7 ms·

I understand Stallman's viewpoint, but his personal website looks like a litany of complaints :) "What's bad about: Airbnb | Amazon | Amtrak | Ancestry | Apple

paulpauper 7y ago
he should add deuterium to his list, too. Why does it deserve that neutron? how greedy of it.
GoodJokes 7y ago
It looks like a series of complaints because it is. What is your point? Not into skepticism?
dspillett 7y ago
> Pay Toilets While I understand the moral absolute standpoint, he fails to state how he sees such free facilities being maintained. While in many areas this can be done by local councils and paid for via relevant taxation, or by requiring local businesses to provide free facilities as part of their requirements of doing business in the area, those options do not cover everywhere (and the latter will be fought hard by business lobbying groups). I hope he isn't naive enough to expect to be able to rely on human nature meaning the general public will keep free facilities in good working order and in a sanitary state!
- 52-6F-62 7y ago
  I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt. The balance is radically weighted to the other side. Unfortunately the counter-weight must be equally radical to approach any sort of balance. He certainly strikes up some valuable discussions
- bena 7y ago
  Stallman lives in a particular bubble and that bubble has defined his viewpoints to a degree that he cannot fathom not being able to live his life in that way. The question of "who does that" or "who pays for that" ultimately comes down to some form of slavery or coercion. Or the question is just avoided. Because "capitalism is evil". Or "what about wage slavery". Or something about how we have intrinsic value as sentient beings and shouldn't be required "to provide value" in order to "just survive". And I'm like "Ok. But who cleans the public toilet?" How do you get someone to agree to that? I'll clean my toilet, sure. But I'm not cleaning the public toilet unless I'm being forced to or I'm being compensated for doing so.
  - zucker42 7y ago
    Using the words "slavery" and "coercion" makes taxes sound like a horrible idea, but I don't think it's a radical idea to have clean public toilets paid for by taxes.
    - wasdfff 7y ago
      Its the perfect use case of taxes: a pool of money for public well being. Being able to pee freely in a sanitary area and not on the ground is benefitting the public well being.
    - bena 7y ago
      Currently, that is how public toilets are cleaned. Taxes are used to pay the wages of the people who clean public toilets. But if everything is a public good, then where is that money coming from? Somehow I get the feeling people think that socialism or communism is something we can add on top of our existing system. I don't buy that assumption. If we're all "providing for the general welfare", why is there income? No matter what, the answers always come down to either capitalism or slavery, but with extra steps. Either we acknowledge that certain tasks will need rewards attached to them to entice people to do them. Which just basically takes us to capitalism, but people feel that as long as we don't dick around with money, it's not really capitalism. Or we acknowledge that we'll have to force people to do certain tasks. And I'm not comfortable with that.
  - 7y ago
- hiq 7y ago
  Japan is an example where public toilets abound and are perfectly fine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilets_in_Japan#Public_toilets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilets_in_Japan#Public_toilet... If you agree with the moral standpoint, and it seems to be feasible at least in Japan, why not try to find ways to make it more widespread in other countries?
bryanlarsen 7y ago
To be fair, there's a smaller list of core complaints: proprietary software, data privacy/ownership, et cetera.
wetpaws 7y ago
"you live long enough to become the villain" is usually a case for every large corporation
airnomad 7y ago
RMS discovered SEO
beatgammit 7y ago
To be fair, there's a lot to dislike about each of those services/companies even if you don't agree with his uncompromising stance on Free Software. I also dislike most of those companies, but for very different reasons from him (I prefer BSD-style licenses and am 10% okay with proprietary software for noncritical stuff).

paulpauper 7y ago

he should add deuterium to his list, too. Why does it deserve that neutron? how greedy of it.

GoodJokes 7y ago

It looks like a series of complaints because it is. What is your point? Not into skepticism?

dspillett 7y ago

> Pay Toilets While I understand the moral absolute standpoint, he fails to state how he sees such free facilities being maintained. While in many areas this can be done by local councils and paid for via relevant taxation, or by requiring local businesses to provide free facilities as part of their requirements of doing business in the area, those options do not cover everywhere (and the latter will be fought hard by business lobbying groups). I hope he isn't naive enough to expect to be able to rely on human nature meaning the general public will keep free facilities in good working order and in a sanitary state!

52-6F-62 7y ago
I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt. The balance is radically weighted to the other side. Unfortunately the counter-weight must be equally radical to approach any sort of balance. He certainly strikes up some valuable discussions
bena 7y ago
Stallman lives in a particular bubble and that bubble has defined his viewpoints to a degree that he cannot fathom not being able to live his life in that way. The question of "who does that" or "who pays for that" ultimately comes down to some form of slavery or coercion. Or the question is just avoided. Because "capitalism is evil". Or "what about wage slavery". Or something about how we have intrinsic value as sentient beings and shouldn't be required "to provide value" in order to "just survive". And I'm like "Ok. But who cleans the public toilet?" How do you get someone to agree to that? I'll clean my toilet, sure. But I'm not cleaning the public toilet unless I'm being forced to or I'm being compensated for doing so.
- zucker42 7y ago
  Using the words "slavery" and "coercion" makes taxes sound like a horrible idea, but I don't think it's a radical idea to have clean public toilets paid for by taxes.
  - wasdfff 7y ago
    Its the perfect use case of taxes: a pool of money for public well being. Being able to pee freely in a sanitary area and not on the ground is benefitting the public well being.
  - bena 7y ago
    Currently, that is how public toilets are cleaned. Taxes are used to pay the wages of the people who clean public toilets. But if everything is a public good, then where is that money coming from? Somehow I get the feeling people think that socialism or communism is something we can add on top of our existing system. I don't buy that assumption. If we're all "providing for the general welfare", why is there income? No matter what, the answers always come down to either capitalism or slavery, but with extra steps. Either we acknowledge that certain tasks will need rewards attached to them to entice people to do them. Which just basically takes us to capitalism, but people feel that as long as we don't dick around with money, it's not really capitalism. Or we acknowledge that we'll have to force people to do certain tasks. And I'm not comfortable with that.
- 7y ago
hiq 7y ago
Japan is an example where public toilets abound and are perfectly fine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilets_in_Japan#Public_toilets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilets_in_Japan#Public_toilet... If you agree with the moral standpoint, and it seems to be feasible at least in Japan, why not try to find ways to make it more widespread in other countries?

bryanlarsen 7y ago

To be fair, there's a smaller list of core complaints: proprietary software, data privacy/ownership, et cetera.

wetpaws 7y ago

"you live long enough to become the villain" is usually a case for every large corporation

airnomad 7y ago

RMS discovered SEO

beatgammit 7y ago

To be fair, there's a lot to dislike about each of those services/companies even if you don't agree with his uncompromising stance on Free Software. I also dislike most of those companies, but for very different reasons from him (I prefer BSD-style licenses and am 10% okay with proprietary software for noncritical stuff).