5 ms·

Snowden should be brought home, given a medal, and put in charge of the NSA. —Richard Stallman

by pgcj_poster 7y ago

derwiki 7y ago
Just because Stallman said a thing doesn't lend much credibility to it. See also: his defense of Epstein.
- emilfihlman 7y ago
  Mate... I recommend you read on the matter before making such wild claims. It was basically a hit piece on him.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    They're hardly wild claims. Here's (http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_2013_%28Pedophilia%29 http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_20...) him in 2013: > There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children. and 2006 (https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29 https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20Jun...): > I am sceptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. Defending someone like Epstein is hardly off-brand here.
    - cameronbrown 7y ago
      Had no idea he'd said something like this. It's deeply disappointing - he always seemed analogous to a software Jesus or the like.
      - dagw 7y ago
        If it matters he has apologized for those statements, said they where made in ignorance and claims that he's completely changed his mind now. Still it shows, at best, questionable judgement to have said those things in the first place.
        ceejayoz 7y ago
        Could you link to that apology?
        palunon 7y ago
        I'm not sure if he apologized, but here he at least recognize he was wrong https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September_2019_%28Sex_between_an_adult_and_a_child_is_wrong%29 https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September... > Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it. > Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why.
        fuzz4lyfe 7y ago
        The reason he requires state actor threat level privacy on all of his devices is now stunningly clear to me. I used to think it was tin foil hat paranoia, but the government has good reason to look at the computers of people who have spoken in the manner shown.
    - kfrzcode 7y ago
      Argue the idea, not the man.
      - xmonkee 7y ago
        It's $CURRENT_YEAR, I don't think we should argue pedophilia. Or rape. Or Slavery. Some things should be considered settled.
        gwd 7y ago
        > It's $CURRENT_YEAR, I don't think we should argue pedophilia. Or rape. Or Slavery. Some things should be considered settled. That's a bit like saying that since we proved the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, that we can now throw away all proofs of it and simply assert it. If it took civilization a long time to figure out that slavery is wrong, or that children can't consent to sex, then it's an error that people will continually fall into; every new person that is born needs to be taught not only that those things are true, but why those things are true. "Settled" should not mean that there is a clear, concise description of exactly why something is wrong to point somebody to and / or repeat every time someone asks. It should not mean, "We shout down and ostracize anyone who asks, 'OK, but why?'"
        ceejayoz 7y ago
        The ostracism comes when you've been told the "why" repeatedly over decades, and still choose to publicly take the position that calculus doesn't exist.
        kfrzcode 7y ago
        Absolutely - some things are agreed upon to be morally outrageous. This doesn't mean, to me, that we should condemn those who have historically stated things that are not aligned to those morals. I'm unequivocally not arguing in support of pedophilia I'm arguing against shutting down free discussion and open transference of ideas. In fact, we should celebrate that rms has/had actually been open with these statements. Speech should not be restricted, in my (admittedly very liberal) viewpoint.
        7y ago
    - forclarity 7y ago
      Defending Epstein narrowly with regards to the age of his victims might not be off-brand. Defending the coersion and threats would be entirely off brand. Apparently, neither happened. The material provided in the Daily Beast article is obviously a defense of Minsky, not Epstein. The article was journalistic incompetence. You can criticize what RMS said, judge him harshly for it, but it was not a defense of Epstein.
    - zajio1am 7y ago
      From stallman.org (unfortunately i cannot find the original e-mails that are mentioned in the news articles): 11 August 2019: (https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#11_August_2019_(Jeffrey_Epstein_committed_suicide) https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#11_August_20...) Jeffrey Epstein ... He also reportedly raped some of those people. I believe those accusations, and I think he deserved to be imprisoned. 14 September 2019: (https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September_2019_(Statements_about_Epstein) https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September...) I want to respond to the misleading media coverage of messages I posted about Marvin Minsky's association with Jeffrey Epstein. The coverage totally mischaracterised my statements. Headlines say that I defended Epstein. Nothing could be further from the truth. I've called him a "serial rapist", and said he deserved to be imprisoned. But many people now believe I defended him — and other inaccurate claims — and feel a real hurt because of what they believe I said.
  - big_chungus 7y ago
    He's been saying this stuff for years: http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_2013_%28Pedophilia%29 http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_20... https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29 https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20Jun... - Richard "Free as in Candy" Stallman
  - hannasanarion 7y ago
    Stallman wrote that email and sent it on an all-blast mailing list. It was his choice to publicly state his opinion that rape is okay if it's done in a country where it's technically legal.
    - pgcj_poster 7y ago
      I think he said the opposite. Someone said something like "she was 17, that's rape in the Virgin Islands" and he said that rape shouldn't be defined by what country an act took place in or whether the person was 17 or 18.
  - asveikau 7y ago
    I read a lot on the matter and concluded RMS's commentary was aloof, tone deaf, and stupid for him to be making. His comments from more than 10 years ago on age of consent and child pornography are also highly problematic. It's also rather disappointing that it will be harder to cite him and be taken seriously on other issues where his commentary is more relevant and correct. The FSF and GNU are good things. To have the founder seen as pro pedophile is not a good look.
    - crankylinuxuser 7y ago
      Well, I pulled my recurring donation. It's not much ($10/mo) but I cannot and will not accept those kinds of statements from Stallman along with complete inaction and passing the buck from the FSF board.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- sixstringtheory 7y ago
  Just as his saying it shouldn’t _lend_ credibility to the statement, his saying it shouldn’t _detract_ from the credibility either. It’s an adhom either way. Extremely effective unfortunately, since pedophilia is extremely taboo, it’s like if someone is calling out obvious tyranny you can get everyone to ignore them by crying “pedo”. They can be a pedo and still be right about the surveillance state. Of course, I can imagine a world where absolute surveillance is pushed in the name of rooting out things like pedophilia “for the greater good” because we “think of the children.” Go read or watch The Circle if you need a little help imagining.
- thinkingemote 7y ago
  Stallman gets hit pieces all the time. Then five years go pass and people say "I thought he was jerk, but he was right all along". Then it repeats itself.

Snowden should be brought home, given a medal, and put in charge of the NSA. —Richard Stallman

derwiki 7y ago

Just because Stallman said a thing doesn't lend much credibility to it. See also: his defense of Epstein.

emilfihlman 7y ago
Mate... I recommend you read on the matter before making such wild claims. It was basically a hit piece on him.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  They're hardly wild claims. Here's (http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_2013_%28Pedophilia%29 http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_20...) him in 2013: > There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children. and 2006 (https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29 https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20Jun...): > I am sceptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. Defending someone like Epstein is hardly off-brand here.
  - cameronbrown 7y ago
    Had no idea he'd said something like this. It's deeply disappointing - he always seemed analogous to a software Jesus or the like.
    - dagw 7y ago
      If it matters he has apologized for those statements, said they where made in ignorance and claims that he's completely changed his mind now. Still it shows, at best, questionable judgement to have said those things in the first place.
      - ceejayoz 7y ago
        Could you link to that apology?
        palunon 7y ago
        I'm not sure if he apologized, but here he at least recognize he was wrong https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September_2019_%28Sex_between_an_adult_and_a_child_is_wrong%29 https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September... > Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it. > Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why.
        fuzz4lyfe 7y ago
        The reason he requires state actor threat level privacy on all of his devices is now stunningly clear to me. I used to think it was tin foil hat paranoia, but the government has good reason to look at the computers of people who have spoken in the manner shown.
  - kfrzcode 7y ago
    Argue the idea, not the man.
    - xmonkee 7y ago
      It's $CURRENT_YEAR, I don't think we should argue pedophilia. Or rape. Or Slavery. Some things should be considered settled.
      - gwd 7y ago
        > It's $CURRENT_YEAR, I don't think we should argue pedophilia. Or rape. Or Slavery. Some things should be considered settled. That's a bit like saying that since we proved the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, that we can now throw away all proofs of it and simply assert it. If it took civilization a long time to figure out that slavery is wrong, or that children can't consent to sex, then it's an error that people will continually fall into; every new person that is born needs to be taught not only that those things are true, but why those things are true. "Settled" should not mean that there is a clear, concise description of exactly why something is wrong to point somebody to and / or repeat every time someone asks. It should not mean, "We shout down and ostracize anyone who asks, 'OK, but why?'"
        ceejayoz 7y ago
        The ostracism comes when you've been told the "why" repeatedly over decades, and still choose to publicly take the position that calculus doesn't exist.
      - kfrzcode 7y ago
        Absolutely - some things are agreed upon to be morally outrageous. This doesn't mean, to me, that we should condemn those who have historically stated things that are not aligned to those morals. I'm unequivocally not arguing in support of pedophilia I'm arguing against shutting down free discussion and open transference of ideas. In fact, we should celebrate that rms has/had actually been open with these statements. Speech should not be restricted, in my (admittedly very liberal) viewpoint.
      - 7y ago
  - forclarity 7y ago
    Defending Epstein narrowly with regards to the age of his victims might not be off-brand. Defending the coersion and threats would be entirely off brand. Apparently, neither happened. The material provided in the Daily Beast article is obviously a defense of Minsky, not Epstein. The article was journalistic incompetence. You can criticize what RMS said, judge him harshly for it, but it was not a defense of Epstein.
  - zajio1am 7y ago
    From stallman.org (unfortunately i cannot find the original e-mails that are mentioned in the news articles): 11 August 2019: (https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#11_August_2019_(Jeffrey_Epstein_committed_suicide) https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#11_August_20...) Jeffrey Epstein ... He also reportedly raped some of those people. I believe those accusations, and I think he deserved to be imprisoned. 14 September 2019: (https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September_2019_(Statements_about_Epstein) https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September...) I want to respond to the misleading media coverage of messages I posted about Marvin Minsky's association with Jeffrey Epstein. The coverage totally mischaracterised my statements. Headlines say that I defended Epstein. Nothing could be further from the truth. I've called him a "serial rapist", and said he deserved to be imprisoned. But many people now believe I defended him — and other inaccurate claims — and feel a real hurt because of what they believe I said.
- big_chungus 7y ago
  He's been saying this stuff for years: http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_2013_%28Pedophilia%29 http://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_20... https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29 https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20Jun... - Richard "Free as in Candy" Stallman
- hannasanarion 7y ago
  Stallman wrote that email and sent it on an all-blast mailing list. It was his choice to publicly state his opinion that rape is okay if it's done in a country where it's technically legal.
  - pgcj_poster 7y ago
    I think he said the opposite. Someone said something like "she was 17, that's rape in the Virgin Islands" and he said that rape shouldn't be defined by what country an act took place in or whether the person was 17 or 18.
- asveikau 7y ago
  I read a lot on the matter and concluded RMS's commentary was aloof, tone deaf, and stupid for him to be making. His comments from more than 10 years ago on age of consent and child pornography are also highly problematic. It's also rather disappointing that it will be harder to cite him and be taken seriously on other issues where his commentary is more relevant and correct. The FSF and GNU are good things. To have the founder seen as pro pedophile is not a good look.
  - crankylinuxuser 7y ago
    Well, I pulled my recurring donation. It's not much ($10/mo) but I cannot and will not accept those kinds of statements from Stallman along with complete inaction and passing the buck from the FSF board.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
sixstringtheory 7y ago
Just as his saying it shouldn’t _lend_ credibility to the statement, his saying it shouldn’t _detract_ from the credibility either. It’s an adhom either way. Extremely effective unfortunately, since pedophilia is extremely taboo, it’s like if someone is calling out obvious tyranny you can get everyone to ignore them by crying “pedo”. They can be a pedo and still be right about the surveillance state. Of course, I can imagine a world where absolute surveillance is pushed in the name of rooting out things like pedophilia “for the greater good” because we “think of the children.” Go read or watch The Circle if you need a little help imagining.
thinkingemote 7y ago
Stallman gets hit pieces all the time. Then five years go pass and people say "I thought he was jerk, but he was right all along". Then it repeats itself.