Re: Bill Gates in the news: Deja vu
* Alexandre Garreau [2021-07-12 18:09]: > But while I wouldn’t want to waste time on inventing lies about bill > gates, I wouldn’t either defend him, he’s just “yet another billionaire” > capitalist, that’s what come with fame and power, I never personally talk > to him, know nothing I appreciate about him, and he mostly does wrong. So > well… Bill Gates as business of Bill Gates was and is continuously penalized by various governments due to the abusive and criminal way of doing business. People may consider Bill Gates as leader, but he made sure that there is no competition and destroyed the natural development of civilization. This deposition is not the only case that is there: https://www.justice.gov/atr/videotaped-deposition-excerpts-bill-gates Or like: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-21684329 would Bill Gates be doing business as individual, not as corporation, he would be life ling in prison for what harm they have done to society. In the recent COVID creation, Bill Gates is using completely same methods, he is suppressing competition by funding the World Health Organization: https://www.who.int/workforcealliance/members_partners/member_list/gates/en/ and thus also influencing largely how to impose sanctions on the world, while in the same time making sure how to sell vaccines: https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/14/investing/curevac-ipo-coronavirus-vaccine-bill-melinda-gates/index.html https://www.inc.com/don-reisinger/why-bill-gates-is-business-worlds-coronavirus-leader.html According to history of Bill Gates, there is just nothing trusted about him. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/
Re: Bill Gates in the news: Deja vu
Le vendredi 21 mai 2021, 22:15:40 CEST Akira Urushibata a écrit : > When people see opinions on any contested subject the typical initial > reaction is: "which side is this commentator on?" In rare cases > someone may comment from a position outside the firmly established > camps. Those who have grown used to the framework of the debate may > have trouble digesting the unconventional message. > > As I wrote, I can see that the recently surfacing scandalous stories > concerning Bill Gates of Microsoft are similar to those cast upon > Richard Stallman of FSF some two years ago. I wonder why this is so. > I would like to examine this issue objectively. Stories about sex, and more importantly sex and young people tends to shock people, I think that’s it, nothing more. Epstein shocked and made (understandably) crazy a lot of people, that ramifies to almost every one having any form of indirect relation to him. Sensationalism is not good, but the fact serial rape shocks people is good (unlike the genghis khan epoch, where a serial rapist and murderer in every place he stepped across a whole continent was seen as honorable… and sometimes still is (but same goes for other like napoleon, who’s another mass murderer still presented positively in his country)) Since both bill gates and rms are famous, there are people having interest in both disparaging rms and disparaging bill gates. About bill gates, he’s so powerful and rich that he must have some objective (related to their objective interests) enemies (at least among competitors!), while for rms, it’s because he openly, widely and very visibly defends extreme viewpoints on his ideology, and that ideology hurt proprietary software business, so he must have even more objective enemies, even in his own “side”. If Bill Gates looses any good reputation, that will harm his business (which is good) but wouldn’t stop it (so it’s insufficient and a bad strategy, in many ways). While if rms looses good reputation, he doesn’t has a profitable business to be hurt, but the free software movement reputation, ideology and struggle will be partially hurt (I’ve seen many people supporting the anti-rms campaign mostly not even because of rms himself, but because to them he represents some kind of obnoxious, purist, extremist and single-focused librist they despise and are tired of). But while I wouldn’t want to waste time on inventing lies about bill gates, I wouldn’t either defend him, he’s just “yet another billionaire” capitalist, that’s what come with fame and power, I never personally talk to him, know nothing I appreciate about him, and he mostly does wrong. So well… For rms it’s different, although he’s often busy, he’s definitely approachable, have many personal features that makes him interesting a worth a (or many) talks, he does mostly useful and relevant political advocacy, and he’s not really powerful, or a real capitalist (with venture capital etc.) or what So to me the case is pretty different, but that’s according my personal jugement and values
Re: Bill Gates in the news: Deja vu
When people see opinions on any contested subject the typical initial reaction is: "which side is this commentator on?" In rare cases someone may comment from a position outside the firmly established camps. Those who have grown used to the framework of the debate may have trouble digesting the unconventional message. As I wrote, I can see that the recently surfacing scandalous stories concerning Bill Gates of Microsoft are similar to those cast upon Richard Stallman of FSF some two years ago. I wonder why this is so. I would like to examine this issue objectively. I respect Ali Reza Hayati. He has the courage to apologize and make corrections promptly.
Re: Bill Gates in the news: Deja vu
People, Intention behind my previous emails was to avoid misunderstanding from Akira's emails. Akira is a good friend and colleague of ours and I don't accuse him of anything, specially in the case of RMS v. Hate Campaign. I addressed Akira because I didn't want to address anyone directly. If I caused any misunderstanding for any of you, I apologize. Sadly I became the very thing I intended to avoid, causing misunderstandings. Let me clear my message. I said "What was the case was that RMS asked some people out and insisted on that. Now, maybe the insisting part made them uncomfortable..." I didn't meant to say RMS insisted on anything, what I meant was that even if RMS insisted, he didn't commit any crime and the nature of what RMS did is completely different from the Gates' case. Maybe some woman accused him that he "insisted", but that is false. He invited someone out, but if she said "no", Richard *did no insist*. About FSF board investigating the RMS case back in 2019, I didn't mean that FSF assigned a team of HR or anything. What I meant was that FSF board and people, at least some of them, followed the claims and reports and were aware of the situation. I didn't mean to spread false information. Please understand that I'm not a native English speaker and some words I use may be wrong. FSF did accept the RMS' resignation because they believed the accusations were true, and that's why I believe they followed the case. Sadly they didn't follow the case very carefully. I apologize if caused any harm or misled people. And I apologize to Akira if I made people look Akira is doing harm or is spreading false information, as I said, my only intention was to avoid misunderstanding Akira, which I think I failed somehow. Best. -- Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com) Libre culture activist and privacy advocate PGP: 88A5 BDB7 E07C 39D0 8132 6412 DCB8 F138 B865 1771 OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bill Gates in the news: Deja vu
I misread your last line so what I wrote doesn't make sense. I thought you said "impossible" instead of "possible". For that, I apologize. And Akira, please note that I'm not accusing you of anything, I'm just replying to you for those of people who may be confused about the matter. Sorry if my message seems unkind, I don't intend to be offensive. I just don't want people to get the idea that RMS and Bill Gates cases are the same. On May 18, 2021 11:59:14 PM UTC, Ali Reza Hayati wrote: >Akira, I think you're confused. Let me answer your message part by part >so you don't cause confusion or misunderstanding for others. > >On 19/05/2021 03:38, Akira Urushibata wrote: >> Reports about the personal life of Microsoft founder Bill Gates are >> appearing in the mainstream media. Some charges sound familiar - >> nearly identical ones were cast upon a different person a couple >> years ago. >> >> I wonder why this is happening. I see expressions like this: >> >>"Bill Gates Had Reputation for Questionable Behavior" >> - New York Times >> >>"... pursued women who worked for him at Microsoft and at the Bill >> and Melinda Gates Foundation, creating what were described as >> uncomfortable work environments" - NBC News >> >> Bill Gates met Jeffrey Epstein several times. He does not deny that >> the meetings happened. His spokesman, however, seems concerned that >> the nature of these encounters is misunderstood. > >This is true. However, RMS never had any encounter with Epstein for any >reason and he called Epstein a serial rapist many times. The >controversial comments were also not about the nature of the crimes but >how they were put in words. > >So while Gates may be asked about the intentions behind those meetings, >RMS is clear that he never met and supported anybody n that case, what >RMS did was to describe the meaning behind the words, not anything else. >So there's no need to be concerned about the nature of relationship >between RMS and Epstein, as there's no relationship. > >> One thing that has become clear is that Microsoft's board has >> investigated the founder's relation with a female employee and >> concluded that it had been inappropriate. > >This true. However, the case, specially the hate letter, against RMS is >not about RMS' relationship with any FSF employees as there were no >relationship in the matter. None of the ones who "claimed" they were >hurt by RMS did have relationship in the term of >girlfriend/boyfriend/partner/etc. with RMS. > >What was the case was that RMS asked some people out and insisted on >that. Now, maybe the insisting part made them uncomfortable but that's >no crime. Not for RMS, not for Gates, not for anybody. > >> Has the FSF board investigated the widely held claim that Richard >> Stallman "defended" Jeffrey Epstein? I don't think they have >> investigated anything. As a consequence they have allowed rumors >> of their founder's "bad behavior" run out of control and cause >> unnecessary confusion and damage to personal reputation. > >FSF board did investigate that. So did a large members of our great >community. Stallman actually never defended Epstein, he just explained >the meaning behind some words. You can read those comments and emails >yourself. > >Bad behavior is relative. I'm comfortable with many stuff while some >people even consider jokes as bad behavior. But if you want to compare >Gates with Stallman, the difference is that Stallman never had any >relationship with those who claim are hurt, but Gates did have >relationship, as we see on news, I'm not judging or deciding anything. > >> I have a request: Do not do to Bill Gates what you would not like done >> to yourself or Richard Stallman. It is possible that the stories that >> are recently surfacing are not true. Do not turn your eyes away from >> what may appear to be lame apology, for therein often lies the seeds >> of truth. >> > >I support this. Nobody should be punished for crime one didn't do. If >Gates is innocent, he shouldn't be punished. > >However, you say, and I quote, "It is possible that the stories that are >recently surfacing are not true." This is a weird statement because it >is not impossible. All of the claims *can* be untrue. > >About the apology, if you think what RMS wrote was a lame apology, you >should first prove that what was claimed against Stallman was true. I >don't expect someone who didn't commit a crime to be punished or to >apologize, I think you think so. > >If you haven't read the claims or followed the actual story, I can >suggest https://stallmansupport.org/ with every detail needed and some >great articles that explain the matter. > >I hope you haven't just followed some people's baseless claims and >believed them without really fact checking and analyzing. Check the >website I sent and please do ask if you had any question. > >Best of all. > -- Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com) Libre
Re: Bill Gates in the news: Deja vu
Akira, I think you're confused. Let me answer your message part by part so you don't cause confusion or misunderstanding for others. On 19/05/2021 03:38, Akira Urushibata wrote: Reports about the personal life of Microsoft founder Bill Gates are appearing in the mainstream media. Some charges sound familiar - nearly identical ones were cast upon a different person a couple years ago. I wonder why this is happening. I see expressions like this: "Bill Gates Had Reputation for Questionable Behavior" - New York Times "... pursued women who worked for him at Microsoft and at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, creating what were described as uncomfortable work environments" - NBC News Bill Gates met Jeffrey Epstein several times. He does not deny that the meetings happened. His spokesman, however, seems concerned that the nature of these encounters is misunderstood. This is true. However, RMS never had any encounter with Epstein for any reason and he called Epstein a serial rapist many times. The controversial comments were also not about the nature of the crimes but how they were put in words. So while Gates may be asked about the intentions behind those meetings, RMS is clear that he never met and supported anybody n that case, what RMS did was to describe the meaning behind the words, not anything else. So there's no need to be concerned about the nature of relationship between RMS and Epstein, as there's no relationship. One thing that has become clear is that Microsoft's board has investigated the founder's relation with a female employee and concluded that it had been inappropriate. This true. However, the case, specially the hate letter, against RMS is not about RMS' relationship with any FSF employees as there were no relationship in the matter. None of the ones who "claimed" they were hurt by RMS did have relationship in the term of girlfriend/boyfriend/partner/etc. with RMS. What was the case was that RMS asked some people out and insisted on that. Now, maybe the insisting part made them uncomfortable but that's no crime. Not for RMS, not for Gates, not for anybody. Has the FSF board investigated the widely held claim that Richard Stallman "defended" Jeffrey Epstein? I don't think they have investigated anything. As a consequence they have allowed rumors of their founder's "bad behavior" run out of control and cause unnecessary confusion and damage to personal reputation. FSF board did investigate that. So did a large members of our great community. Stallman actually never defended Epstein, he just explained the meaning behind some words. You can read those comments and emails yourself. Bad behavior is relative. I'm comfortable with many stuff while some people even consider jokes as bad behavior. But if you want to compare Gates with Stallman, the difference is that Stallman never had any relationship with those who claim are hurt, but Gates did have relationship, as we see on news, I'm not judging or deciding anything. I have a request: Do not do to Bill Gates what you would not like done to yourself or Richard Stallman. It is possible that the stories that are recently surfacing are not true. Do not turn your eyes away from what may appear to be lame apology, for therein often lies the seeds of truth. I support this. Nobody should be punished for crime one didn't do. If Gates is innocent, he shouldn't be punished. However, you say, and I quote, "It is possible that the stories that are recently surfacing are not true." This is a weird statement because it is not impossible. All of the claims *can* be untrue. About the apology, if you think what RMS wrote was a lame apology, you should first prove that what was claimed against Stallman was true. I don't expect someone who didn't commit a crime to be punished or to apologize, I think you think so. If you haven't read the claims or followed the actual story, I can suggest https://stallmansupport.org/ with every detail needed and some great articles that explain the matter. I hope you haven't just followed some people's baseless claims and believed them without really fact checking and analyzing. Check the website I sent and please do ask if you had any question. Best of all. -- Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com) Libre culture activist and privacy advocate PGP: 88A5 BDB7 E07C 39D0 8132 6412 DCB8 F138 B865 1771 OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
