure card (click, take a look). "Business or pleasure?" a question that hundreds of hotels and airports have asked him over the years, and he found a related joke that he thinks is great.
The mattress in his office is where he sleeps. He lives in his office, when in Boston. Has for years.
So, based on knowing him as well as I do, is he a man of universal charm? No. Is he a gentleman? Yes.
People are still talking about this?
Attached file is what I think we should do to this thread. (Source: Season of the Witch)
| Anexo | Tamaño |
|---|---|
| stopit.tar | 633 KB |
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios