Re: [Discuss] RMS (or meta-discussion thereon)
> From: Rich Pieri > > wor...@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) wrote: >> Of course, RMS ran into trouble for speaking his mind plainly in a >> time when that is unsafe, and his personality makes him particularly >> vulnerable to that. [...] > > Point: he didn't speak (write) his mind plainly. He tried to equivocate > around the meanings of two clearly defined, very serious criminal > charges. [...] Sorry, let me clarify. When I said "plainly" I didn't mean that what he said was plain; indeed, I've not read what he wrote. What I meant was that he said what he was thinking and feeling, rather than first asking the fundamental question, "If I say this, will I still weigh more than a duck?" But as others have noted, RMS is not particularly aware of others' social cues. Dale ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:22:14 -0400 Marco Milano wrote: > On 9/26/19 12:17 PM, Dan Ritter wrote: > > Joe Polcari wrote: > >> You’re counting? > > > > I didn't recognize his name, so I asked my mail client. I can > > count to three pretty quickly. > > > > -dsr- > > How is the number of emails to the email list > is related to anything? > > Are you saying that unless you are constantly on the > email list, you have no credibility?? Signal to noise. Three messages, one of them was pure noise. SteveT Steve Litt Author: The Key to Everyday Excellence http://www.troubleshooters.com/key Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/stevelitt ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 05:12:52 -0700 "Jim Gasek" wrote: > Remember that the "METOO" movement is a religious movement, it is not > based on facts, logic, or evidence. Oh, bullshit. Women get raped all the time, and that's a fact. > > It's core doctrine is "Always believe (as fact) the accusations.". > The accusations are not up for debate, and analysis. If the pendulum has swung a little too far toward believing the woman, that's regrettable, but completely understandable given that until very recently, men and boys simply said "it was consensual", and that was their magic get-out-of-jail-free card. Womens' and girls' own families wouldn't believe them. I saw that first hand. Then there's the matter of the boss's offers the woman can't refuse. "Put out if you want a good annual review." Happens all the time. Happened to my girlfriend in 1985: When she wouldn't put out for the boss, he wrote her up for *everything* and made her work life a living hell. Yeah, this METOO stuff is just sooo unfair to us men. We have to keep our hands off women who aren't our girlfriends. We can't lear or howl or whistle or give obviously lewd compliments. No more elbow-tittie or ass-grab. What a terrible imposition on us! >From what I've read about RMS' situation, I don't think his defense of Minsky was problematic, and it's a shame that particular instance has cost him so dearly. But please don't use it to advance your obviously preexisting dislike of the METOO movement. I have a wife and two daughters and I don't want some slob rubbing up against one of them in an elevator and then saying "she was asking for it", and everyone believes the slob. > > (That's "Man-splaining") Get over it. SteveT Steve Litt Author: The Key to Everyday Excellence http://www.troubleshooters.com/key Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/stevelitt ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
> > Are you saying that unless you are constantly on the > > email list, you have no credibility?? > > Nope. I'm saying that I give this person no credibility based on their > actual words in that actual message, and I am not inclined to cut them > slack based on their long and honorable history of making other worthwhile > contributions to the list, so I plonked. I'm sorry I was unclear. > You were perfectly clear. You are not responsible for willful misinterpretation or cognitive-dissonance scrambling of your words to create straw-dogs. -- Bill Ricker bill.n1...@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
Marco Milano wrote: > > > On 9/26/19 12:17 PM, Dan Ritter wrote: > > Joe Polcari wrote: > > > You’re counting? > > > > I didn't recognize his name, so I asked my mail client. I can > > count to three pretty quickly. > > > > -dsr- > > How is the number of emails to the email list > is related to anything? > > Are you saying that unless you are constantly on the > email list, you have no credibility?? Nope. I'm saying that I give this person no credibility based on their actual words in that actual message, and I am not inclined to cut them slack based on their long and honorable history of making other worthwhile contributions to the list, so I plonked. I'm sorry I was unclear. -dsr- (everyone else is welcome to get in the last word; this will be my last message on this thread) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On 9/26/19 12:17 PM, Dan Ritter wrote: Joe Polcari wrote: You’re counting? I didn't recognize his name, so I asked my mail client. I can count to three pretty quickly. -dsr- How is the number of emails to the email list is related to anything? Are you saying that unless you are constantly on the email list, you have no credibility?? ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
Joe Polcari wrote: > You’re counting? I didn't recognize his name, so I asked my mail client. I can count to three pretty quickly. -dsr- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
You’re counting? Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 26, 2019, at 11:32 AM, Dan Ritter wrote: > > Jim Gasek wrote: >> Remember that the "METOO" movement is a religious movement, it is not based >> on facts, logic, or evidence. > > > Your third message in three years, and this is what you want to > say? > > Plonk. > > -dsr- > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
Jim Gasek wrote: > Remember that the "METOO" movement is a religious movement, it is not based > on facts, logic, or evidence. Your third message in three years, and this is what you want to say? Plonk. -dsr- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
Remember that the "METOO" movement is a religious movement, it is not based on facts, logic, or evidence. It's core doctrine is "Always believe (as fact) the accusations.". The accusations are not up for debate, and analysis. (That's "Man-splaining") Trying to find actual facts is simply not a part of the equation. I find it humorous that everyone is trying to talk logically about this. This group is smart enough to know better. Universities (all of them) seem to be fully on-board with this whole PC doctrine. "The unaware, are unaware that they're unaware." Thanks, Jim ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
As has often been noted before, the law is an ass! On 9/24/19 12:20 PM, Rich Braun wrote: Seth Gordon wrote:That's what we have when we define everything from taking a leak in a woods where, unknown to you, a child was watching, to jumping out from behind bushes and raping an 80 year old woman, are defined as sex crimes, and the sheep like public is inclined to having a zero tolerance policy on sex crimes. I didn't think I had anything else to add to this discussion but this post reminded me of an incident I hadn't thought of in years: my ex's next boyfriend after me was a 20-something guy from Colombia. He was taking a piss at a Friendly's restaurant in Medford when some 12-year-old kid said hi to him. He wasn't cautious (came from a country where nudity is, I guess, no big deal) and the kid saw his privates. The father asked what took so long when the kid came out of the bathroom (this was long enough ago that parents weren't yet helicoptering over every bathroom visit). To make a long story short, police came on scene, this gentle guy who wouldn't hurt a fly let alone molest a kid wound up in jail, and was deported to his homeland immediately upon release from jail months later. -rich ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
Seth Gordon wrote:That's what we have when we define everything from taking a leak in a woods where, unknown to you, a child was watching, to jumping out from behind bushes and raping an 80 year old woman, are defined as sex crimes, and the sheep like public is inclined to having a zero tolerance policy on sex crimes. I didn't think I had anything else to add to this discussion but this post reminded me of an incident I hadn't thought of in years: my ex's next boyfriend after me was a 20-something guy from Colombia. He was taking a piss at a Friendly's restaurant in Medford when some 12-year-old kid said hi to him. He wasn't cautious (came from a country where nudity is, I guess, no big deal) and the kid saw his privates. The father asked what took so long when the kid came out of the bathroom (this was long enough ago that parents weren't yet helicoptering over every bathroom visit). To make a long story short, police came on scene, this gentle guy who wouldn't hurt a fly let alone molest a kid wound up in jail, and was deported to his homeland immediately upon release from jail months later. -rich ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
Seth Gordon wrote: > On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:55 PM Steve Litt > wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 12:55:13 -0400 > > Seth Gordon wrote: > > > > > The English word “cancer” can refer to anything from a skin tumor > > > that a doctor can remove as an outpatient procedure, to metastatic > > > pancreatic cancer that is certain to kill you within six months. But > > > both of these things are still cancer. > > > > OK, let's go with that analogy. Can you imagine if every cancer, > > including a minor skin tumor, were treated with heavy chemotherapy and > > radiation? > > > > That's what we have when we define everything from taking a leak in a > > woods where, unknown to you, a child was watching, to jumping out from > > behind bushes and raping an 80 year old woman, are defined as sex > > crimes, and the sheep like public is inclined to having a zero > > tolerance policy on sex crimes. There are plenty of people forever on > > the sex offender registry whose crime was having sex with their 1 year > > younger than them girlfriend. > > > > I agree that this is a problem, but the solution to that problem is to > change the law so that not all forms of sexual assault get treated with > this “zero tolerance” policy, not redraw the boundaries of “sexual assault” > itself. And many (though not all) states have done this. They are generally called "Romeo and Juliet" laws. -dsr- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 17:36:42 -0400 Rich Pieri wrote: > He wrote it. RMS definitely called Epstein a serial rapist. Here's the reference: https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jan-apr.html#25_April_2019_(Plea_deal_for_Epstein) -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 20:11:33 -0400 MBR wrote: > I think Thomas Lord's rebuttal of Thomas Bushnell's article is well > worth reading. (See > https://twitter.com/thomas_lord/status/1174433645110513664). From > Lord's comments: Given what I know of RMS' behavior and my own interactions with the man? There's some hyperbole on both sides of this but Bushnell is the less exaggerated of the two. -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
I think Thomas Lord's rebuttal of Thomas Bushnell's article is well worth reading. (See https://twitter.com/thomas_lord/status/1174433645110513664). From Lord's comments: "One remarkable thing about the FSF at that time, when we worked out of dinky spare offices on the campus of MIT, was the degree of participation by women. In the tiny society that was then the FSF, women were more prominent than I had seen in Silicon Valley, or acadamia prior." -- Thomas Lord "The general culture of inclusiveness and tolerance that RMS fostered meant that, at least when I was there alongside Bushnell, that social circle in and around the organization was feminized and all the stronger for it." -- Thomas Lord "This does not mean, of course, that RMS (or any of us) never gave offense or acted stupidly. But Bushnell's portrait showing a depraved sexist coddled by this or that MIT prof. is simply bullshit, and Bushnell probably knows or should know that in his heart." -- Thomas Lord Mark Rosenthal On 9/23/19 1:34 PM, Shirley Márquez Dúlcey wrote: Thomas Bushnell has written a thoughtful piece about RMS on Medium: https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/a-reflection-on-the-departure-of-rms-18e6a835fd84 People who have been following this thread might want to read it. On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 12:58 PM Derek Martin wrote: On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 11:23:26AM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the criticism. I can not see how, unless you suck at reading English, you can interpret this any way other than that he takes issue with the term "sexual assault" PRECISELY because it is NOT "clearly defined." So I lied, I do see a way: If you choose to read in the worst possible unstated intentions of the person making the statements. This is unfortunately a tactic that has become commonplace in recent years. Then you get the interpretation that you have taken. Now substitute Epstein for Minsky in RMS' rhetoric and see what you get. Actully what rms expressly called for--being explicit about that which you are accusing someone--would work just fine if you substituted Epstein for Minsky. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:55 PM Steve Litt wrote: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 12:55:13 -0400 > Seth Gordon wrote: > > > The English word “cancer” can refer to anything from a skin tumor > > that a doctor can remove as an outpatient procedure, to metastatic > > pancreatic cancer that is certain to kill you within six months. But > > both of these things are still cancer. > > OK, let's go with that analogy. Can you imagine if every cancer, > including a minor skin tumor, were treated with heavy chemotherapy and > radiation? > > That's what we have when we define everything from taking a leak in a > woods where, unknown to you, a child was watching, to jumping out from > behind bushes and raping an 80 year old woman, are defined as sex > crimes, and the sheep like public is inclined to having a zero > tolerance policy on sex crimes. There are plenty of people forever on > the sex offender registry whose crime was having sex with their 1 year > younger than them girlfriend. > I agree that this is a problem, but the solution to that problem is to change the law so that not all forms of sexual assault get treated with this “zero tolerance” policy, not redraw the boundaries of “sexual assault” itself. One of the things that anti-rape activists in the 1970s did was actually lobby their state legislatures to *reduce* the criminal penalties for rape. They wanted to do this because as long as rape was punishable by a mandatory 20-years-to-life prison term, or some such, defendants in rape cases were more likely to simply be acquitted. Minor skin tumors shouldn’t be treated with chemotherapy, but if you just ignore them because “oh, that’s not *real* cancer,” that’s not good either. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 12:55:13 -0400 Seth Gordon wrote: > The English word “cancer” can refer to anything from a skin tumor > that a doctor can remove as an outpatient procedure, to metastatic > pancreatic cancer that is certain to kill you within six months. But > both of these things are still cancer. OK, let's go with that analogy. Can you imagine if every cancer, including a minor skin tumor, were treated with heavy chemotherapy and radiation? That's what we have when we define everything from taking a leak in a woods where, unknown to you, a child was watching, to jumping out from behind bushes and raping an 80 year old woman, are defined as sex crimes, and the sheep like public is inclined to having a zero tolerance policy on sex crimes. There are plenty of people forever on the sex offender registry whose crime was having sex with their 1 year younger than them girlfriend. Doctors are smart enough to see beyond the broad "cancer" label and remediate appropriately. The voting public and those they vote into office are not. If you're the father of a teen age boy, you might want to explain this to him early and often. Imagine if 20 years from now, your son is legally prevented from accompanying his child at the school bus stop, and he's even legally prevented from intervening if he sees his child talking to a known repeat pedophile at the bus station, because your son is on the sex registry, because 20 years ago, with the complete support of everyone including the two families, he had sex with his girlfriend, who was three months younger than he. All because 1) An incredibly broad range of activities fall under one label, and 2) the dumb ass public cannot perceive distinctions within the label and the vote-hungry politicians legislate accordingly. My response has nothing to do with the Stallman situation, it's simply a response to the assertion that "cancer" covers a broad spectrum, and the all too often one-to-one correspondence of such a spectrum name to a single remediation. SteveT ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 13:33:00 -0500 Derek Martin wrote: > > RMS wrote two things which appear contradictory: > > > > Epstein was a serial rapist. > > I think he did not write this. Or at least, I can confirm that when > *I* wrote it, it was my careless take on what someone else said he > said. I doubt very much rms would make such a bald, imprecise > statement. He's a bit of a windbag. He wrote it. RMS definitely called Epstein a serial rapist. > > Sexual assault presumes the application of force or violence. > > > > Huh? So if Minsky or Epstein did not apply force or violence then it > > wasn't sexual asasult or rape? > > Epstein wasn't charged with sexual assault, AFAIK, so it wouldn't > apply. He was charged with prostitution and sex trafficking. He was accused of sexual assault. He got out of formal charging as part of the plea deal but he was definitely accused. > But critically, rms never said the crime wouldn't apply. You have > said that repeatedly in this thread, but he said nothing of the sort > in the CSAIL thread in question. He only said that there are > multiple things that have the same name which are not the same, and > the term applied is extremely prejudicial in a way that causes people > to think much worse of someone who is accused of it. And because of > that instead you should be more specific about the accusation. RMS: > Let's presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). > > The word "assaulting" presumes that he applied force or violence, > in some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. > Only that they had sex. RMS asserted that assault presumes the application of force or violence in the context of defending Minsky's reputation. He's making the point that whatever Minsky did it was not sexual assault and it is absolutely wrong to call it sexual assault because neither force nor violence were applied. Paraphrased: it's not sexual assault if there is no application of force or violence. A *lot* of people at CSAIL interpreted it this way. When questioned he flatly refused to clarify what he meant to anyone on the list. With literally no futher explanation of his intent we are left with our interpretations and his history of advocacy of sex with minors. The fact that this dicsussion is happening here and elsewhere is more than enough proof that it's not a case of "we all misunderstood what he meant". > Most people will never hear the details--they will only hear "sexual > assault." Minsky won't have the benefit of the details, he'll only > ever have the label. Now and forever. In the eyes of some, he will > be branded a monster. Permanently. If you can't see that, can't see The saddest thing about this is it's RMS' own fault. If he had STFU as Bushnell alluded then this wouldn't have happened. Seriously. Giuffre's deposition never actually said they had sex which is corroborated by a witness who said Minsky declined. RMS didn't read the deposition for himself before jumping into the fray. He made his assumption based on spurious claims in a clipping from a news article. -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 02:46:55PM -0400, Seth Gordon wrote: > If I say that “I think person X committed crime Y”, without further > elaboration, and crime Y is punishable by law by up to ten years in prison, > my statement is not equivalent to “I think that person X deserves to go to > prison for ten years”. I'm well aware of and support the reasons for having consent laws. None of this has anything to do with rms's point. Most people will never hear the details--they will only hear "sexual assault." Minsky won't have the benefit of the details, he'll only ever have the label. Now and forever. In the eyes of some, he will be branded a monster. Permanently. If you can't see that, can't see the harm in that, to him, his family, and his associates, certainly nothing I can say will convince you... -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
If I say that “I think person X committed crime Y”, without further elaboration, and crime Y is punishable by law by up to ten years in prison, my statement is not equivalent to “I think that person X deserves to go to prison for ten years”. Any time there is a crime there are aggravating and mitigating factors. To point out that X’s behavior falls *within the boundaries of* a crime punishable by *up to* ten years in prison is not prejudicial. (FWIW, according to my quick google-fu, the median time served for rape or sexual assault in a state prison on a first offense is 4.2 years, and a quarter of such convicts are released within two years.) The whole reason the concept of “statutory rape” exists in the law, and why the broad category of sexual assault *includes* statutory rape, is that lawmakers assume that children are not yet mature enough to manage their own affairs, even when they *think* they are competent, and therefore, an adult who has sex with a child should be treated as someone who has committed rape *even when* the child has said “yes”. There is room for reasonable debate on whether the law should put the dividing line at 16 or 17 or 18 or whatever, or how to properly handle sex between two minors, or when one partner is just above the line and one is just below it, or how severely the crime should be punished. But these debate does not seem apposite to the simple question of whether or not Minsky (based on the facts that nobody seems to be disputing) committed sexual assault at all. And if we’re going to acknowledge that in some cases people younger than 17 can be psychologically/morally capable of consent even when the law says otherwise, we should also acknowledge the reverse: in some cases people *older* than 17 (i.e., some college undergraduates) can have sex *without* giving meaningful consent. I would also observe that RMS has (quite properly!) subjected the question of “consent” to very careful scrutiny, and even used some rhetorical exaggeration to describe the relationship between “consenting” parties, when the object used to execute “consent” is a restrictive software license. On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 2:03 PM Rich Pieri wrote: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:56:48 -0500 > Derek Martin wrote: > > > So I lied, I do see a way: If you choose to read in the worst > > possible unstated intentions of the person making the statements. > > This is unfortunately a tactic that has become commonplace in recent > > years. Then you get the interpretation that you have taken. > > Or the way that you seem to be directly avoiding: confusion. RMS wrote > two things which appear contradictory: > > Epstein was a serial rapist. > > Sexual assault presumes the application of force or violence. > > Huh? So if Minsky or Epstein did not apply force or violence then it > wasn't sexual asasult or rape? > > -- > Rich Pieri > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 02:02:19PM -0400, Rich Pieri wrote: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:56:48 -0500 > Derek Martin wrote: > > > So I lied, I do see a way: If you choose to read in the worst > > possible unstated intentions of the person making the statements. > > This is unfortunately a tactic that has become commonplace in recent > > years. Then you get the interpretation that you have taken. > > Or the way that you seem to be directly avoiding: confusion. I didn't avoid that. I actually said almost exactly that: > > I can not see how, unless you suck at reading English, you can > > interpret this any way other than Poor reading comprehension is certainly a form of confusion. > RMS wrote two things which appear contradictory: > > Epstein was a serial rapist. I think he did not write this. Or at least, I can confirm that when *I* wrote it, it was my careless take on what someone else said he said. I doubt very much rms would make such a bald, imprecise statement. He's a bit of a windbag. > Sexual assault presumes the application of force or violence. > > Huh? So if Minsky or Epstein did not apply force or violence then it > wasn't sexual asasult or rape? Epstein wasn't charged with sexual assault, AFAIK, so it wouldn't apply. He was charged with prostitution and sex trafficking. But critically, rms never said the crime wouldn't apply. You have said that repeatedly in this thread, but he said nothing of the sort in the CSAIL thread in question. He only said that there are multiple things that have the same name which are not the same, and the term applied is extremely prejudicial in a way that causes people to think much worse of someone who is accused of it. And because of that instead you should be more specific about the accusation. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:56:48 -0500 Derek Martin wrote: > So I lied, I do see a way: If you choose to read in the worst > possible unstated intentions of the person making the statements. > This is unfortunately a tactic that has become commonplace in recent > years. Then you get the interpretation that you have taken. Or the way that you seem to be directly avoiding: confusion. RMS wrote two things which appear contradictory: Epstein was a serial rapist. Sexual assault presumes the application of force or violence. Huh? So if Minsky or Epstein did not apply force or violence then it wasn't sexual asasult or rape? -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 12:55:13PM -0400, Seth Gordon wrote: > The English word “cancer” can refer to anything from a skin tumor that a > doctor can remove as an outpatient procedure, to metastatic pancreatic > cancer that is certain to kill you within six months. But both of these > things are still cancer. Cancer is cancer, and telling a loved one you have cancer immediately illicits strong negative emotions, /at least until you elucidate the details./ Which is rms's exact point. > Likewise, the word “assault” has a very broad range of > meaning—anything from raising a fist with the intention of punching > someone to brandishing a rifle with the intention of shooting > someone. I find this argument utterly disingenouous. These are legal definitions the average person is most likely not even aware of. In the past I've pointed out the distinction between assault and battery to my parents and both of them thought I was an idiot until I proved it to them. To the average person, "assault" brings to mind a brutal physical attack. If you try to convince me you don't know this I will not believe you, unless you also tell me you're not fom this country and English is not your native language. It's the primary definition of the word: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault > So no, I don’t think it’s at all reasonable for someone to complain > about statutory rape being described as “sexual assault”, even > though certain instances of sexual assault committed against adults > are crimes of greater magnitude than certain instances of statutory > rape. Some people will simply never see reason in an argument they don't agree with. So if you, age 18, had sex with your 17 and 11 months old girlfriend, and were later convicted of statutory rape, how would you feel about being branded a rapist? Please, please make the argument that this is not the case we are discussing, so I can point out the hipocrasy of it. =8^) > When I see arguments like that being put forward I wonder if the > speaker’s actual motive is to decriminalize the behavior at issue > entirely. And this is the problem. You just admitted you're quick to jump to an assumption of motive, the worst possible intentions, just like everyone else who has condemned rms, despite rms's clear contradictory statement of what his motive is. It probably does not help in people's eyes that he is reputed to have advocated for exactly that in the past, however note that in this thread he has made absolutely no mention of the notion. It probably does not help that he is reputed to be a womanizer. But those truths take away nothing from the ARGUMENT he actually made. The validity of an argument does not change based upon who is making it. Only the way you color it does. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. > On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 12:24 PM Derek Martin > wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:54:52AM -0400, Rich Pieri wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 23:50:12 -0400 > > > John Abreau wrote: > > > > > > > Of course, if Stallman was assuming Minsky did indeed sleep with the > > > > victim, then Benford's testimony doesn't count in Stallman's favor. > > > > In that case, Stallman's remarks could be considered creepy, but > > > > Minsky's turning down the victim's approach would not be creepy. > > > > > > This. Here is what RMS wrote: > > > > > > > The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference > > > > reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein's harem. > > > > (See > > > > > > https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed > > .) > > > > Let's presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). > > > > > > > > The word "assaulting" presumes that he applied force or violence, in > > > > some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. > > > > Only that they had sex. > > > > > > This is RMS presuming that Minsky did have sex with Giuffre. Then he > > > explains why, if this really happened, it was not rape or sexual > > > assault. > > > > No, that's not what he said. He said, quoting from the thread: > > > > We know that Giuffre was being coerced into sex--by Epstein. She > > was being harmed. But the details do affect whether, and to what > > extend, Minsky was responsible for that. > > > > And the part you are referring to: > > > > The announcement of the Friday event does an injustice to Marvin > > Minsky: > > > > “deceased AI ‘pioneer’ Marvin Minsky (who is accused of assaulting > > one of Epstein’s victims [2])” > > > > The injustice is in the word "assaulting". The term "sexual assault" > > is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: > >
Re: [Discuss] RMS
Thomas Bushnell has written a thoughtful piece about RMS on Medium: https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/a-reflection-on-the-departure-of-rms-18e6a835fd84 People who have been following this thread might want to read it. On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 12:58 PM Derek Martin wrote: > On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 11:23:26AM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > > Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a > > specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the > > criticism. > > > > I can not see how, unless you suck at reading English, you can > > interpret this any way other than that he takes issue with the term > > "sexual assault" PRECISELY because it is NOT "clearly defined." > > So I lied, I do see a way: If you choose to read in the worst > possible unstated intentions of the person making the statements. > This is unfortunately a tactic that has become commonplace in recent > years. Then you get the interpretation that you have taken. > > > > Now substitute Epstein for Minsky in RMS' rhetoric and see what you > get. > > Actully what rms expressly called for--being explicit about that which you > are accusing someone--would work just fine if you substituted Epstein > for Minsky. > > -- > Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 > -=-=-=-=- > This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will > result in > undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. > > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 11:23:26AM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a > specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the > criticism. > > I can not see how, unless you suck at reading English, you can > interpret this any way other than that he takes issue with the term > "sexual assault" PRECISELY because it is NOT "clearly defined." So I lied, I do see a way: If you choose to read in the worst possible unstated intentions of the person making the statements. This is unfortunately a tactic that has become commonplace in recent years. Then you get the interpretation that you have taken. > > Now substitute Epstein for Minsky in RMS' rhetoric and see what you get. Actully what rms expressly called for--being explicit about that which you are accusing someone--would work just fine if you substituted Epstein for Minsky. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
The English word “cancer” can refer to anything from a skin tumor that a doctor can remove as an outpatient procedure, to metastatic pancreatic cancer that is certain to kill you within six months. But both of these things are still cancer. Likewise, the word “assault” has a very broad range of meaning—anything from raising a fist with the intention of punching someone to brandishing a rifle with the intention of shooting someone. But both of these behaviors are, under a definition that goes back to English common law, assault. So no, I don’t think it’s at all reasonable for someone to complain about statutory rape being described as “sexual assault”, even though certain instances of sexual assault committed against adults are crimes of greater magnitude than certain instances of statutory rape. When I see arguments like that being put forward I wonder if the speaker’s actual motive is to decriminalize the behavior at issue entirely. On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 12:24 PM Derek Martin wrote: > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:54:52AM -0400, Rich Pieri wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 23:50:12 -0400 > > John Abreau wrote: > > > > > Of course, if Stallman was assuming Minsky did indeed sleep with the > > > victim, then Benford's testimony doesn't count in Stallman's favor. > > > In that case, Stallman's remarks could be considered creepy, but > > > Minsky's turning down the victim's approach would not be creepy. > > > > This. Here is what RMS wrote: > > > > > The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference > > > reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein's harem. > > > (See > > > > https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed > .) > > > Let's presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). > > > > > > The word "assaulting" presumes that he applied force or violence, in > > > some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. > > > Only that they had sex. > > > > This is RMS presuming that Minsky did have sex with Giuffre. Then he > > explains why, if this really happened, it was not rape or sexual > > assault. > > No, that's not what he said. He said, quoting from the thread: > > We know that Giuffre was being coerced into sex--by Epstein. She > was being harmed. But the details do affect whether, and to what > extend, Minsky was responsible for that. > > And the part you are referring to: > > The announcement of the Friday event does an injustice to Marvin > Minsky: > > “deceased AI ‘pioneer’ Marvin Minsky (who is accused of assaulting > one of Epstein’s victims [2])” > > The injustice is in the word "assaulting". The term "sexual assault" > is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: > taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as > Y, which is much worse than X. > > The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference > reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein’s harem. > (See > https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed > .) > Let’s presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). > > The word “assaulting” presumes that he applied force or violence, in > some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. > Only that they had sex. > > We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that > she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was > being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her > to conceal that from most of his associates. > > I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it > is absolutely wrong to use the term "sexual assault" in an accusation. > > Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a > specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the > criticism. > > I can not see how, unless you suck at reading English, you can > interpret this any way other than that he takes issue with the term > "sexual assault" PRECISELY because it is NOT "clearly defined." It > instead refers (as I previously said) to multiple different behaviors > that all carry the same label, but which are not at all the same > crime. His issue is that the legal DEFINITIONS, plural, do not all > conform to the ENGLISH definition of the word "assault" and hence > attach a level of negativity that is inflated compared to the lay > understanding associated with the term "sexual assault." He insists > that due to this conflation, accusations should be explicit in what > they are accusing. > > What part of this is in any way not clear? > > > Now substitute Epstein for Minsky in RMS' rhetoric and see what you get. > > He clearly did not do that. The first bit I quoted makes that clear. > I have elsewhere
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:54:52AM -0400, Rich Pieri wrote: > On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 23:50:12 -0400 > John Abreau wrote: > > > Of course, if Stallman was assuming Minsky did indeed sleep with the > > victim, then Benford's testimony doesn't count in Stallman's favor. > > In that case, Stallman's remarks could be considered creepy, but > > Minsky's turning down the victim's approach would not be creepy. > > This. Here is what RMS wrote: > > > The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference > > reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein's harem. > > (See > > https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed.) > > Let's presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). > > > > The word "assaulting" presumes that he applied force or violence, in > > some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. > > Only that they had sex. > > This is RMS presuming that Minsky did have sex with Giuffre. Then he > explains why, if this really happened, it was not rape or sexual > assault. No, that's not what he said. He said, quoting from the thread: We know that Giuffre was being coerced into sex--by Epstein. She was being harmed. But the details do affect whether, and to what extend, Minsky was responsible for that. And the part you are referring to: The announcement of the Friday event does an injustice to Marvin Minsky: “deceased AI ‘pioneer’ Marvin Minsky (who is accused of assaulting one of Epstein’s victims [2])” The injustice is in the word "assaulting". The term "sexual assault" is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X. The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein’s harem. (See https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed.) Let’s presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). The word “assaulting” presumes that he applied force or violence, in some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. Only that they had sex. We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates. I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term "sexual assault" in an accusation. Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the criticism. I can not see how, unless you suck at reading English, you can interpret this any way other than that he takes issue with the term "sexual assault" PRECISELY because it is NOT "clearly defined." It instead refers (as I previously said) to multiple different behaviors that all carry the same label, but which are not at all the same crime. His issue is that the legal DEFINITIONS, plural, do not all conform to the ENGLISH definition of the word "assault" and hence attach a level of negativity that is inflated compared to the lay understanding associated with the term "sexual assault." He insists that due to this conflation, accusations should be explicit in what they are accusing. What part of this is in any way not clear? > Now substitute Epstein for Minsky in RMS' rhetoric and see what you get. He clearly did not do that. The first bit I quoted makes that clear. I have elsewhere seen that he has called Epstien a serial rapist. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] rms
On 9/22/19 1:09 PM, Rich Braun wrote: Jsol (Jon Solomon) is yet another of my long-ago housemates. We first knew one another at Stevens Tech, before he dropped out to take a staff job at Rutgers. (His overly-long stay as guest at the apartment in Cambridge in 1983 contributed to the departure of RMS and one of my other housemates, so he and I rented elsewhere later.) Rutgers is where the Telecom Digest was hosted circa 1982. Sample archive link: https://iconia.com/TELECOMDigestV2.33.txt. Headers suggest it was launched (by jsol) perhaps a year earlier. But I don’t remember that history, dig through those archives to see more. Looks like you know more than I here. -kb ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] rms
I took a brief look at the first few digests in the archive, as well as the
READ-ME-FIRST, first-test-message, and announcement files. Found the
archive at
http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/archives/back.issues/1981-86.volumes.1-5/
JSol posted the first administrivia message to the list.
Geoff Peck (ucbvax!geoff) posted the first test message when the list was
created.
The file vol1.announcement in the 1981-86.volumes.1-5 archive folder
describes Geoff Peck as the "current {telecom,poli-sci}-link coordinator".
The file vol1.READ-ME-FIRST, dated June 13, 1999, explains that the first
few messages were taken from a telephone discussion in the Arpanet list
HUMAN NETS.
In several of the first few digests,JSol describes himself as "The
Moderator".
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:10 PM Rich Braun wrote:
> Kent Borg wrote:
>
> > I only remember Pat Townson, so I think it is a pretty good
> > guess that he was the first moderator.
>
> Jsol (Jon Solomon) is yet another of my long-ago housemates. We first knew
> one another at Stevens Tech, before he dropped out to take a staff job at
> Rutgers. (His overly-long stay as guest at the apartment in Cambridge in
> 1983 contributed to the departure of RMS and one of my other housemates, so
> he and I rented elsewhere later.) Rutgers is where the Telecom Digest was
> hosted circa 1982.
>
> Sample archive link: https://iconia.com/TELECOMDigestV2.33.txt. Headers
> suggest it was launched (by jsol) perhaps a year earlier. But I don’t
> remember that history, dig through those archives to see more.
>
> -rich
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
--
John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix
Email j...@blu.org / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0x920063C6
PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@blu.org
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] rms
Kent Borg wrote: > I only remember Pat Townson, so I think it is a pretty good > guess that he was the first moderator. Jsol (Jon Solomon) is yet another of my long-ago housemates. We first knew one another at Stevens Tech, before he dropped out to take a staff job at Rutgers. (His overly-long stay as guest at the apartment in Cambridge in 1983 contributed to the departure of RMS and one of my other housemates, so he and I rented elsewhere later.) Rutgers is where the Telecom Digest was hosted circa 1982. Sample archive link: https://iconia.com/TELECOMDigestV2.33.txt. Headers suggest it was launched (by jsol) perhaps a year earlier. But I don’t remember that history, dig through those archives to see more. -rich ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] rms
On 9/20/19 5:29 PM, Bill Horne wrote: Since I'm the current Moderator of The Telecom Digest, I'd really appreciate more info about those who came before me. I took over from Pat Townson, but I have no information on those who came before him. Thanks to everyone for taking time to read this: all info gratefully received. I was a decently close reader of the telecom usenet group back in the '80s, and I only remember Pat Townson, so I think it is a pretty good guess that he was the first moderator. -kb ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 23:50:12 -0400 John Abreau wrote: > Of course, if Stallman was assuming Minsky did indeed sleep with the > victim, then Benford's testimony doesn't count in Stallman's favor. > In that case, Stallman's remarks could be considered creepy, but > Minsky's turning down the victim's approach would not be creepy. This. Here is what RMS wrote: > The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference > reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein's harem. > (See > https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed.) > Let's presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). > > The word "assaulting" presumes that he applied force or violence, in > some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. > Only that they had sex. This is RMS presuming that Minsky did have sex with Giuffre. Then he explains why, if this really happened, it was not rape or sexual assault. Now substitute Epstein for Minsky in RMS' rhetoric and see what you get. -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 8:04 PM Derek Martin wrote: > > 1. Questioning whether Minsky was actually guilty of _anything_, > UNDER THE LAW: [] You're still entitled to think it's pretty > creepy > though. > > 2. [] Statutory rape, for example, involves ONLY whether the >participants are beyond some age defined by law in their local >jurisdiction. [] > I'm still hung up on the part regarding Gregory Benford's witness account. https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/ > Minsky is dead and can’t defend himself, but physicist/SF author > Greg Benford, who I know and am inclined to trust, writes: > >> Typical Crap Journalism from NYT: >> >> “In a deposition unsealed this month, a woman testified that, >> as a teenager, she was told to have sex with Marvin Minsky, >> a pioneer in artificial intelligence, on Mr. Epstein’s island >> in the Virgin Islands. Mr. Minsky, who died in 2016 at 88, was >> a founder of the Media Lab in the mid-1980s.” >> >> Note, never says what happened. If Marvin had done it, she would >> say so. I know; I was there. Minsky turned her down. Told me >> about it. She saw us talking and didn’t approach me. ~ If a woman comes on to a man and he says "No, thanks", and then does not sleep with her, I don't see how that could be considered statutory rape on his part, even if a third party had secretly coerced her into coming on to him. And I don't see how telling her "no, thanks" and then not sleeping with her is in any way creepy. Of course, if Stallman was assuming Minsky did indeed sleep with the victim, then Benford's testimony doesn't count in Stallman's favor. In that case, Stallman's remarks could be considered creepy, but Minsky's turning down the victim's approach would not be creepy. -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email: abre...@gmail.com / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0x920063C6 PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 19:03:04 -0500 Derek Martin wrote: > I read the thread (or as much of it as was readily available on the > web), and, much as I hate to defend rms, I think this is a gross > mischaracterization of what he said. But it's one tons of media > outlets have also made, so at least you're in good company. Six thousand-odd subscribers on csail-related. Six thousand-odd students and alums, faculty and staff, and others with various connections to CSAIL like technical committes and standards organizations. Six thousand-odd of the brightest, best-educated people in the world. No consensus. Some say RMS dug his own grave. Some say it was a gross mischaracterization. Good company, indeed, I think, regardless of which side you find yourself on. -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:04:27PM -0400, Rich Pieri wrote: > On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 21:09:10 -0400 > wor...@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) wrote: > > > Of course, RMS ran into trouble for speaking his mind plainly in a > > time when that is unsafe, and his personality makes him particularly > > vulnerable to that. But I have been wondering whether his personality > > has robbed him of the connections and goodwill that can buffer one > > from problems. That is, whether CSAIL may have been wanting to eject > > him for some time and this provided the opportunity. > > Point: he didn't speak (write) his mind plainly. He tried to equivocate > around the meanings of two clearly defined, very serious criminal > charges. I read the thread (or as much of it as was readily available on the web), and, much as I hate to defend rms, I think this is a gross mischaracterization of what he said. But it's one tons of media outlets have also made, so at least you're in good company. Thread posted in part here, for those of us who aren't actually on CSAIL-related: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richard-stallman-described-epstein-victims-as-entirely-willing Side point regarding the article: RMS also clearly did NOT "describe Epstein victims as 'entirely willing,'" contrary to the article's clickbait headline. He simply questioned whether Giuffre appeared so to Minsky, as by all accounts (including one posted here, if I'm not mistaken) it was she who initiated contact with Minsky. I find it tremendously disturbing that all manner of news media outlets, regardless of any political or philosophical leaning, are just outright saying shit that ain't true. > And then when he apologized he didn't apologize for what he did but > for the press misrepresenting him. As far as I can see, this was the correct response--or it would have been, in a world where rational thought about controvercial topics still had value. Minsky (and now RMS himself) has essentially already been convicted in the media. Due process is rather passe these days--it's way more satisfying to convict people who say and do things you don't like on social media or in the press--but it's still the law of the land, for good reason, perhaps now more than ever. RMS's arguments are likely exactly the ones Minsky's lawyers would have used (perhaps among others) to defend him, most likely with success as best I can tell, should it have come to that. I'm certain RMS saw it that way--that he was defending a colleague (and friend?) whom no one else could or would, whom he thought deserved due process, just like any other accused person. I could not see the start of the thread, but it would not surprise me if it was a response to a message from someone else suggesting that MIT's affiliation with Epstein and Minsky should be disavowed, or if he posted it after hearing conversations about it. Whever else I think about RMS, it's been my observation that his words and actions all point unfailingly at what he genuinely believes is fair and just. Even if he is mostly shitty about it. RMS's comments centered around two DISTINCT but related points: 1. Questioning whether Minsky was actually guilty of _anything_, UNDER THE LAW: Whether Minsky was aware Giuffre was being coerced, whether someone's assertion of what the law is in the Virgin Islands was correct, whether Giuffre was in fact under aged under that law, and whether Minsky was aware of it if she were. It's my understanding that her own deposition leaves those questions in doubt--she was not sure where or when it happened or what her age was at the time. She did not give any indication that Minsky knew she was being coerced, or that he knew her age. Nor did any other account I've heard of. If Minsky didn't know of her age or her coersion, then it fails to meet the legal requirements of the crime of rape. You're still entitled to think it's pretty creepy though. 2. The terms "sexual assault" and "rape" both apply to a range of behaviors (this is a fact), which are not equal (this is a judgement). Statutory rape, for example, involves ONLY whether the participants are beyond some age defined by law in their local jurisdiction. The age is rather arbitrary, as made plain by the fact that in 30 states what Minsky did wouldn't have been illegal, even if he had known her age (barring coersion). RMS argued that it is "morally ambiguous" and unfair to label such a person, /if he were guilty/, with the same label as, say, the South Hill Rapist. The second point requires a moral judgement. I don't agree with rms's "abolish age of consent laws" notion (yes, he has really advocated for that publicly), but I think his point about their arbitraryness is an existential fact and therefore reasonable. I also don't think it is unreasonable to conclude that having otherwise consentual sex with someone who
Re: [Discuss] rms
On 9/20/2019 1:51 PM, Bill Cattey wrote: > Shirley's Story provokes me to tell, my "It's all my fault," story. > > At one time, my friends Jonathan Solomon (whom many of you know as > jsol -- of Telecom Digest fame), and Rich Braun shared an apartment in > Central Square with RMS. lu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss Since I'm the current Moderator of The Telecom Digest, I'd really appreciate more info about those who came before me. I took over from Pat Townson, but I have no information on those who came before him. Thanks to everyone for taking time to read this: all info gratefully received. Bill Horne -- Bill Horne 828-678-1548 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On 9/19/2019 9:55 PM, Bill Horne wrote: > On 9/19/2019 5:03 PM, Jerry Feldman wrote: >> I was an emacs guy. Learned vi in about 1980, but when I worked for cadmus >> I learned gosling emacs. Used it for all my development until I switched >> to atom > No less an authority than Neal Stephenson wrote "I use emacs, which > might be thought of as a thermonuclear word processor."^1 > > Bill > > 1. https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/NealStephenson I have just been told that Neal Stephenson switched from emacs to a different word processor, and then to writing with a fountain pen. Since I find fountain pens very hard to use, does anyone know which software Mr. Stephenson used in between emacs and his pen? TIA. Bill -- Bill Horne 828-678-1548 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] rms
and a bit of overall guidance to the cause; he is best known now as a public speaker. His retirement from the FSF and CSAIL is symbolic and will have little impact on either organization. It may lead to him getting fewer or no speaking gigs but his involvement in that scene was likely winding down anyway, with or without the recent incident. RMS's impact on the world of computing is undeniable. The internet would be a very different thing without free software and would probably not have allowed so many flowers to bloom. Sadly, the ISPs, the big data companies, and the big media companies, which are often one and the same, are busily closing the doors again. On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 5:11 PM Stuart Conner wrote: I wonder if he is an undiagnosed autism spectrum case and his “stubborn” and “antisocial” behaviors are something he really can’t just “knock off”. Having said that even if one has autism it doesn’t mean behaviors are always excused there is therapy and training to get them selves under control and more capable of interaction in public. SMC On Sep 19, 2019, at 12:00 PM, discuss-requ...@blu.org wrote: Send Discuss mailing list submissions to discuss@blu.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to discuss-requ...@blu.org You can reach the person managing the list at discuss-ow...@blu.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: RMS in the news (Derek Martin) 2. Re: RMS in the news (Rich Pieri) 3. Re: RMS in the news (Randy Cole) 4. Re: RMS in the news (Kent Borg) 5. Re: RMS in the news (John Abreau) 6. Re: RMS in the news (Rich Pieri) 7. Re: RMS in the news (Bill Horne) -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 12:38:48 -0500 From: Derek Martin To: discuss@blu.org Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news Message-ID: <20190918173848.gc3...@bladeshadow.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 06:40:31AM -0400, Jack Bennett wrote: I thought it was a mildly funny exchange at the time, but I hadn't known of his reputation for singling out women in the audience and making them uncomfortable. I wonder if he would have done the same call out with a male professor in the same situation. I've interacted with RMS on a few occasions, and my impression has always been he would not hesitate to confront anyone, regardness of any of their identifying characteristics, for any reason he deemed suitable. I tend to think this is as it should be, except that his threshold for when it's OK to confront people needs some rather heavy-handed tuning. Despite that I mostly agree with his message, I would characterize 100% of those interactions as negative. He is coarse sand paper, and a taste I would prefer not to acquire, much like every other SJW type I'm aware of having encountered (since such awareness has generally been imparted via similar behavior). -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 14:03:01 -0400 From: Rich Pieri To: discuss@blu.org Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news Message-ID: <5d827156.1c69fb81.80d61.7...@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 11:34:44 -0400 Dan Ritter wrote: And then we do. RMS hasn't stopped in at least 30 years. Don't use Asperger's as an excuse for RMS acting like an asshole. It's rude to all of the rest of us. This. I would like to add that I'm sick and tired of RMS' friends telling me I need to be tolerant of whatever his damage might be. I'm a difficult person to deal with. I know it. I'm not always good at handling it but I try and when someone tells me to knock it off I knock it off. RMS has somehow leveraged *not* knocking it off into a career. Now it's over. Instead of telling us that we should be tolerant of RMS who "thinks differently" from most of us, maybe those of you who call him friend should have been telling him to knock it off. If you had done this 30 years ago instead of making excuses for him and encouraging his assholery then maybe this whole situation could have been avoided. -- Rich Pieri -- Message: 3 Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:05:07 -0400 From: Randy Cole To: blug Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" It's interesting that the media yesterday was talking about the SNL comedian first, then eventually RMS. * * * When my brother was in high school he got a
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On 9/19/19 4:54 PM, John Abreau wrote: I absolutely*hate* vim. Hear hear! I'm an old VI fan, like others have mentioned, because of the finger memory. I made the mistake of getting hooked on 'vile' which is very VI like without a lot of the fluffy interference that VIM provides. I've resigned myself to just living with vile or vim 'cause it's easier than refitting the systems I'm on. -- << MCT >> Michael C Tiernan. http://www.linkedin.com/in/mtiernan Non Impediti Ratione Cogatationis Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea. -Robert A. Heinlein ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 21:09:10 -0400 wor...@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) wrote: > Of course, RMS ran into trouble for speaking his mind plainly in a > time when that is unsafe, and his personality makes him particularly > vulnerable to that. But I have been wondering whether his personality > has robbed him of the connections and goodwill that can buffer one > from problems. That is, whether CSAIL may have been wanting to eject > him for some time and this provided the opportunity. Point: he didn't speak (write) his mind plainly. He tried to equivocate around the meanings of two clearly defined, very serious criminal charges. Which is typical of his rhetoric. And then when he apologized he didn't apologize for what he did but for the press misrepresenting him. Again, typical RMS: he doesn't discuss with you; he speaks to his followers behind you. He still has people who call him friend supporting him. I dunnow how long that's going to last, though. CSAIL are figuring out what they're going to do about email lists and civility right now, and him expressing his opinions about civility hasn't gone over well. > Which led me to wonder what he had been doing recently. I hadn't been > paying attention for decades; my last memory was the announcement of > GCC, which was a huge step forward, probably the most massive single > open-source system at the time, and a vital one for building > independent systems. The biggest thing about GCC he's done recently is, after the GCC core development rejected Apple's LLVM merge patch after getting UI-C to dual-license under the GPL, to complain that LLVM's debugger isn't under a free (as in FSF) license. Didn't seem to matter that it would have been if his people hadn't rejected it. And then Apple abandoned GPL everything beause of the TiVo clause in GPLv3. -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On 9/19/2019 5:03 PM, Jerry Feldman wrote: > I was an emacs guy. Learned vi in about 1980, but when I worked for cadmus > I learned gosling emacs. Used it for all my development until I switched > to atom No less an authority than Neal Stephenson wrote "I use emacs, which might be thought of as a thermonuclear /word processor/."^1 Bill 1. https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/NealStephenson ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS
> From: Shirley M?rquez D?lcey > > RMS hasn't been actively involved in software design for a number of years. > At this point his contributions are limited to evangelism and a bit of > overall guidance to the cause; he is best known now as a public speaker. > His retirement from the FSF and CSAIL is symbolic and will have little > impact on either organization. It may lead to him getting fewer or no > speaking gigs but his involvement in that scene was likely winding down > anyway, with or without the recent incident. Thanks for giving us that history! Of course, RMS ran into trouble for speaking his mind plainly in a time when that is unsafe, and his personality makes him particularly vulnerable to that. But I have been wondering whether his personality has robbed him of the connections and goodwill that can buffer one from problems. That is, whether CSAIL may have been wanting to eject him for some time and this provided the opportunity. Which led me to wonder what he had been doing recently. I hadn't been paying attention for decades; my last memory was the announcement of GCC, which was a huge step forward, probably the most massive single open-source system at the time, and a vital one for building independent systems. RMS's history reminds me of an observation that big changes in politics are often done by unreasonable people pursuing unlikely agendas: The important American Presidents are those like Reagan who "know a few big things" and push them unceasingly, without much regard for the pragmatic or even the reasonable. -- Tyler Cowen Dale ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019, at 17:03, Jerry Feldman wrote: > I was an emacs guy. Learned vi in about 1980, but when I worked for cadmus > I learned gosling emacs. Used it for all my development until I switched > to atom Remember the epithet "eight megabytes and constantly swapping"? I grew up with CUA applications (Alt+[letter] or F10 to activate menus, shift+[cursor movement] to select, ctrl+[cursor movement] to move more). Now my editor of choice is Visual Studio Code. I don't want to tell you how many megabytes it is. But it works great for me. :^) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] rms
On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:09:36 -0400 Shirley Márquez Dúlcey wrote: > I doubt that RMS has ever been officially diagnosed. I can't imagine > him willingly sitting down in front of a psychiatrist. But I have no > doubt whatsoever that he is somewhere on the autism spectrum. I do. I doubt that there's anything clinically neuroatypical about his brain. That's not a clinical diagnosis. It's me recognizing behavioral traits we share (or shared; I've been told that I've gotten better). -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] rms
nd more capable of interaction in public. > > SMC > > > On Sep 19, 2019, at 12:00 PM, discuss-requ...@blu.org wrote: > > > > Send Discuss mailing list submissions to > >discuss@blu.org > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > >http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > >discuss-requ...@blu.org > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > >discuss-ow...@blu.org > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: RMS in the news (Derek Martin) > > 2. Re: RMS in the news (Rich Pieri) > > 3. Re: RMS in the news (Randy Cole) > > 4. Re: RMS in the news (Kent Borg) > > 5. Re: RMS in the news (John Abreau) > > 6. Re: RMS in the news (Rich Pieri) > > 7. Re: RMS in the news (Bill Horne) > > > > > > -- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 12:38:48 -0500 > > From: Derek Martin > > To: discuss@blu.org > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news > > Message-ID: <20190918173848.gc3...@bladeshadow.org> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > >> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 06:40:31AM -0400, Jack Bennett wrote: > >> I thought it was a mildly funny exchange at the time, but I hadn't > >> known of his reputation for singling out women in the audience and > >> making them uncomfortable. I wonder if he would have done the same > >> call out with a male professor in the same situation. > > > > I've interacted with RMS on a few occasions, and my impression has > > always been he would not hesitate to confront anyone, regardness of > > any of their identifying characteristics, for any reason he deemed > > suitable. I tend to think this is as it should be, except that his > > threshold for when it's OK to confront people needs some rather > > heavy-handed tuning. > > > > Despite that I mostly agree with his message, I would characterize > > 100% of those interactions as negative. He is coarse sand paper, and > > a taste I would prefer not to acquire, much like every other SJW type > > I'm aware of having encountered (since such awareness has generally > > been imparted via similar behavior). > > > > -- > > Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 > > -=-=-=-=- > > This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will > result in > > undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 14:03:01 -0400 > > From: Rich Pieri > > To: discuss@blu.org > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news > > Message-ID: <5d827156.1c69fb81.80d61.7...@mx.google.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > > > On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 11:34:44 -0400 > > Dan Ritter wrote: > > > >> And then we do. > >> > >> RMS hasn't stopped in at least 30 years. > >> > >> Don't use Asperger's as an excuse for RMS acting like an asshole. > >> It's rude to all of the rest of us. > > > > This. > > > > I would like to add that I'm sick and tired of RMS' friends telling me > > I need to be tolerant of whatever his damage might be. I'm a difficult > > person to deal with. I know it. I'm not always good at handling it but > > I try and when someone tells me to knock it off I knock it off. > > > > RMS has somehow leveraged *not* knocking it off into a career. > > Now it's over. > > > > Instead of telling us that we should be tolerant of RMS who "thinks > > differently" from most of us, maybe those of you who call him friend > > should have been telling him to knock it off. If you had done this 30 > > years ago instead of making excuses for him and encouraging his > > assholery then maybe this whole situation could have been avoided. > > > > -- > > Rich Pieri > > > > > > -- > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:05:07 -0400 > > From: Randy Cole > > To: blug > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news > > Message-ID: > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > > >
Re: [Discuss] rms
I wonder if he is an undiagnosed autism spectrum case and his “stubborn” and “antisocial” behaviors are something he really can’t just “knock off”. Having said that even if one has autism it doesn’t mean behaviors are always excused there is therapy and training to get them selves under control and more capable of interaction in public. SMC > On Sep 19, 2019, at 12:00 PM, discuss-requ...@blu.org wrote: > > Send Discuss mailing list submissions to >discuss@blu.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >discuss-requ...@blu.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at >discuss-ow...@blu.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: RMS in the news (Derek Martin) > 2. Re: RMS in the news (Rich Pieri) > 3. Re: RMS in the news (Randy Cole) > 4. Re: RMS in the news (Kent Borg) > 5. Re: RMS in the news (John Abreau) > 6. Re: RMS in the news (Rich Pieri) > 7. Re: RMS in the news (Bill Horne) > > > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 12:38:48 -0500 > From: Derek Martin > To: discuss@blu.org > Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news > Message-ID: <20190918173848.gc3...@bladeshadow.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > >> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 06:40:31AM -0400, Jack Bennett wrote: >> I thought it was a mildly funny exchange at the time, but I hadn't >> known of his reputation for singling out women in the audience and >> making them uncomfortable. I wonder if he would have done the same >> call out with a male professor in the same situation. > > I've interacted with RMS on a few occasions, and my impression has > always been he would not hesitate to confront anyone, regardness of > any of their identifying characteristics, for any reason he deemed > suitable. I tend to think this is as it should be, except that his > threshold for when it's OK to confront people needs some rather > heavy-handed tuning. > > Despite that I mostly agree with his message, I would characterize > 100% of those interactions as negative. He is coarse sand paper, and > a taste I would prefer not to acquire, much like every other SJW type > I'm aware of having encountered (since such awareness has generally > been imparted via similar behavior). > > -- > Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 > -=-=-=-=- > This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in > undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. > > > > -- > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 14:03:01 -0400 > From: Rich Pieri > To: discuss@blu.org > Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news > Message-ID: <5d827156.1c69fb81.80d61.7...@mx.google.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 11:34:44 -0400 > Dan Ritter wrote: > >> And then we do. >> >> RMS hasn't stopped in at least 30 years. >> >> Don't use Asperger's as an excuse for RMS acting like an asshole. >> It's rude to all of the rest of us. > > This. > > I would like to add that I'm sick and tired of RMS' friends telling me > I need to be tolerant of whatever his damage might be. I'm a difficult > person to deal with. I know it. I'm not always good at handling it but > I try and when someone tells me to knock it off I knock it off. > > RMS has somehow leveraged *not* knocking it off into a career. > Now it's over. > > Instead of telling us that we should be tolerant of RMS who "thinks > differently" from most of us, maybe those of you who call him friend > should have been telling him to knock it off. If you had done this 30 > years ago instead of making excuses for him and encouraging his > assholery then maybe this whole situation could have been avoided. > > -- > Rich Pieri > > > -- > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:05:07 -0400 > From: Randy Cole > To: blug > Subject: Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > It's interesting that the media yesterday was talking about the SNL > comedian first, then eventually RMS. > * * * > When my brother was in high school he got a guest account at the AI > lab. Something happened & that person couldn't sponsor gues
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
I was an emacs guy. Learned vi in about 1980, but when I worked for cadmus I learned gosling emacs. Used it for all my development until I switched to atom -- Jerry Feldman Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 On Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:55 PM John Abreau wrote: > Similarly for me with vi. I've been using vi since my first UNIX system in > 1983, a PDP-11/34a running BSD Unix 2.8. > > I absolutely *hate* vim. When I install a new Linux system, one of the > first add-ons I install is nvi, which is not a reimplementation like vim, > but rather is derived from the BSD code base that I grew up with. > > When I use vim for anything non-trivial, I almost always run into cases > where some functionality that my fingers know turns out to be missing, and > cases where some bizarre mode that my fingers don't know about gets invoked > inadvertently and I have no clue what it is or how to exit from it. > > When I use nvi, neither of those frustrating annoyances occur. > > > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 4:23 PM Kent Borg wrote: > > > On 9/19/19 11:13 AM, Bill Horne wrote: > > > RMS has left us the FSF, the GNU organization, and Emacs (which I use > > > every day): we owe him a lot, both as a society and as a group, and I > > > hope we can keep in mind the immense weight of his achievements on the > > > balance of his life. > > > > I use emacs whenever I use my computer. In a sense I hate emacs, but it > > is what my fingers know. > > > > -kb > > > > ___ > > Discuss mailing list > > Discuss@blu.org > > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > -- > John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix > Email: abre...@gmail.com / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID > 0x920063C6 > PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6 > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
Similarly for me with vi. I've been using vi since my first UNIX system in 1983, a PDP-11/34a running BSD Unix 2.8. I absolutely *hate* vim. When I install a new Linux system, one of the first add-ons I install is nvi, which is not a reimplementation like vim, but rather is derived from the BSD code base that I grew up with. When I use vim for anything non-trivial, I almost always run into cases where some functionality that my fingers know turns out to be missing, and cases where some bizarre mode that my fingers don't know about gets invoked inadvertently and I have no clue what it is or how to exit from it. When I use nvi, neither of those frustrating annoyances occur. On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 4:23 PM Kent Borg wrote: > On 9/19/19 11:13 AM, Bill Horne wrote: > > RMS has left us the FSF, the GNU organization, and Emacs (which I use > > every day): we owe him a lot, both as a society and as a group, and I > > hope we can keep in mind the immense weight of his achievements on the > > balance of his life. > > I use emacs whenever I use my computer. In a sense I hate emacs, but it > is what my fingers know. > > -kb > > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email: abre...@gmail.com / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0x920063C6 PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On 9/19/19 11:13 AM, Bill Horne wrote: RMS has left us the FSF, the GNU organization, and Emacs (which I use every day): we owe him a lot, both as a society and as a group, and I hope we can keep in mind the immense weight of his achievements on the balance of his life. I use emacs whenever I use my computer. In a sense I hate emacs, but it is what my fingers know. -kb ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On 9/18/2019 7:10 PM, John Abreau wrote: I first heard of RMS at the Boston Computer Society in 1985. I first met RMS in a room adjoining the workstations aisles in the AI lab at M.I.T. I was a High-school student who liked computers, and I had the good fortune to know another Amateur Radio operator who worked there. RMS was sitting at a small table with a terminal on it, dictating code into a tape recorder. The only other item in the room was a cot at the other end, and when we shook hands, he said "Happy hacking!" My friend later told me that RMS lived there, but I didn't quite believe it until years later, when I learned that RMS' apartment had been burned out and that he hadn't known about it for about a week. The next time I saw him, RMS was standing in the center strip of Memorial drive, holding a sign that read "Software should be free." I stopped and asked him why, but I didn't understand his explanation. The last time we met, I was swiping groceries at a supermarket in Cambridge. RMS came by and told me that I shouldn't use the self-service section, because I was putting people out of work. RMS has left us the FSF, the GNU organization, and Emacs (which I use every day): we owe him a lot, both as a society and as a group, and I hope we can keep in mind the immense weight of his achievements on the balance of his life. The problem with genius, it has been said, is that there's no way to go but down. Bill Horne ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 17:28:13 -0400 Kent Borg wrote: > I was once introduced to Stallman, but I had met him before, so I > reminded him of the party, and of the conversation we had had. > > He remembered me: "Oh, your *that* asshole." You win the Internet this week. :) -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
I first heard of RMS at the Boston Computer Society in 1985. My friend Glenn Hoffman gave me a BCS membership for Christmas in 1984, and we both attended the BCS/Mac meeting in January 1985, where Bernard Aboba handed out printed copies of the GNU Manifesto. I was duly impressed by his ideas. Many years later, after I founded the BCS Linux/UNIX SIG, we had a meeting where the speaker cancelled a few days before the meeting, and the alternate speaker we found at the last minute gave a talk on booting diskless Sun workstations from a Linux server, but his entire talk lasted about 10 minutes. RMS was in the audience, and during the Q after the talk, someone asked about running WordPerfect on Linux. RMS immediately responded to this by loudly asking, "Why bind yourselves in the chains of commercial software when you can be *FREE* !!!". Since we had another 90 minutes to fill, I turned the meeting over to him. His impromptu talk was lively and entertaining. A few months later I invited him to give a talk on software patents, to which he responded that he won't speak at any of our meetings until we rename our group to the BCS GNU/Linux SIG. Needless to say, I found this demand unreasonable and unacceptable, so the meeting never happened. On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:29 PM Kent Borg wrote: > On 9/18/19 1:53 AM, Rich Braun wrote: > > I’d love to hear more RMS stories. -rich > > Many, many years ago... > > I was once introduced to Stallman, but I had met him before, so I > reminded him of the party, and of the conversation we had had. > > He remembered me: "Oh, your *that* asshole." > > One of my proudest moments, I retell it every chance I get. Kinda feel > like now people will think I'm just heaping on because it is cool to dis > Stallman. No, he's been worth it a long time. > > I'm glad his vision of open source software is out there, he had a lot > of influence over where we are...and I am also very glad he didn't get > his way as to all his utopian details--because utopia is a perfect > place, and one man's perfection and absolute utopia is another man's hell. > > -kb > > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email: abre...@gmail.com / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0x920063C6 PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
It's interesting that the media yesterday was talking about the SNL comedian first, then eventually RMS. * * * When my brother was in high school he got a guest account at the AI lab. Something happened & that person couldn't sponsor guests anymore, so he got one sponsored by RMS, which led to a summer job working there. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 11:34:44 -0400 Dan Ritter wrote: > And then we do. > > RMS hasn't stopped in at least 30 years. > > Don't use Asperger's as an excuse for RMS acting like an asshole. > It's rude to all of the rest of us. This. I would like to add that I'm sick and tired of RMS' friends telling me I need to be tolerant of whatever his damage might be. I'm a difficult person to deal with. I know it. I'm not always good at handling it but I try and when someone tells me to knock it off I knock it off. RMS has somehow leveraged *not* knocking it off into a career. Now it's over. Instead of telling us that we should be tolerant of RMS who "thinks differently" from most of us, maybe those of you who call him friend should have been telling him to knock it off. If you had done this 30 years ago instead of making excuses for him and encouraging his assholery then maybe this whole situation could have been avoided. -- Rich Pieri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 06:40:31AM -0400, Jack Bennett wrote: > I thought it was a mildly funny exchange at the time, but I hadn't > known of his reputation for singling out women in the audience and > making them uncomfortable. I wonder if he would have done the same > call out with a male professor in the same situation. I've interacted with RMS on a few occasions, and my impression has always been he would not hesitate to confront anyone, regardness of any of their identifying characteristics, for any reason he deemed suitable. I tend to think this is as it should be, except that his threshold for when it's OK to confront people needs some rather heavy-handed tuning. Despite that I mostly agree with his message, I would characterize 100% of those interactions as negative. He is coarse sand paper, and a taste I would prefer not to acquire, much like every other SJW type I'm aware of having encountered (since such awareness has generally been imparted via similar behavior). -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
MBR wrote: > I've known RMS since the 1970s when we were both regular attendees at the > MIT Folk Dance Club. His Aspergers has always made him a difficult person > to deal with. My dad has Asperger's. I have Asperger's. My son has Asperger's. Aspies find it difficult to interpret non-literal social cues. As a coping mechanism, all of us who are fundamentally reasonable people say things like "If I make you uncomfortable, please know that it's not my intention. Just tell me if I have, and I will stop it immediately." And then we do. RMS hasn't stopped in at least 30 years. Don't use Asperger's as an excuse for RMS acting like an asshole. It's rude to all of the rest of us. -dsr- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
I've known RMS since the 1970s when we were both regular attendees at the MIT Folk Dance Club. His Aspergers has always made him a difficult person to deal with. You say you "wonder if he would have done the same call out with a male professor in the same situation". I'm pretty sure that the answer is, "Yes." On 9/18/19 6:40 AM, Jack Bennett wrote: He came to give a public talk at Brown which was very well attended because he was quite well known among the CS, science, and engineering world. He gave a pretty typical rms talk - software freedom is important, open source is not good enough, closed systems are bad since you don't know what they are doing to your personal information. All the usual messages that he's been an uncompromising pitbull about for 35+ years. Almost offhandedly, he mentioned that people shouldn't procreate because having kids takes away from the time that you could otherwise be spending on REALLY important things, like working on free software and/or activism for software freedom. That was a new one that I hadn't heard. It kind of underscored his single-minded obsession to me. Here he is talking to a pretty diverse audience and he's saying that his "thing" is more important than literally any other important thing in any other person's life. Later on, one professor in the department, a member of my dissertation committee, was quietly leaving the talk a little bit early. rms noticed and called her out directly for leaving early so she retorted, "well, you know, I gotta pick up the KIDS". I thought it was a mildly funny exchange at the time, but I hadn't known of his reputation for singling out women in the audience and making them uncomfortable. I wonder if he would have done the same call out with a male professor in the same situation. On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:55 AM Rich Braun wrote: I have a fond memory of RMS crashing one of our BLU meetings to hammer at the point that our organization’s name included the word Linux and that we should amend it to include the word Gnu. With rumors of his death not quite entirely exaggerated—departure from FSF is tantamount to interment, it’s been his whole life—I’d love to hear more RMS stories. -rich ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
When I was an undergrad, roughly thirty years ago, I worked as one of RMS’s typists. I’m not comfortable describing the experience in detail on a public forum. On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:30 AM Brendan Kidwell wrote: > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, at 06:40, Jack Bennett wrote: > > Later on, one professor in the department, a member of my dissertation > > committee, was quietly leaving the talk a little bit early. rms noticed > and > > called her out directly for leaving early so she retorted, "well, you > know, > > I gotta pick up the KIDS". > > It's funny to hear a story of that kind of disrespect now. > > Just last week before the current drama erupted, I was talking to a friend > who is a radio host in New York City. My friend said that he'd invited RMS > to give a keynote at some event, and RMS not only ignore the parameters of > the time slot -- he COVERED the clock. > > So, apparently RMS's talk is the most important thing in the world. He'll > end when he feels like it, and you may not leave when you're satisfied. > > I've given talks, myself, where I end with 80% of the audience I started > with and I literally didn't notice anyone left. > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, at 06:40, Jack Bennett wrote: > Later on, one professor in the department, a member of my dissertation > committee, was quietly leaving the talk a little bit early. rms noticed and > called her out directly for leaving early so she retorted, "well, you know, > I gotta pick up the KIDS". It's funny to hear a story of that kind of disrespect now. Just last week before the current drama erupted, I was talking to a friend who is a radio host in New York City. My friend said that he'd invited RMS to give a keynote at some event, and RMS not only ignore the parameters of the time slot -- he COVERED the clock. So, apparently RMS's talk is the most important thing in the world. He'll end when he feels like it, and you may not leave when you're satisfied. I've given talks, myself, where I end with 80% of the audience I started with and I literally didn't notice anyone left. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
I'd like to see his original email that sparked the whole mess. From what little I've seen, it sounds like RMS condemned Epstein but defended Minsky, as Minsky is dead and thus cannot defend himself. The impression I got was that RMS had claimed Epstein forced the 17-year-old girl to come on to Minsky, but that Minsky was unaware that she was being coerced. Also, Gregory Benford, author and professor, claims to have witnessed the incident where she came on to Minsky. He says that Minsky turned her down, and that neither he nor Minsky had any reason to suspect that she was being coerced. If this is the case, then all the blame belongs with Epstein. On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 6:34 AM Jack Bennett wrote: > He came to give a public talk at Brown which was very well attended because > he was quite well known among the CS, science, and engineering world. > > He gave a pretty typical rms talk - software freedom is important, open > source is not good enough, closed systems are bad since you don't know what > they are doing to your personal information. All the usual messages that > he's been an uncompromising pitbull about for 35+ years. > Almost offhandedly, he mentioned that people shouldn't procreate because > having kids takes away from the time that you could otherwise be spending > on REALLY important things, like working on free software and/or activism > for software freedom. That was a new one that I hadn't heard. It kind of > underscored his single-minded obsession to me. Here he is talking to a > pretty diverse audience and he's saying that his "thing" is more important > than literally any other important thing in any other person's life. > > Later on, one professor in the department, a member of my dissertation > committee, was quietly leaving the talk a little bit early. rms noticed and > called her out directly for leaving early so she retorted, "well, you know, > I gotta pick up the KIDS". > > I thought it was a mildly funny exchange at the time, but I hadn't known of > his reputation for singling out women in the audience and making them > uncomfortable. I wonder if he would have done the same call out with a male > professor in the same situation. > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:55 AM Rich Braun wrote: > > > I have a fond memory of RMS crashing one of our BLU meetings to hammer at > > the point that our organization’s name included the word Linux and that > we > > should amend it to include the word Gnu. With rumors of his death not > quite > > entirely exaggerated—departure from FSF is tantamount to interment, it’s > > been his whole life—I’d love to hear more RMS stories. -rich > > ___ > > Discuss mailing list > > Discuss@blu.org > > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > -- > Jack Bennett > ajbenn...@gmail.com > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email: abre...@gmail.com / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0x920063C6 PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
He came to give a public talk at Brown which was very well attended because he was quite well known among the CS, science, and engineering world. He gave a pretty typical rms talk - software freedom is important, open source is not good enough, closed systems are bad since you don't know what they are doing to your personal information. All the usual messages that he's been an uncompromising pitbull about for 35+ years. Almost offhandedly, he mentioned that people shouldn't procreate because having kids takes away from the time that you could otherwise be spending on REALLY important things, like working on free software and/or activism for software freedom. That was a new one that I hadn't heard. It kind of underscored his single-minded obsession to me. Here he is talking to a pretty diverse audience and he's saying that his "thing" is more important than literally any other important thing in any other person's life. Later on, one professor in the department, a member of my dissertation committee, was quietly leaving the talk a little bit early. rms noticed and called her out directly for leaving early so she retorted, "well, you know, I gotta pick up the KIDS". I thought it was a mildly funny exchange at the time, but I hadn't known of his reputation for singling out women in the audience and making them uncomfortable. I wonder if he would have done the same call out with a male professor in the same situation. On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:55 AM Rich Braun wrote: > I have a fond memory of RMS crashing one of our BLU meetings to hammer at > the point that our organization’s name included the word Linux and that we > should amend it to include the word Gnu. With rumors of his death not quite > entirely exaggerated—departure from FSF is tantamount to interment, it’s > been his whole life—I’d love to hear more RMS stories. -rich > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- Jack Bennett ajbenn...@gmail.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] RMS in the news
Rich Braun wrote: > I have a fond memory of RMS crashing one of our BLU meetings to hammer at the > point that our organization’s name included the word Linux and that we should > amend it to include the word Gnu. With rumors of his death not quite entirely > exaggerated—departure from FSF is tantamount to interment, it’s been his > whole life—I’d love to hear more RMS stories. -rich Years before I met her, my wife-to-be went out on a date with RMS. She says he was rude to the waitstaff, was obnoxiously overbearing on every subject, and she feels that every allegation against him is believable. -dsr- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[Discuss] RMS in the news
I have a fond memory of RMS crashing one of our BLU meetings to hammer at the point that our organization’s name included the word Linux and that we should amend it to include the word Gnu. With rumors of his death not quite entirely exaggerated—departure from FSF is tantamount to interment, it’s been his whole life—I’d love to hear more RMS stories. -rich ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
