4 ms·

There are other legitimate ways to protest. Breaking down the unity of the GNU system is unwise and a childish fit, at best. Promoting unity among GNU should b

There are other legitimate ways to protest. Breaking down the unity of the GNU system is unwise and a childish fit, at best. Promoting unity among GNU should be the first priority of every project in the system. It is not immediately clear that Libreboot leadership did anything to address their concerns, they simply walked away. Energy going to causes like this detract from the real mission of GNU: a free operating system. That should be its only concern. There's going to be a lot of flamage on this comment, but the community needs to prioritize technical progress over other things. Other organizations exist to deal with those issues, and so we shouldn't confuse GNU's real purpose.

adultSwim 10y ago
You shouldn't need to compromise your basic values to write software. A free operating system may be your only concern; it isn't everyones. To have other priorities is not childish.
- generic_user 10y ago
  The OP's point is a bit off topic but this statement deserves a response. > You shouldn't need to compromise your basic values to write software. If you believe this then you must also believe that Brendan Eich should still have his job at Mozilla. And that his believe that the state should not grant homosexual marriage licences is of no consequence to his participation in software development. Brendan Eich should not be forced to compromise his basic values to write software. Basic values does not = (your values). Within the 7+ Billion people on this planet there are quite a lot of conflicting 'basic values'. If you can not embrace them all in your programming community (or better yet exclude values altogether) then the core assertion is disingenuous and false. Society is multidimensional. The separation of vectors is out of necessity to ensure the integrity of each vector. Without this integrity you have abandon the possibility for any vector to move towards enlightenment and progress. Politics, Ethics, Values, Religion Sciences and the Arts are all different dimensions. With a wide spectrum of ideas and beliefs in each one of them. Many of these ideas are contradictory and in conflict. That is the healthy and necessary state of an enlightened society. You separate Software development from beliefs for the same reason that you separate Mathematics from beliefs. The progression of Mathematics has no political or social bound. If you can not accept that Mathematics is distinguishable and separate from your beliefs then you have truly embraced an intellectual and cultural regressive ideology. Likewise if you can not accept that people who you do not share beliefs with can and are advancing the breath and depth of programming and computer science then you have embraced an intellectually and culturally regressive ideology.
  - legulere 10y ago
    Of course like you said Brendan basic values were being questioned. But I think you're taking the comment you're replying to a bit too literal. What it probably meant was that things besides technical points, especially interpersonal ones do actually matter. You could argue that a lot of people's basic values were compromised by Brendan Eich. And I think you're right that you should try to keep things as separate as possible. But that's never 100% possible. Underlying the technical problems there lie social ones. If you tell yourself that you're keeping things purely rational and technological you are lying to yourself. You still need to work with other people to get things done for instance. Even the GNU project is strongly occupied with moral thoughts about their definition of freedom of software. Being the greatest genius doesn't help you one bit if you can't communicate those ideas and get help spreading them.
    - generic_user 10y ago
      > Of course like you said Brendan basic values were being questioned. > You could argue that a lot of people's basic values were compromised by Brendan Eich. This sort of highlights the irreconcilable dilemma of the claim that your basic values who ever you are and what ever your values are should be supported by a software project. That simply can not happen. Its a false statement. You either have to have one persons/groups basic values as prerequisite for participation and exclude everyone else who has different values. Or you mutually exclude personal basic values as a prerequisite and invite everyone to participate in solving the larger technological goal. What I think is being lost here, intentionally or not is the idea of mutual respect. You can have mutual respect with people you do not share common values with and still work together, share friendship and solve problems. If Open Source / Free Software, can not produce projects where people with different values can have mutual respect and compassion for one another and work together to achieve a common goal then there are serious, serious problems for FLOSS going forward.
danarmak 10y ago
> Other organizations exist to deal with those issues For the alleged issue of someone being fired due to being transgender, I fail to see how other organizations can deal with her being fired from the FSF. Do you suggest transgender people should only work for organizations promoting transgender rights, who can "deal with their issues"? Also, please consider that if all organizations and communities behaved as you suggest, then just as the FSF might not organizationally care about transgender rights, every other organization in the world might not care about free software. As a free software supporter, do you really want that? * Obligatory disclaimer: this comment is not intended to imply any factual assessment of the various claims about the firing.
- legulere 10y ago
  The alleged issue even is not being fired because of being transgender, but being fired because of complaining too much about being harassed.
acdha 10y ago
This is a serious issue and you're not helping by trying to dismiss it as childish or otherwise delegitimizing it. It's very easy to say “technical progress” should be a priority when the issue in question doesn't affect you personally but that reflects a gross failure of empathy on your part rather than an argument against the Libreboot decision. Open source development, especially in the FSF's area, is generally about people volunteering their time and valuable expertise to contribute to a public good. It is simply unreasonable and unrealistic to suggest that people prioritize that goal over every other consideration. As a hypothetical, suppose the issue in question was anti-Semitism and a Jewish maintainer decided to leave – would you really tell them that they should just be focused on creating a free operating system? To be clear: I am not saying that this is a valid complaint, that the FSF is in the right or wrong, etc. I don't know any details about the incidents in question but I can see that it's a serious allegation which should not be arbitrarily dismissed. I hope that the FSF works to ensure that the community and potential new contributors can trust them to follow their stated policies.
legulere 10y ago
Why should the lead developer of a software project need to stay with harassers? Holding "unity of the GNU system" is what is childish. There's basically no difference if a project is an official GNU project or not anyway.

adultSwim 10y ago

You shouldn't need to compromise your basic values to write software. A free operating system may be your only concern; it isn't everyones. To have other priorities is not childish.

generic_user 10y ago
The OP's point is a bit off topic but this statement deserves a response. > You shouldn't need to compromise your basic values to write software. If you believe this then you must also believe that Brendan Eich should still have his job at Mozilla. And that his believe that the state should not grant homosexual marriage licences is of no consequence to his participation in software development. Brendan Eich should not be forced to compromise his basic values to write software. Basic values does not = (your values). Within the 7+ Billion people on this planet there are quite a lot of conflicting 'basic values'. If you can not embrace them all in your programming community (or better yet exclude values altogether) then the core assertion is disingenuous and false. Society is multidimensional. The separation of vectors is out of necessity to ensure the integrity of each vector. Without this integrity you have abandon the possibility for any vector to move towards enlightenment and progress. Politics, Ethics, Values, Religion Sciences and the Arts are all different dimensions. With a wide spectrum of ideas and beliefs in each one of them. Many of these ideas are contradictory and in conflict. That is the healthy and necessary state of an enlightened society. You separate Software development from beliefs for the same reason that you separate Mathematics from beliefs. The progression of Mathematics has no political or social bound. If you can not accept that Mathematics is distinguishable and separate from your beliefs then you have truly embraced an intellectual and cultural regressive ideology. Likewise if you can not accept that people who you do not share beliefs with can and are advancing the breath and depth of programming and computer science then you have embraced an intellectually and culturally regressive ideology.
- legulere 10y ago
  Of course like you said Brendan basic values were being questioned. But I think you're taking the comment you're replying to a bit too literal. What it probably meant was that things besides technical points, especially interpersonal ones do actually matter. You could argue that a lot of people's basic values were compromised by Brendan Eich. And I think you're right that you should try to keep things as separate as possible. But that's never 100% possible. Underlying the technical problems there lie social ones. If you tell yourself that you're keeping things purely rational and technological you are lying to yourself. You still need to work with other people to get things done for instance. Even the GNU project is strongly occupied with moral thoughts about their definition of freedom of software. Being the greatest genius doesn't help you one bit if you can't communicate those ideas and get help spreading them.
  - generic_user 10y ago
    > Of course like you said Brendan basic values were being questioned. > You could argue that a lot of people's basic values were compromised by Brendan Eich. This sort of highlights the irreconcilable dilemma of the claim that your basic values who ever you are and what ever your values are should be supported by a software project. That simply can not happen. Its a false statement. You either have to have one persons/groups basic values as prerequisite for participation and exclude everyone else who has different values. Or you mutually exclude personal basic values as a prerequisite and invite everyone to participate in solving the larger technological goal. What I think is being lost here, intentionally or not is the idea of mutual respect. You can have mutual respect with people you do not share common values with and still work together, share friendship and solve problems. If Open Source / Free Software, can not produce projects where people with different values can have mutual respect and compassion for one another and work together to achieve a common goal then there are serious, serious problems for FLOSS going forward.

danarmak 10y ago

> Other organizations exist to deal with those issues For the alleged issue of someone being fired due to being transgender, I fail to see how other organizations can deal with her being fired from the FSF. Do you suggest transgender people should only work for organizations promoting transgender rights, who can "deal with their issues"? Also, please consider that if all organizations and communities behaved as you suggest, then just as the FSF might not organizationally care about transgender rights, every other organization in the world might not care about free software. As a free software supporter, do you really want that? * Obligatory disclaimer: this comment is not intended to imply any factual assessment of the various claims about the firing.

legulere 10y ago
The alleged issue even is not being fired because of being transgender, but being fired because of complaining too much about being harassed.

acdha 10y ago

This is a serious issue and you're not helping by trying to dismiss it as childish or otherwise delegitimizing it. It's very easy to say “technical progress” should be a priority when the issue in question doesn't affect you personally but that reflects a gross failure of empathy on your part rather than an argument against the Libreboot decision. Open source development, especially in the FSF's area, is generally about people volunteering their time and valuable expertise to contribute to a public good. It is simply unreasonable and unrealistic to suggest that people prioritize that goal over every other consideration. As a hypothetical, suppose the issue in question was anti-Semitism and a Jewish maintainer decided to leave – would you really tell them that they should just be focused on creating a free operating system? To be clear: I am not saying that this is a valid complaint, that the FSF is in the right or wrong, etc. I don't know any details about the incidents in question but I can see that it's a serious allegation which should not be arbitrarily dismissed. I hope that the FSF works to ensure that the community and potential new contributors can trust them to follow their stated policies.

legulere 10y ago

Why should the lead developer of a software project need to stay with harassers? Holding "unity of the GNU system" is what is childish. There's basically no difference if a project is an official GNU project or not anyway.