lostjohnny

> But he defended someone who associated with Epstein and who had sex with an underage girl, he got from Epstein.

He did not.

I think it's time to cut with the BS!

- according to the sources Minsky never had sex with the girl, if you have proof of the contrary, please provide them

- Stallman was not defending Minsky, in fact he even assumed the sex happened, he was arguing against using the term "sexual assault" because its legal definition is very different from the everyday connotation

But I found something I think you might enjoy.

I found someone who probably nailed it

    How about, if the old person would be mick jagger? I could imagine, he still has his charms to some. Also I have seen young attractive women aproaching old yoga gurus for example ..

    But yeah, the old guy wasn't mick jagger, nor a yoga master and at best he did assume the girl was a 18+ old prostitue doing it willingly for money and power

And he (Minsky) turned her down.

p.s. the author of that comment is you

> by using inaccurate, disparaging, and dismissive language to attack the character of a critic.

> Your comment reminds me of the people who come out in defense of the Catholic Church whenever someone claims they were sexually abused by a Priest.

Isn't this ironic?

You're using the same language of the weapon's builder to try to accuse me of defending child molesters.

Why are people like you constantly at war with the world?

It's not my fault if she is a nobody (she really is) that builds weapons for the US military (she really does) and if she distorted RMS emails to make it look he was defending a rapist (he wasn't). It's not even my fault if RMS never molested anybody (he really didn't), never raped anybody (he really didn't), never hurt anybody (he really didn't) and never committed a crime (he really didn't).

Looks like I'm defending the reputation of a good man after all.

I'm really sorry you have a problem with reality, I swear.

What would you think if someone leaked this post[1] you wrote with the title "TOXIC WHITE PRIVILEGED MAN SAYS KIDS ARE TERRORISTS"?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21074077

> I don't believe every highly-esteemed man is asking undergrads out

Seriously?

Epstein was really well-esteemed.

Weinstein was very well-esteemed

Polansky was very well-esteemed

Ethan Zuckerman (MIT) was very well-esteemed

Stallman did nothing of the sort.

They are just legends built around a weird guy who comes out creepy when tries to be friendly.

And they started because he was not popular in college but usually right

People hate the outcasts that expose their faults in public

It ruins their projected image

It hurts their giant ego

BTW: I've been young and creepy sometimes to women, they've been creepy to me (one even stalked me and my girlfriend), most of the time we've been cool around each other.

"She said, he said" is a very bad way to evaluate a person in an objective way.

"They told me that one time" it's the beginning of everyone's life, when you are 66 and lived the life Stallman has lived, that one time, repeated over and over, becomes almost a truth.

It's like John Lennon saying "The best drummer in the world? Ringo is not even the best drummer in The Beatles"

Or Ozzy Osbourne eating bats

Or Van Halen's "no brown M&M's" rule

> me of the women who accused Assange

There's a huge difference though.

Assange after he was accused of rape escaped from the process and started rambling about a “radical feminist conspiracy”

Stallman is not accused of anything, never escaped and if you write to him (he still answer to everybody) will ask you to support the FSF because it's important

And this is the man women and students should be afraid of...

> Yes, he did. There are other articles mentioned here that prove it.

Let's see them then.

I'm sure there are real testimonies of real people.

> Of course he did (and does). It's well known. Here's HN from 11 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20979343

And I've personally spoken with 4 of them that say the exact opposite.

Drop some name please, accusations need proof.

> I don't even move in those circles

I do.

> Richard Stallman, Knight for Justice - Also Hot Ladies

Old joke, stupid sign, nothing severe, it's been there forever together with the sticker of Amnesty International (if you haven't noticed), nobody complained for ages, suddenly high paid engineers that without GCC wouldn't have the same high paid job complain that RMS makes them feel uncomfortable, even though they "don't even move in those circles"

Let's be serious, please don't make me quote Roger Murtaugh.

> Yes, but was the sign there before, or not?

The story is well known

The sign was there

And together with it there was an Amnesty International sticker.

So it really depends on what people want to see, more than what's really there.

I've seen much worse sign, like professors not receiving at their office even if they were required to, posting signs with the new address where you could find them (usually their private studio office)

And they only received if it was "really needed" otherwise you just sent an email and waited.

That's what made me really furious when I was a student.

Women were more concerned that they traveled 100kms from their home towns to meet the professor and talk about their thesis and finding their door shut, not of some stupid signs that was clearly a joke made by someone who wasn't a threat to anybody.

The real threat came from the polite, well dressed, highly educated, power angry monsters, those like Epstein.

Stallman is the exact opposite of that kind of men.

> You might think they are extreme in their views but rulings restricting speech are very, very rare.

And that has severe consequences as you see.

Popper said it many years ago.

> The fact Stallman doesn't understand what assault means

he knows very well.

He meant, and it's obvious from the emails, that the term is slippery if used to accuse someone.

It would have been better something like "statutory rape"

because it's not disputable.

> Somehow I missed this, so a person literally working on helping the government kill people was the one asking to remove RMS?

Yep

https://www.linkedin.com/in/selam-gano-089895ba/

Most men at MIT are not RMS and nobody create legends on them.

Because nobody knows them.

But if it is creepy for RMS, it is for anyone else who did it.

Where is the outrage?

Half their age is perfectly legit if one is 25 and the other is 50.

You should be more precise.

"I'll kill your family" after they killed many other people's families is verbal violence.

Believe me, my grangrandfather and my grandfather were jailed many times in the 20 years of fascist regime because they refused to swear as fascists.

They were two gentle men who worked as tailors.

Remove them all then.

Where's the outrage when we need it?

> Selam Jie Gano

People should be outraged that a nobody working on automated vehicles for the US military (AKA drones) believes she on a higher moral ground than Stallman, that never hurt anybody.

People should be outraged that said nobody wrote "Remove Stallman and all the other toxic people in tech" like if "removing" people is ok, like she knows who they are, 'cause she's the ultimate judge, and as if building weapons is not toxic...

BTW

RMS has been much more brave and clear than that.

He wrote

    "if someone in csail says in this discussion group that Minsky was accused of sexual assault, a very serious accusation, and someone else in csail thinks that he was not, should the latter person refrain from saying so in this same discussion group out of concern that the conversation will leak and be misconstrued by the press?"

    The in stands for "science". The job of scientists is to evaluate evidence and seek truth. We have a social responsibility to do that as well. I hope that we scientists will never evade our social responsibility to seek and defend the truth out of fear that the press will misconstrue our search. That would not be a reputation I would like attached to my affiliation.

   I think the existence of a dispute about that supports my point that the term "sexual assault" is slippery, so we ought to use more concrete terms when accusing anyone.

He did what he believed was the right thing to do.

He was doing it to protect the movement and the protest from

a - leaks to the press

b - bad PR, if they used sexual assault people could spin it as "but he didn't assault her, it was consensual sex" like they usually do: they shoot the messenger or the form of the message to not address the real issue and divert the attention (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts)

c - he was UNDOUBTEDLY right! nobody is talking about the protest against Epstein-MIT involvement.

good job Selam, good job everybody

> You don't there is enough mud to go around?

I think there is only mud, not based on any real issue with what Stallman said or did.

> does not automatically follow that it was the wrong thing to do.

It does.

FSF main goal was freedom and protecting fundamental liberties of each individual

Stallman main contribution to FSF was the GPL, a legal framework, FSF main contribution was pro bono legal support defending free software in court.

So, yeah, if FSF cannot defend its founder, most popular and most honorable member, it becomes basically useless, it follows it was the wrong thing to do.

Their reputation was based on trust, trust has been broken.

I've been called weak as European and you tell me I'm the one making a flame war by just stating what's obvious?

You've a weird sens of humor my friend.

1) nope. yo could say whatever you wanted in Rome when the ruler was the pope, but you could not write it freely.

Example: Pasquino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasquino

2) I'm a polite Italian using ancient words: it's what we call hate speech today.

> Me, too.

It doesn't look like that.

> But I suppose, you are also not a women struggeling in a sexist nerd IT world?

I'm not a woman, I'm also not a sexist nerd.

And I know, having been a supporter of the free software since the mid 90s, having interacted with the first Luther Blisset group in Italy, having tried to build an Italian Linux distro in 1996 and been part in the hack community (I've been among the first to build and attend hack meetings conventions in Italy, you can read more about the first one here http://www.ecn.org/hackit98/faq.html), that I've never met more women in tech than in the FSF circles.

There were literally no women in tech back then, but there were more than a few of them interested in being part of a socio-political revolutionary platform such as the free software philosophy.

I've personally taught a group of girls howto install Linux so they could teach to other people in the free Linux courses we gave in many community centers, back when Linux meant Slackware 1.0 (1.0.1 to be correct) and kernel 1.2.13.

I've been a teacher for Rails girls whose motto is "Our aim is to give tools and a community for women to understand technology and to build their ideas"

Because RMS and all the guys like him believed in inclusiveness and I believed it too, thanks to them.

> I got anxiety just typing all that.

That's why people who are scared of their own opinion never accomplish anything.

> Telling someone you're going to kill yourself if they don't date you is clearly just trying to be friendly.

In fact I have strong compassion for those calling it an aggression.

their life must be miserable if they can't take a simple thing like that.

It happened to me more than one time, one of them stalked me, I never called them "aggresive bitches", they just had a few problems expressing emotions, that's it and I calmly explained to them why we couldn't be together.

If you really are autistic, you should know what it means trying to be like everybody else when you're different.

> people have called him creepy for asking out MIT undergraduates

So every male at MIT is creepy then.

> defending adults having sex with children.

He was just arguing about the science available at the moment and even links the study on his website (everything is still there, he is not hiding anything)

> He didn't harass women during the two days I interacted with him, therefore he has never done so

Exactly, he's innocent until proven guilty, like everybody else.

You're implying that "I heard from someone that heard it from someone else, that heard it from their dad, that read it on a mailing list, 20 years ago, that he did, therefore ho did"

> It seems

seems does not qualify as evidence

> circles that interacted with RMS

Like Thomas Lord?

https://archive.is/7qepC

The real reference, which is available and downloadable from the internet to anybody who wants to read it don;t say the sex happened.

never, in the hundreds of pages of depositions.

Instead of talking about MIT that took money from Epstein, we're talking about Stallman that never did.

> He's harassed and bothered dozens of women in and outside of MIT.

No, he didn't.

Thomas Lord who worked with him says

> 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. 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.

https://archive.is/7qepC#selection-1243.1-1359.221

> stable opinions over large groups don't form in a week

We know very well how they form: years of false propaganda.

People still believes he's scared of plants.

> Do you have any reason to believe that RMS hadn’t been the subject of several co platings

Why it always resolve to a comply or die situation?

How many times people told you what to do, you didn't and in the end you were right?

> by Richard attempting to defend the memory of a long-time, now deceased friend

He wasn't even defending him, he was just saying "don't use a word that does not represent what really happened according to the sources".

> was a time where his style of firebrand-like vitriol against proprietary software was crucial. But that time is over

[citation needed]

Anyway, even if it was true, has him become disposable?

> want my children to follow in my footsteps, as I followed my dad

Maybe your dad wasn't such a great person for other people except you though.

Maybe I would prefer my kids being more like RMS than me or your dad or you.

What you want it's irrelevant.

> who bully, cajole and generally act like obnoxious arseholes

he's been bullied all of his life, because he never conformed to any norm.

And there are people like you keep doing that.

There's that too.

I think he intended that unadulterated free speech is not necessarily the most important of the rights.

I think freedom of the press and freedom of association come before that.

In fact the first thing Mussolini did when he won the election (not without the help of violence, verbal but more importantly physical, like Hitler also did after him) was to abolish the free press and make all the other parties illegal.

> Is it incitement of racial hatred to post a joke video of your dog performing a Nazi salute?

Why did you post it?

Because you know it's controversial and would create engagement.

If the nazi salute wasn't controversial (and rightfully considered hate crime) you would have ignored it.

BTW the first amendment does not condone hate speech.

Because even USA understands that there is a limit on everything.