5 ms·

I'm surprised the article doesn't mention Richard Stallman's essays on Facebook. That's the first place I saw this idea expressed. (He calls users of Facebook "

I'm surprised the article doesn't mention Richard Stallman's essays on Facebook. That's the first place I saw this idea expressed. (He calls users of Facebook "useds".)

throwajay-rms 8y ago
often i have longed for a way to convince stallman that the smug pseudo-clever tone evinced by his word games pushes away more people than it attracts. alas
- marnett 8y ago
  words directly affect thought. while some substitutions can be overkill, it can still help the reader better perceive the precise thought the writer wants. this idea is at the core of books like 1984, for example.
  - stochastic_monk 8y ago
    I like Stallman’s emphasis. Considering how resistant people tend to be to the idea of not using Facebook, underscoring that they’re being sold is an important point. And not for the purposed of exerting control like 1984’s.
- flycaliguy 8y ago
  I feel like that guy has a public attraction ceiling. He's better doing himself.
- Zarath 8y ago
  If you believe that the major danger of Facebook is that it allows people to easily be manipulated, then sugar coating your true meaning to be more appealing may just be counter to your purpose.
hamburga 8y ago
https://stallman.org/facebook.html https://stallman.org/facebook.html
na85 8y ago
Stallman's juvenile demeanor detracts from the perception of his message. Calling rap music "c...rap", calling them useds instead of users, the gravmass stuff, writing diatribes about not wearing ties, not to mention eating his toe jam on camera that one time... He's a kook and will never be taken seriously. Like it or not we are superficial beings and culture carries with it certain norms that must be adhered to if we wish to maintain broad spectrum appeal or credibility. It's not enough to have good ideas.
- Wingwing 8y ago
  It sounds like you are the problem here to be honest.
- vinceguidry 8y ago
  I think RMS would disagree with you. He considers his cause to have been successful beyond his wildest dreams. Reading his biography paints a stark picture of a tech landscape being increasingly dominated by corporate interests. His organization offered another way. He never thought it would get off the ground, but it turned out that corporations are desperate to save a buck and are more than willing to work with free software in order to do it. The GPL was the first keystone, his advocacy helped to popularize it. His choice of appealing to nerds like him was perfect, and his kook persona where he doesn't bother trying to button up his rougher edges is far more convincing than any amount of sanitizing ever would be. More to the point, Stallman is insanely smart, and is more accomplished than probably anybody posting on HN, including even pg. He didn't stop being smart just because he became notable.
  - eeZah7Ux 8y ago
    Spot on. Often being unconventional is more effective than being likable.
- zeveb 8y ago
  You're not wrong, but neither is rms. The little boy pointing out that the emperor's new clothes are non-existent is no less right for breaking social mores, but is rather less likely to actually be paid attention to.

I'm surprised the article doesn't mention Richard Stallman's essays on Facebook. That's the first place I saw this idea expressed. (He calls users of Facebook "useds".)

throwajay-rms 8y ago

often i have longed for a way to convince stallman that the smug pseudo-clever tone evinced by his word games pushes away more people than it attracts. alas

marnett 8y ago
words directly affect thought. while some substitutions can be overkill, it can still help the reader better perceive the precise thought the writer wants. this idea is at the core of books like 1984, for example.
- stochastic_monk 8y ago
  I like Stallman’s emphasis. Considering how resistant people tend to be to the idea of not using Facebook, underscoring that they’re being sold is an important point. And not for the purposed of exerting control like 1984’s.
flycaliguy 8y ago
I feel like that guy has a public attraction ceiling. He's better doing himself.
Zarath 8y ago
If you believe that the major danger of Facebook is that it allows people to easily be manipulated, then sugar coating your true meaning to be more appealing may just be counter to your purpose.

hamburga 8y ago

https://stallman.org/facebook.html https://stallman.org/facebook.html

na85 8y ago

Stallman's juvenile demeanor detracts from the perception of his message. Calling rap music "c...rap", calling them useds instead of users, the gravmass stuff, writing diatribes about not wearing ties, not to mention eating his toe jam on camera that one time... He's a kook and will never be taken seriously. Like it or not we are superficial beings and culture carries with it certain norms that must be adhered to if we wish to maintain broad spectrum appeal or credibility. It's not enough to have good ideas.

Wingwing 8y ago
It sounds like you are the problem here to be honest.
vinceguidry 8y ago
I think RMS would disagree with you. He considers his cause to have been successful beyond his wildest dreams. Reading his biography paints a stark picture of a tech landscape being increasingly dominated by corporate interests. His organization offered another way. He never thought it would get off the ground, but it turned out that corporations are desperate to save a buck and are more than willing to work with free software in order to do it. The GPL was the first keystone, his advocacy helped to popularize it. His choice of appealing to nerds like him was perfect, and his kook persona where he doesn't bother trying to button up his rougher edges is far more convincing than any amount of sanitizing ever would be. More to the point, Stallman is insanely smart, and is more accomplished than probably anybody posting on HN, including even pg. He didn't stop being smart just because he became notable.
- eeZah7Ux 8y ago
  Spot on. Often being unconventional is more effective than being likable.
zeveb 8y ago
You're not wrong, but neither is rms. The little boy pointing out that the emperor's new clothes are non-existent is no less right for breaking social mores, but is rather less likely to actually be paid attention to.