11 ms·

Why FSF Founder Richard Stallman is Wrong on Steve Jobs

116 points by diegogomes 15y ago

diegogomes 15y ago
Stallman is nuts -> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083536 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083536
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
smoyer 15y ago
Great article ... follow the HN conversation here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083349 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083349
tmhedberg 15y ago
Stallman is admittedly rather tactless, particularly in his recent comment about Jobs. To him, there is no freedom but absolute freedom; any compromise whatsoever is unacceptable, and he will not sugar-coat his opinions to make them more palatable to those that don't think the same way that he does. That is undoubtedly a shortcoming on his part. Still, I think that if you can look past his poor social graces, the man makes some very valid points. Time and time again, he issues statements that draw eye rolls and sneers, only to be vindicated later when his seemingly over-dramatic predictions actually come to pass. Dislike the man if you must. Criticize his poor diplomatic communication skills. But his role in our technological ecosystem is vital, and I for one am glad he's around.
- Tashtego 15y ago
  Isn't the job of a spokesperson to figure out how to effectively communicate the "valid points" of a movement so that people are not distracted by "the poor social graces" of their source? Stallman's ideas don't make him a poor spokesperson- his communication style does.
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    That depends entirely on what the goals of the organization are. The FSF seems to be primarily focused on providing information and tools to those who wish to seek it. At this, I believe they do a pretty good job. There are other organizations focused on selling the idea of F/OSS to outsiders, such as OSI.
    - ugh 15y ago
      Not according to their own website they are not: http://www.fsf.org/ http://www.fsf.org/ First bullet point.
      - burgerbrain 15y ago
        And Greenpeace pickets Japanese whalers. Realistically, these sorts of organizations are not looking for outside support. They thrive on controversy and know their target audience well. I don't financially support the FSF, I don't financially or intellectually support Greenpeace, and I think the politics of groups like The Yes Men are tedious. I also don't think any of them are going to change the world. I do respect the hell out of all of them though.
- benatkin 15y ago
  > To him, there is no freedom but absolute freedom; any compromise whatsoever is unacceptable, and he will not sugar-coat his opinions to make them more palatable to those that don't think the same way that he does. Yes, when asked he will express disdain even for projects like Ubuntu. He will say that iOS is worse, but to him, neither are acceptable. This keeps him from connecting strongly with many who are sympathetic to his cause. I don't think people who have read a great deal of what he's said, and what others have said about him, are surprised by his recent statement about Steve Jobs. I was actually surprised that he waited 24 hours and managed to keep it short and say something to make it a little less personal (the Chicago mayor quote). I think he's maturing.
maximusprime 15y ago
Is there a distribution of Linux that has removed all of the Gnu stuff and anything connected to Stallman? I think there would be quite a lot of value in that personally.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- jrockway 15y ago
  OpenBSD has attempted this throughout the years, but mostly to align with Theo's idea of secure C and architecture. Last I checked, though, this was not entirely successful; they're still using gcc. Honestly, the first thing I do on a new BSD system is to install the GNU userspace. It's more code, but it does more, and that makes me more productive. But there are plenty of projects attempting to rewrite the UNIX userspace, so join one of those and make it happen if you see "quite a lot of value in that personally". But by writing high-quality Free software, you'd still be advancing Stallman's agenda to let all computer users use the computer the way they want to.
  - hackermom 15y ago
    "...you'd still be advancing Stallman's agenda to let all computer users use the computer the way they want to." Optionally under a license that is free for real.
    - jrockway 15y ago
      This really depends on how literally you take "freedom". If you think freedom is the ability to take away other people's freedom, then you won't like the GPL. The idea behind the GPL is to increase the amount of freedom in the world, not to increase each individual's amount of freedom.
  - duskwuff 15y ago
    > Last I checked, though, this was not entirely successful; they're still using gcc. I'm not sure how far they've gotten, but they're supposed to have pcc to solve that: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070915195203 http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=2007091519520...
monochromatic 15y ago
> Richard Stallman is putting his feet firmly in his mouth Is that a veiled reference to him eating the toe jam?
- raganwald 15y ago
  Quite possibly. Would people rather we talked about the year or so that Mr. Jobs made unusual hygiene choices of his own? Both topics seem irrelevant to what the men in question have or haven’t accomplished.
  - awj 15y ago
    Irrational as it might be, appearance matters when someone becomes the public face for a group. This topic inevitably comes up when RMS is the subject of a thread. It's easy to dismiss that as maliciousness or trolling, but I think it's at least partially a reflection of the image RMS is projecting for the FSF.
    - raganwald 15y ago
      It’s not irrational to accept that appearance matters to many if not most people or almost every person. And when choosing someone to be a spokesperson for FSF, that’s a valid consideration. That being said, my observation is that if Mr. Stallman says X or Y or Z and we are discussing what he said, we are not choosing a spokesperson, nor are we any of “those” people. We are free to choose to evaluate what he said in a vacuum, just as if it were posted by an AnonymousCoward. We are perfectly free to debate X or Y or Z on their own terms. If you or that person over there or this person over here would rather segue into repeating the exact same conversation we had last week and the week before that, and the month before that about how off-putting the man’s behaviour can be at times, well, that is your privilege. It’s not irrational to discuss it, just as it’s not irrational to discuss the fact that Apple’s first president reportedly didn’t like Steve’s body odour stinking up his office. I remember when Steve’s star wasn’t quite so high in the public perception, and people did call out his eccentricities. When his products and ideas weren’t home runs, people complained about his autocratic ways and accused him of being a fanatic, explaining how his lack of appreciation for the “real world” and for “compromise” were costing Apple and NeXT. They harangued him for his abrasive manners and habit of screaming at employees. In the end, I see the two men as having some great similarities.
redthrowaway 15y ago
Free Software truly does deserve better than RMS. The guy is just about the least-suited person to being a spokesman (or any public figure) I've seen. As a hacker and behind-the-scenes guy, sure. But his complete lack of tact, social skills, and presentability makes him more harmful than helpful as a figurehead.
- calibraxis 15y ago
  [There goes my karma...] Since a lot of people here seemed to have an emotional reaction to Jobs' passing, I had no desire to say anything here. But now the topic is Stallman, and for whatever reason, people are wanting to discuss his comments. I (and probably most people I know) don't think Stallman's comments are a big deal. Steve was known for acting cruelly to people; apparently acted like a sociopath. If he treated people like shit when he was alive, then it's not the end of the world when someone says a few less-than-respectful things about him when he's gone. When confronted with the death of someone he disliked, I doubt Steve would be so sentimental. (At least not inwardly.)
  - ugh 15y ago
    The problem is that Stallman is a very public spokesperson for free software and he does an absolutely terrible job. It’s impossible to ignore the effects he has in his role and they are terrible.
    - dman 15y ago
      I am yet to see a press release saying a company decided to go closed source because they disagree with what Richard Stallman says. Can you point to any specific examples where Richard Stallman and his views have pushed a project that was on the open source path into the closed source direction.
      - ugh 15y ago
        Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think that keeping existing open source projects open source is all Stallman wants. Do you honestly believe that his comments help push for more free software? I don’t.
16s 15y ago
He's entitled to his opinion. He's a legend himself, just not as widely appreciated as Mr. Jobs was.
- eridius 15y ago
  Jobs is a legend. RMS is simply infamous.
  - chugger 15y ago
    Wrong. Jobs is a legend. RMS is a pig.
    - genieyclo 15y ago
      Hey chugger, I think you need to re-read the HN Welcome[1] page. Calling someone "a pig", "a low life pig and a coward" and other ad hominem insults is not what we do on HN. These types of comments you've been leaving all over this story don't add to it, and reflect poorly on yourself mainly. Don't sound like just another angry Jobs fan. If you have something worthwhile to say, say it in a civilized manner that teaches us something or adds to the conversation. [1] http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
parfe 15y ago
I don't see people reacting as harshly if it was someone like Jack Valenti that RMS said some unkind posthumous words about. Steve Jobs did embody the lock down of computing. I'd say Valenti and Jobs belong to the same category of protecting the consumer from perceived evil through benevolent restriction. I haven't seen anyone claiming Stallman is wrong. Just that he was a jerk about the death of a revered CEO who gets worshiped as a tech prophet. Jobs oversaw some great advances in the consumer computing market. That does not make him immune to criticism and especially not immune to true criticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Valenti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Valenti
- astrodust 15y ago
  "Steve Jobs did embody the lock down of computing"? Really? To a hacker, perhaps, but to most people he made computing accessible, giving them tools that they'd never have had no matter how "open" otherwise.
  - rphlx 15y ago
    Computers, MP3 players, and smartphones would still exist without Steve Jobs. Although probably with a cheaper/uglier case, more complicated SW, and less marketing and design-induced love.
    - protomyth 15y ago
      I get the feeling without Steve Jobs, devices that allow Stevie Wonder (see the video in my other comment) or my mother to actually use all those things wouldn't be mainstream. He cared about everyone being able use the technology. It isn't the cases that make Apple products great, it is the carefully thought out uses that generate amazings designs.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  I haven't seen anyone claiming Stallman is wrong. I claim Stallman is wrong. To the extent that people may have lost freedom along one axis, they gained it along others. And these other axis most people consider far more important. Everything in life has tradeoffs, and most people recognize that. Stallman doesn't with respect to this one particular axis (a warped view of SW freedom).
jbooth 15y ago
I love how these threads are always full of people saying "Oh, well I agree with the guy in general, but look at that ridiculous beard he has!". And then we talk about the beard for 500 words.
- pedrolll 15y ago
  Your comment has the first mention of beard that I saw in this thread. Let's not derail this discussion.
  - chadgeidel 15y ago
    I believe "beard" is a metaphor for "particular trait (lack of tact) about a person (Stallman) that I find objectonable". See "bikeshedding".
    - jbooth 15y ago
      Thanks.
- Toady 15y ago
  Well, the beard, and other quirks, sort of symbolize how socially off and out-of-touch with normal people Stallman and others like him actually are. It doesn't automatically refute arguments he makes, but it does paint a picture.
forgottenpaswrd 15y ago
Stallman, I had this man as a host in my house in Spain as part of a free software convention many years ago and I could tell you that he is one of the worst mannered person I had met in person, and that conclusion was shared with the entire LUG that had to organize it. I appreciate what he has done with the GPL, but when speaking he could do a disservice for the community. Something as simple as talking about "Linux" will make him crazy, as he will force you in a rude way to use GNU BEFORE Linux, always despising what Linux Towards made(and this thing called Hurd was going to be way better). As he talked it become obvious that he saw his role as more important than everybody else. He has "command and control", "you are with me or against me" mentality.
- derleth 15y ago
  > Linux Towards One day, someone is going to have to fix autocorrect. It's batting 0 for 2 here.
lallysingh 15y ago
Enough. Stallman's not /the/ leader of Free Software. He can't be, because he doesn't lead. He's a rude jackass that wrote some code and few licenses. He works on finding new ways to be a jackass to get attention. In ideas and code, sure, he's contributed a lot. But he's no leader. That's something different.
- joelthelion 15y ago
  His ideas have influenced a lot of people. Isn't that being a leader (of opinion?). He may not be a very good spokesman, but he has been very influential (I agree his influence has diminished a lot in the last few years).
  - lallysingh 15y ago
    Nope. You can agree with people, or be convinced by them without following them. RMS doesn't lead anybody. And with his rhetoric, doesn't seem to want to.
- jasonlotito 15y ago
  http://www.fsf.org/about/leadership http://www.fsf.org/about/leadership Not debating what you are saying. Just putting this here.
  - eropple 15y ago
    I think it's hard to say that the FSF really "leads" a whole lot these days. I'd call the Apache Foundation the current leading lights, if I had to pick one. This may be influenced by the fact that their primary spokesman is not a douchebag. Heck, I don't even know who it would be. Probably because whoever it is doesn't try to make himself or herself the story, unlike Mr. Stallman.
- nkassis 15y ago
  Not going to deny he's a jackass (maybe I'd call it antisocial) but you should give him more credit for the technical work he's provided. People often downplay his technical contributions because he hasn't made many of them more recently but he did a lot more than write a little code and a license(which is a pretty decent document).
dos1 15y ago
"But I see no argument whatsoever here to persuade Jobs' fans that they should be considering free software. Just a petty expression of relief that a rival is no longer available to compete with Stallman's cause." To me this hit the nail on the head. As far as I can tell, Stallman was just trying to be as inflammatory as possible. There was certainly a more tactful way for Richard to express his opinion on the matter, and he's done nothing but hinder his own cause with his vitriol.
y0ghur7_xxx 15y ago
"I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone." This means to me that Stallman is glad that Jobs is no more a malign influence on people's computing. But he is not glad that he is dead. That is exactly the same thing the poster says about Stallman: "While I'd love it if Stallman would retire, or at the very least improve his social skills, I hope he lives to be 120. As long as he's alive, there's hope he might change. I'd never be glad that he's gone. And I'm certainly not glad that Steve is." Saying that you'd love it if Stallman would retire means that you would be glad if he's gone.
- rtperson 15y ago
  I think you're missing an important distinction here: Stallman has not, in fact, died. The writer of the article is talking about a living person. That fundamentally changes what you're allowed, in polite society, to say about him.
  - redthrowaway 15y ago
    Bingo. Stallman, and many of his supporters, are just missing the nuance. You simply don't say, "I'm glad he's gone" a day and a half after someone dies. Even if you are, and even if you don't mean you're glad he's dead. It's one of those unspoken rules of human interaction that Stallman just doesn't seem to get.
    - bryanlarsen 15y ago
      Which is why Stallman explicitly said "I'm not glad he's dead".
      - stock_toaster 15y ago
        People may be reacting to it regardless, possibly even subconsciously, because it was placed (and sounded) like a 'hedge' phrase.
    - MostAwesomeDude 15y ago
ghshephard 15y ago
I'm probably the hugest fan of Apple, and Jobs there is. I grew up on Macintoshes, own one of every iPhone and iPad. Five Apple Laptops in 11 years (three on my bed right now.) But, I also love Open Software, and, from Stallman's perspective, I can see why Steve Jobs and his higher and higher walled gardens was seen as a threat to the Open Source movement. Now, as for me - I don't really care, because I _love_ my iPhone4, my Macbook Air, and Terminal.App is my constant companion. All in all I thought Stallman's response was as respectable and restrained as it could be for someone with his unflinching posture.
- RexRollman 15y ago
  It's okay to make the choices you have made because at least you were aware of the choice you were making. Many people out there don't have a fucking clue.
ozten 15y ago
Don't feed the trolls.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
Mithrandir 15y ago
I'm slightly disappointed that RMS said this, but I'm not altogether surprised. RMS is, as others on this and the other thread have mentioned, someone who is not big on comprise. He has done a lot for computing (GNU, Emacs, GPL) but Jobs also did a lot for computing and was certainly more well known then RMS; to RMS, that good Jobs did is negated by whatever 'bad' he did (proprietary software, etc.) Whatever non-free/non-open source Jobs did is up for debate on whether that's 'bad' or not, but that would still not wipe out any good. Of course, RMS is perfectly entitled to his opinion, but as he is the spokesperson for the FSF he could be a bit more diplomatic without going as far as saying 'Apple software is fine with us.' Something like 'Although Apple restricted user rights with proprietary software and DRM in its products, Mr. Jobs was one of the first to popularize personal computing and certainly had an impact on the tech world. My condolences to his family.' or similar would have looked a helluva lot better than what he wrote. Appearances to some degree do matter for the FSF right now Even if you disagree that Jobs had any profound or otherwise impact on technology, he did just die. Have a bit more respect for his friends and family.
AlfaWolph 15y ago
Most people who've made an impact on society at any scale are free to have their legacy examined and criticized when they die. This can hopefully be done without criticizing the person behind the legacy. For instance, Hitchens wrote a scathing piece on the legacy of Reagan right after he passed. But people who make impacts on our world are often so married to their legacies that it is difficult to criticize that legacy without criticizing the person. Steve Jobs is one of those whose legacy is indistinguishable from himself partly because he led an intensely private life. From reading Stallman's comments, I found nothing that specifically mentioned the man, only his methods. I think that's perfectly okay. I can only guess that most people who find fault in his words are probably just caught up in the emotions produced from seeing one of the largest figures in our time move on in front of our eyes. So I've got to call RRW out on this. They posted this as the usual linkbait we're all accustomed to. (i.e. Manufactured outrage for attention.)
mcfunley 15y ago
We have been passing a douchey-looking book called "How to Make it in Software" around work as a joke for the last few days. On page 79 there is a picture of RMS sitting in a chair, mouth agape, in bare feet, with both hands on his dick.
quellhorst 15y ago
I don't pay attention to people like RMS who eat stuff off their feet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=I25UeVXrEHQ#t=111s http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v...
jrockway 15y ago
I don't think Stallman did anything wrong. Jobs undeniably set back the Free Software community by making really good software that people were willing to trade their freedom for. For most people, it doesn't make a difference whether or not something is free, so these people happily accepted phones that couldn't run Unapproved software and OSes that contain code specifically to prevent you from tracing certain pieces of software that send information about your computer back to Apple. This is counter to everything that Stallman has spent his life on, so he says, "I'm glad Jobs isn't around anymore, because he was really good at fucking my movement over".
karamazov 15y ago
Apple products are not forced on anyone. Anyone interested in free software can buy whatever they like and run whatever they want; those interested in the advantages (both actual and perceived) of Apple products can get Macs, iPads, and iPhones. This is called freedom of choice; for someone so dedicated to freedom of software, it's surprising that RMS doesn't respect it.
- vacri 15y ago
  there is a difference between 'choice' and 'informed choice'
hackermom 15y ago
Day by day, statement after statement, he sounds more and more like a religious fundamentalist nut. Sigh...
vasco 15y ago
"He manages to offend common decency (...) and insult millions of Apple users simultaneously." I highly doubt that common decency as an abstract concept feels much offended. And even if it did, I am sure it would be able to sleep at night. As to Apple users, if they feel offended by the insult, I would advise them to watch this little clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cycXuYzmzNg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cycXuYzmzNg
- duffomelia 15y ago
  Or read this essay by Paul Graham: http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
runjake 15y ago
I might argue that Mac OS X has been a gateway "drug" to Free Software/Open Source for many who would otherwise be on Windows (which isn't a slight against Windows, but much of the most popular OSS software is at home on *NIX).
cgopalan 15y ago
I have always been surprised as to why people think its offensive to talk ill of someone just because the person is dead. Death does not change character. If a person could be criticized for something when he was alive, he should not be immune to that after death. I am definitely not saying that Steve Jobs was a jerk. I admire the man. But it seems insensible when the OP says it "offends common decency". Also, IMHO, Stallman wasn't reckless about choosing his words. He says, he's not glad he's dead (referring to the fact that wishing death upon someone is not good), but he's glad he's gone (referring here to Jobs as a symbol of antithesis of the free software movement). The OP offers an alternate version of what Stallman could have said. Its says: "I didn't share Steve Jobs' vision of computing, and I wish he'd chosen to embrace free software. I'm very sorry that he's gone and we've lost the opportunity to have that conversation. My sympathies are with his family at this time." When a person says something, it embodies his style and personality. Stallman shouldnt have to say something that is not his style. Also "I am very sorry he's gone and we've lost the opportunity to have that conversation" indicates that Stallman wanted to engage Jobs in conversation. Who knows? Maybe Stallman doesnt want to keep engaging in conversation. Maybe he views it as a tough battle and is sincerely relieved that people against the fsf philosophy dont exist anymore. If someone with similar beliefs dies tomorrow, he will count it as one more step towards progress. There are very few people in the world who do not offer veiled opinions. Stallman seems to be one of them. Let us not tell him what he needs to say - but instead think about why he said it.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  I have always been surprised as to why people think its offensive to talk ill of someone just because the person is dead. Death does not change character. If a person could be criticized for something when he was alive, he should not be immune to that after death. There's a time and place to show restraint. How would you feel if one of your mom's ex-boyfriends came to her funeral and started cursing at her? Maybe that's what he did the last time he saw her alive, but you know what, there's a time and place for restraint. (Note, not a dig on you and your mom at all -- but recall that Jobs has family too). Would it have been too much for RMS to say, "I'll respectfully voice my opinions at a later date" Apparently so.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
burke 15y ago
That was actually surprisingly tactful for RMS. It barely came across as offensive.
shipit 15y ago
Richard Stallman and Steve Jobs is the same personality. Stallman's belief is around intellectual expression as free software and Jobs' was design for culture. In the pursuit of their ideals, both have demonstrated similar zeal and reputation for offending people. We overlook Steve Jobs' quirks because we cherish the beautiful products from Cupertino and we seek to absorb that into our own process. As a culture, very few actually care for emacs or gcc. In an alternate universe, Stallman's Lisp-ness would be worshipped and aesthetics would be relegated to vanity.
- eropple 15y ago
  Jobs had a well-known positive and beneficial side to him. Bad Steve did certainly exist, but Bad Steve doesn't give that commencement address at Stanford. Stallman is at his core inhumane. It is not contemptible, but merely sad.
  - shipit 15y ago
    This is a late response, however, to Stallman's credit he acted on his convictions of free software, invented GPL, gave away gcc, bash, emacs, libc, binutils, hurd and hundreds other pieces that enabled a kid in Finland to cook Linux. Stallman's core is exposed which cannot be said about the man who estranged his own daughter (and he did rectify it after two years of denial) and maintained secrecy around all aspects of his life and work.
gparke 15y ago
I think RMS forgets what is important about freedom. As an iOS developer, the widespread adoption of iOS devices has allowed me to follow my own path, work on what I love, and have the chance to see my dreams become reality. If that isn't freedom, I don't know what is. Apple's success implies the market wants a controlled user experience. If that means I have to use 'jailed' software to buy my own freedom, it is a small price to pay.
Tichy 15y ago
I despise it if people try to use somebodies death to exert power over other people. This author just wants to control RMS and uses Steve Jobs to have a go at him.
kragen 15y ago
People are complaining a lot that Stallman isn't complying with the social norm that one does not speak ill of the dead. (And of course there are people who are personally offended because they identify with Steve Jobs and put Apple stickers on their car, which is just kind of pathetic. We'll leave them to one side.) Some of them go so far as to argue that Stallman would be more effective if he complied with those social norms, and that the FSF would be more effective if it had a spokesperson who complied with social norms. The point that they're missing is that Stallman is effective at what he does precisely because he violates social norms — much like Steve Jobs. Let me tell a story. On the 9th of September of this year, I was at the Conferencia Internacional de Software Libre here in Buenos Aires. Partido Justicialista, the ruling party of Argentina, has decided that free software is a good idea, and has been trying to promote it. One of the things that they're doing is a program called Conectar Igualdad ("Connecting Equality"), in which they're distributing one netbook to every public high school student in the country, 1.7 million so far, dual-booting with Linux and Windows, bought with the country's recently-renationalized pension funds. Another of the things they did was that they organized this conference, last year and this year, which was hosted by the National Library. Last year they had Jon "maddog" Hall give the keynote, and he talked about this thin-client internet-access project that he's been putting together with a bunch of folks in Brazil, which really sounds pretty awesome. This year they had Stallman give the keynote instead, and the auditorium was so crowded that I couldn't get in far enough to see him, so I hung out in the library's café instead. (This is Argentina; cafés are a necessity of civilized life, so there is one in the library.) So I didn't see the talk, and I didn't even see Stallman on his way out, but boy, did I hear about it afterwards in the café. Stallman apparently spent quite a bit of time ripping up the Conectar Igualdad program, because of the dual-booting, because of the lack of support for kids actually running Linux, because of the lack of source code for the modified Linux kernel that was actually running on the machines, and for other reasons. A person who obeyed social norms would not have considered doing this. After all, he was the guest of the Argentine government, who had invited him to come speak at this conference in order to reinforce their appearance of commitment to free software. Instead, he accepted the invitation and then spent his time shredding their appearance of commitment to free software. What a socially incompetent loser, eh? A week later I was at a party, and I happened to talk to a woman who works for Conectar Igualdad. She brought up Stallman's speech and said how she had been so happy about it, because he had said all the things that she had been unhappy about but hadn't been able to bring up. And apparently now there are meetings inside Conectar Igualdad to fix the problems that Stallman so publicly criticized. Stallman is what is colloquially known as an asshole. He has very little concern for other people's feelings or for social norms. And it's that very unbending nature that makes him an effective change agent. Deferring to social norms would cripple him. On the other hand, if he were at least aware of the feelings of other people, perhaps he could be leading a much more effective organization, instead of alienating even most of his closest friends over the years.
seven_stones 15y ago
The article doesn't make a case for Stallman being wrong, but merely for being "offensive".
sek 15y ago
He is a radical, he thinks in absolutes. We need these people to get something started because their motivation comes from seeing something black and white. The sad thing is just, that these people often die unhappy.
fredDouglass 15y ago
when you create the worlds de facto compiler, debugger and maybe the world's most powerful text editor, you can say whatever you want.
keeran 15y ago
> We can only hope his successors, as they attempt to carry on his legacy, will be less effective. I read this as a thinly veiled tribute.
jbp 15y ago
How many people support(ed) the freedom of artists to draw Allah? It is just non-sense that you'll be offended by someone unless you allow yourself to be offended. You don't like the comment, you ignore.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
wglb 15y ago
From the famous 2005 Commencement Address: And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary. Seems to be what Stallman is doing.
serge2k 15y ago
> I'm very sorry that he's gone followed by > There's no need to pretend that Stallman liked Jobs He said what he meant.
mattbee 15y ago
I rather agreed, but only because I think Stallman's achievements trump Jobs' in the long run - http://matthewblo.ch/34/keep-it-classy-richard-stallman/ http://matthewblo.ch/34/keep-it-classy-richard-stallman/

116 points by diegogomes 15y ago

diegogomes 15y ago

Stallman is nuts -> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083536 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083536

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

smoyer 15y ago

Great article ... follow the HN conversation here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083349 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083349

tmhedberg 15y ago

Stallman is admittedly rather tactless, particularly in his recent comment about Jobs. To him, there is no freedom but absolute freedom; any compromise whatsoever is unacceptable, and he will not sugar-coat his opinions to make them more palatable to those that don't think the same way that he does. That is undoubtedly a shortcoming on his part. Still, I think that if you can look past his poor social graces, the man makes some very valid points. Time and time again, he issues statements that draw eye rolls and sneers, only to be vindicated later when his seemingly over-dramatic predictions actually come to pass. Dislike the man if you must. Criticize his poor diplomatic communication skills. But his role in our technological ecosystem is vital, and I for one am glad he's around.

Tashtego 15y ago
Isn't the job of a spokesperson to figure out how to effectively communicate the "valid points" of a movement so that people are not distracted by "the poor social graces" of their source? Stallman's ideas don't make him a poor spokesperson- his communication style does.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  That depends entirely on what the goals of the organization are. The FSF seems to be primarily focused on providing information and tools to those who wish to seek it. At this, I believe they do a pretty good job. There are other organizations focused on selling the idea of F/OSS to outsiders, such as OSI.
  - ugh 15y ago
    Not according to their own website they are not: http://www.fsf.org/ http://www.fsf.org/ First bullet point.
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      And Greenpeace pickets Japanese whalers. Realistically, these sorts of organizations are not looking for outside support. They thrive on controversy and know their target audience well. I don't financially support the FSF, I don't financially or intellectually support Greenpeace, and I think the politics of groups like The Yes Men are tedious. I also don't think any of them are going to change the world. I do respect the hell out of all of them though.
benatkin 15y ago
> To him, there is no freedom but absolute freedom; any compromise whatsoever is unacceptable, and he will not sugar-coat his opinions to make them more palatable to those that don't think the same way that he does. Yes, when asked he will express disdain even for projects like Ubuntu. He will say that iOS is worse, but to him, neither are acceptable. This keeps him from connecting strongly with many who are sympathetic to his cause. I don't think people who have read a great deal of what he's said, and what others have said about him, are surprised by his recent statement about Steve Jobs. I was actually surprised that he waited 24 hours and managed to keep it short and say something to make it a little less personal (the Chicago mayor quote). I think he's maturing.

maximusprime 15y ago

Is there a distribution of Linux that has removed all of the Gnu stuff and anything connected to Stallman? I think there would be quite a lot of value in that personally.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
jrockway 15y ago
OpenBSD has attempted this throughout the years, but mostly to align with Theo's idea of secure C and architecture. Last I checked, though, this was not entirely successful; they're still using gcc. Honestly, the first thing I do on a new BSD system is to install the GNU userspace. It's more code, but it does more, and that makes me more productive. But there are plenty of projects attempting to rewrite the UNIX userspace, so join one of those and make it happen if you see "quite a lot of value in that personally". But by writing high-quality Free software, you'd still be advancing Stallman's agenda to let all computer users use the computer the way they want to.
- hackermom 15y ago
  "...you'd still be advancing Stallman's agenda to let all computer users use the computer the way they want to." Optionally under a license that is free for real.
  - jrockway 15y ago
    This really depends on how literally you take "freedom". If you think freedom is the ability to take away other people's freedom, then you won't like the GPL. The idea behind the GPL is to increase the amount of freedom in the world, not to increase each individual's amount of freedom.
- duskwuff 15y ago
  > Last I checked, though, this was not entirely successful; they're still using gcc. I'm not sure how far they've gotten, but they're supposed to have pcc to solve that: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070915195203 http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=2007091519520...

monochromatic 15y ago

> Richard Stallman is putting his feet firmly in his mouth Is that a veiled reference to him eating the toe jam?

raganwald 15y ago
Quite possibly. Would people rather we talked about the year or so that Mr. Jobs made unusual hygiene choices of his own? Both topics seem irrelevant to what the men in question have or haven’t accomplished.
- awj 15y ago
  Irrational as it might be, appearance matters when someone becomes the public face for a group. This topic inevitably comes up when RMS is the subject of a thread. It's easy to dismiss that as maliciousness or trolling, but I think it's at least partially a reflection of the image RMS is projecting for the FSF.
  - raganwald 15y ago
    It’s not irrational to accept that appearance matters to many if not most people or almost every person. And when choosing someone to be a spokesperson for FSF, that’s a valid consideration. That being said, my observation is that if Mr. Stallman says X or Y or Z and we are discussing what he said, we are not choosing a spokesperson, nor are we any of “those” people. We are free to choose to evaluate what he said in a vacuum, just as if it were posted by an AnonymousCoward. We are perfectly free to debate X or Y or Z on their own terms. If you or that person over there or this person over here would rather segue into repeating the exact same conversation we had last week and the week before that, and the month before that about how off-putting the man’s behaviour can be at times, well, that is your privilege. It’s not irrational to discuss it, just as it’s not irrational to discuss the fact that Apple’s first president reportedly didn’t like Steve’s body odour stinking up his office. I remember when Steve’s star wasn’t quite so high in the public perception, and people did call out his eccentricities. When his products and ideas weren’t home runs, people complained about his autocratic ways and accused him of being a fanatic, explaining how his lack of appreciation for the “real world” and for “compromise” were costing Apple and NeXT. They harangued him for his abrasive manners and habit of screaming at employees. In the end, I see the two men as having some great similarities.

redthrowaway 15y ago

Free Software truly does deserve better than RMS. The guy is just about the least-suited person to being a spokesman (or any public figure) I've seen. As a hacker and behind-the-scenes guy, sure. But his complete lack of tact, social skills, and presentability makes him more harmful than helpful as a figurehead.

calibraxis 15y ago
[There goes my karma...] Since a lot of people here seemed to have an emotional reaction to Jobs' passing, I had no desire to say anything here. But now the topic is Stallman, and for whatever reason, people are wanting to discuss his comments. I (and probably most people I know) don't think Stallman's comments are a big deal. Steve was known for acting cruelly to people; apparently acted like a sociopath. If he treated people like shit when he was alive, then it's not the end of the world when someone says a few less-than-respectful things about him when he's gone. When confronted with the death of someone he disliked, I doubt Steve would be so sentimental. (At least not inwardly.)
- ugh 15y ago
  The problem is that Stallman is a very public spokesperson for free software and he does an absolutely terrible job. It’s impossible to ignore the effects he has in his role and they are terrible.
  - dman 15y ago
    I am yet to see a press release saying a company decided to go closed source because they disagree with what Richard Stallman says. Can you point to any specific examples where Richard Stallman and his views have pushed a project that was on the open source path into the closed source direction.
    - ugh 15y ago
      Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think that keeping existing open source projects open source is all Stallman wants. Do you honestly believe that his comments help push for more free software? I don’t.

16s 15y ago

He's entitled to his opinion. He's a legend himself, just not as widely appreciated as Mr. Jobs was.

eridius 15y ago
Jobs is a legend. RMS is simply infamous.
- chugger 15y ago
  Wrong. Jobs is a legend. RMS is a pig.
  - genieyclo 15y ago
    Hey chugger, I think you need to re-read the HN Welcome[1] page. Calling someone "a pig", "a low life pig and a coward" and other ad hominem insults is not what we do on HN. These types of comments you've been leaving all over this story don't add to it, and reflect poorly on yourself mainly. Don't sound like just another angry Jobs fan. If you have something worthwhile to say, say it in a civilized manner that teaches us something or adds to the conversation. [1] http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

parfe 15y ago

I don't see people reacting as harshly if it was someone like Jack Valenti that RMS said some unkind posthumous words about. Steve Jobs did embody the lock down of computing. I'd say Valenti and Jobs belong to the same category of protecting the consumer from perceived evil through benevolent restriction. I haven't seen anyone claiming Stallman is wrong. Just that he was a jerk about the death of a revered CEO who gets worshiped as a tech prophet. Jobs oversaw some great advances in the consumer computing market. That does not make him immune to criticism and especially not immune to true criticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Valenti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Valenti

astrodust 15y ago
"Steve Jobs did embody the lock down of computing"? Really? To a hacker, perhaps, but to most people he made computing accessible, giving them tools that they'd never have had no matter how "open" otherwise.
- rphlx 15y ago
  Computers, MP3 players, and smartphones would still exist without Steve Jobs. Although probably with a cheaper/uglier case, more complicated SW, and less marketing and design-induced love.
  - protomyth 15y ago
    I get the feeling without Steve Jobs, devices that allow Stevie Wonder (see the video in my other comment) or my mother to actually use all those things wouldn't be mainstream. He cared about everyone being able use the technology. It isn't the cases that make Apple products great, it is the carefully thought out uses that generate amazings designs.
kenjackson 15y ago
I haven't seen anyone claiming Stallman is wrong. I claim Stallman is wrong. To the extent that people may have lost freedom along one axis, they gained it along others. And these other axis most people consider far more important. Everything in life has tradeoffs, and most people recognize that. Stallman doesn't with respect to this one particular axis (a warped view of SW freedom).

jbooth 15y ago

I love how these threads are always full of people saying "Oh, well I agree with the guy in general, but look at that ridiculous beard he has!". And then we talk about the beard for 500 words.

pedrolll 15y ago
Your comment has the first mention of beard that I saw in this thread. Let's not derail this discussion.
- chadgeidel 15y ago
  I believe "beard" is a metaphor for "particular trait (lack of tact) about a person (Stallman) that I find objectonable". See "bikeshedding".
  - jbooth 15y ago
    Thanks.
Toady 15y ago
Well, the beard, and other quirks, sort of symbolize how socially off and out-of-touch with normal people Stallman and others like him actually are. It doesn't automatically refute arguments he makes, but it does paint a picture.

forgottenpaswrd 15y ago

Stallman, I had this man as a host in my house in Spain as part of a free software convention many years ago and I could tell you that he is one of the worst mannered person I had met in person, and that conclusion was shared with the entire LUG that had to organize it. I appreciate what he has done with the GPL, but when speaking he could do a disservice for the community. Something as simple as talking about "Linux" will make him crazy, as he will force you in a rude way to use GNU BEFORE Linux, always despising what Linux Towards made(and this thing called Hurd was going to be way better). As he talked it become obvious that he saw his role as more important than everybody else. He has "command and control", "you are with me or against me" mentality.

derleth 15y ago
> Linux Towards One day, someone is going to have to fix autocorrect. It's batting 0 for 2 here.

lallysingh 15y ago

Enough. Stallman's not /the/ leader of Free Software. He can't be, because he doesn't lead. He's a rude jackass that wrote some code and few licenses. He works on finding new ways to be a jackass to get attention. In ideas and code, sure, he's contributed a lot. But he's no leader. That's something different.

joelthelion 15y ago
His ideas have influenced a lot of people. Isn't that being a leader (of opinion?). He may not be a very good spokesman, but he has been very influential (I agree his influence has diminished a lot in the last few years).
- lallysingh 15y ago
  Nope. You can agree with people, or be convinced by them without following them. RMS doesn't lead anybody. And with his rhetoric, doesn't seem to want to.
jasonlotito 15y ago
http://www.fsf.org/about/leadership http://www.fsf.org/about/leadership Not debating what you are saying. Just putting this here.
- eropple 15y ago
  I think it's hard to say that the FSF really "leads" a whole lot these days. I'd call the Apache Foundation the current leading lights, if I had to pick one. This may be influenced by the fact that their primary spokesman is not a douchebag. Heck, I don't even know who it would be. Probably because whoever it is doesn't try to make himself or herself the story, unlike Mr. Stallman.
nkassis 15y ago
Not going to deny he's a jackass (maybe I'd call it antisocial) but you should give him more credit for the technical work he's provided. People often downplay his technical contributions because he hasn't made many of them more recently but he did a lot more than write a little code and a license(which is a pretty decent document).

dos1 15y ago

"But I see no argument whatsoever here to persuade Jobs' fans that they should be considering free software. Just a petty expression of relief that a rival is no longer available to compete with Stallman's cause." To me this hit the nail on the head. As far as I can tell, Stallman was just trying to be as inflammatory as possible. There was certainly a more tactful way for Richard to express his opinion on the matter, and he's done nothing but hinder his own cause with his vitriol.

y0ghur7_xxx 15y ago

"I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone." This means to me that Stallman is glad that Jobs is no more a malign influence on people's computing. But he is not glad that he is dead. That is exactly the same thing the poster says about Stallman: "While I'd love it if Stallman would retire, or at the very least improve his social skills, I hope he lives to be 120. As long as he's alive, there's hope he might change. I'd never be glad that he's gone. And I'm certainly not glad that Steve is." Saying that you'd love it if Stallman would retire means that you would be glad if he's gone.

rtperson 15y ago
I think you're missing an important distinction here: Stallman has not, in fact, died. The writer of the article is talking about a living person. That fundamentally changes what you're allowed, in polite society, to say about him.
- redthrowaway 15y ago
  Bingo. Stallman, and many of his supporters, are just missing the nuance. You simply don't say, "I'm glad he's gone" a day and a half after someone dies. Even if you are, and even if you don't mean you're glad he's dead. It's one of those unspoken rules of human interaction that Stallman just doesn't seem to get.
  - bryanlarsen 15y ago
    Which is why Stallman explicitly said "I'm not glad he's dead".
    - stock_toaster 15y ago
      People may be reacting to it regardless, possibly even subconsciously, because it was placed (and sounded) like a 'hedge' phrase.
  - MostAwesomeDude 15y ago

ghshephard 15y ago

I'm probably the hugest fan of Apple, and Jobs there is. I grew up on Macintoshes, own one of every iPhone and iPad. Five Apple Laptops in 11 years (three on my bed right now.) But, I also love Open Software, and, from Stallman's perspective, I can see why Steve Jobs and his higher and higher walled gardens was seen as a threat to the Open Source movement. Now, as for me - I don't really care, because I _love_ my iPhone4, my Macbook Air, and Terminal.App is my constant companion. All in all I thought Stallman's response was as respectable and restrained as it could be for someone with his unflinching posture.

RexRollman 15y ago
It's okay to make the choices you have made because at least you were aware of the choice you were making. Many people out there don't have a fucking clue.

ozten 15y ago

Don't feed the trolls.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

Mithrandir 15y ago

I'm slightly disappointed that RMS said this, but I'm not altogether surprised. RMS is, as others on this and the other thread have mentioned, someone who is not big on comprise. He has done a lot for computing (GNU, Emacs, GPL) but Jobs also did a lot for computing and was certainly more well known then RMS; to RMS, that good Jobs did is negated by whatever 'bad' he did (proprietary software, etc.) Whatever non-free/non-open source Jobs did is up for debate on whether that's 'bad' or not, but that would still not wipe out any good. Of course, RMS is perfectly entitled to his opinion, but as he is the spokesperson for the FSF he could be a bit more diplomatic without going as far as saying 'Apple software is fine with us.' Something like 'Although Apple restricted user rights with proprietary software and DRM in its products, Mr. Jobs was one of the first to popularize personal computing and certainly had an impact on the tech world. My condolences to his family.' or similar would have looked a helluva lot better than what he wrote. Appearances to some degree do matter for the FSF right now Even if you disagree that Jobs had any profound or otherwise impact on technology, he did just die. Have a bit more respect for his friends and family.

AlfaWolph 15y ago

Most people who've made an impact on society at any scale are free to have their legacy examined and criticized when they die. This can hopefully be done without criticizing the person behind the legacy. For instance, Hitchens wrote a scathing piece on the legacy of Reagan right after he passed. But people who make impacts on our world are often so married to their legacies that it is difficult to criticize that legacy without criticizing the person. Steve Jobs is one of those whose legacy is indistinguishable from himself partly because he led an intensely private life. From reading Stallman's comments, I found nothing that specifically mentioned the man, only his methods. I think that's perfectly okay. I can only guess that most people who find fault in his words are probably just caught up in the emotions produced from seeing one of the largest figures in our time move on in front of our eyes. So I've got to call RRW out on this. They posted this as the usual linkbait we're all accustomed to. (i.e. Manufactured outrage for attention.)

mcfunley 15y ago

We have been passing a douchey-looking book called "How to Make it in Software" around work as a joke for the last few days. On page 79 there is a picture of RMS sitting in a chair, mouth agape, in bare feet, with both hands on his dick.

quellhorst 15y ago

I don't pay attention to people like RMS who eat stuff off their feet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=I25UeVXrEHQ#t=111s http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v...

jrockway 15y ago

I don't think Stallman did anything wrong. Jobs undeniably set back the Free Software community by making really good software that people were willing to trade their freedom for. For most people, it doesn't make a difference whether or not something is free, so these people happily accepted phones that couldn't run Unapproved software and OSes that contain code specifically to prevent you from tracing certain pieces of software that send information about your computer back to Apple. This is counter to everything that Stallman has spent his life on, so he says, "I'm glad Jobs isn't around anymore, because he was really good at fucking my movement over".

karamazov 15y ago

Apple products are not forced on anyone. Anyone interested in free software can buy whatever they like and run whatever they want; those interested in the advantages (both actual and perceived) of Apple products can get Macs, iPads, and iPhones. This is called freedom of choice; for someone so dedicated to freedom of software, it's surprising that RMS doesn't respect it.

vacri 15y ago
there is a difference between 'choice' and 'informed choice'

hackermom 15y ago

Day by day, statement after statement, he sounds more and more like a religious fundamentalist nut. Sigh...

vasco 15y ago

"He manages to offend common decency (...) and insult millions of Apple users simultaneously." I highly doubt that common decency as an abstract concept feels much offended. And even if it did, I am sure it would be able to sleep at night. As to Apple users, if they feel offended by the insult, I would advise them to watch this little clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cycXuYzmzNg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cycXuYzmzNg

duffomelia 15y ago
Or read this essay by Paul Graham: http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

runjake 15y ago

I might argue that Mac OS X has been a gateway "drug" to Free Software/Open Source for many who would otherwise be on Windows (which isn't a slight against Windows, but much of the most popular OSS software is at home on *NIX).

cgopalan 15y ago

I have always been surprised as to why people think its offensive to talk ill of someone just because the person is dead. Death does not change character. If a person could be criticized for something when he was alive, he should not be immune to that after death. I am definitely not saying that Steve Jobs was a jerk. I admire the man. But it seems insensible when the OP says it "offends common decency". Also, IMHO, Stallman wasn't reckless about choosing his words. He says, he's not glad he's dead (referring to the fact that wishing death upon someone is not good), but he's glad he's gone (referring here to Jobs as a symbol of antithesis of the free software movement). The OP offers an alternate version of what Stallman could have said. Its says: "I didn't share Steve Jobs' vision of computing, and I wish he'd chosen to embrace free software. I'm very sorry that he's gone and we've lost the opportunity to have that conversation. My sympathies are with his family at this time." When a person says something, it embodies his style and personality. Stallman shouldnt have to say something that is not his style. Also "I am very sorry he's gone and we've lost the opportunity to have that conversation" indicates that Stallman wanted to engage Jobs in conversation. Who knows? Maybe Stallman doesnt want to keep engaging in conversation. Maybe he views it as a tough battle and is sincerely relieved that people against the fsf philosophy dont exist anymore. If someone with similar beliefs dies tomorrow, he will count it as one more step towards progress. There are very few people in the world who do not offer veiled opinions. Stallman seems to be one of them. Let us not tell him what he needs to say - but instead think about why he said it.

kenjackson 15y ago
I have always been surprised as to why people think its offensive to talk ill of someone just because the person is dead. Death does not change character. If a person could be criticized for something when he was alive, he should not be immune to that after death. There's a time and place to show restraint. How would you feel if one of your mom's ex-boyfriends came to her funeral and started cursing at her? Maybe that's what he did the last time he saw her alive, but you know what, there's a time and place for restraint. (Note, not a dig on you and your mom at all -- but recall that Jobs has family too). Would it have been too much for RMS to say, "I'll respectfully voice my opinions at a later date" Apparently so.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

burke 15y ago

That was actually surprisingly tactful for RMS. It barely came across as offensive.

shipit 15y ago

Richard Stallman and Steve Jobs is the same personality. Stallman's belief is around intellectual expression as free software and Jobs' was design for culture. In the pursuit of their ideals, both have demonstrated similar zeal and reputation for offending people. We overlook Steve Jobs' quirks because we cherish the beautiful products from Cupertino and we seek to absorb that into our own process. As a culture, very few actually care for emacs or gcc. In an alternate universe, Stallman's Lisp-ness would be worshipped and aesthetics would be relegated to vanity.

eropple 15y ago
Jobs had a well-known positive and beneficial side to him. Bad Steve did certainly exist, but Bad Steve doesn't give that commencement address at Stanford. Stallman is at his core inhumane. It is not contemptible, but merely sad.
- shipit 15y ago
  This is a late response, however, to Stallman's credit he acted on his convictions of free software, invented GPL, gave away gcc, bash, emacs, libc, binutils, hurd and hundreds other pieces that enabled a kid in Finland to cook Linux. Stallman's core is exposed which cannot be said about the man who estranged his own daughter (and he did rectify it after two years of denial) and maintained secrecy around all aspects of his life and work.

gparke 15y ago

I think RMS forgets what is important about freedom. As an iOS developer, the widespread adoption of iOS devices has allowed me to follow my own path, work on what I love, and have the chance to see my dreams become reality. If that isn't freedom, I don't know what is. Apple's success implies the market wants a controlled user experience. If that means I have to use 'jailed' software to buy my own freedom, it is a small price to pay.

Tichy 15y ago

I despise it if people try to use somebodies death to exert power over other people. This author just wants to control RMS and uses Steve Jobs to have a go at him.

kragen 15y ago

People are complaining a lot that Stallman isn't complying with the social norm that one does not speak ill of the dead. (And of course there are people who are personally offended because they identify with Steve Jobs and put Apple stickers on their car, which is just kind of pathetic. We'll leave them to one side.) Some of them go so far as to argue that Stallman would be more effective if he complied with those social norms, and that the FSF would be more effective if it had a spokesperson who complied with social norms. The point that they're missing is that Stallman is effective at what he does precisely because he violates social norms — much like Steve Jobs. Let me tell a story. On the 9th of September of this year, I was at the Conferencia Internacional de Software Libre here in Buenos Aires. Partido Justicialista, the ruling party of Argentina, has decided that free software is a good idea, and has been trying to promote it. One of the things that they're doing is a program called Conectar Igualdad ("Connecting Equality"), in which they're distributing one netbook to every public high school student in the country, 1.7 million so far, dual-booting with Linux and Windows, bought with the country's recently-renationalized pension funds. Another of the things they did was that they organized this conference, last year and this year, which was hosted by the National Library. Last year they had Jon "maddog" Hall give the keynote, and he talked about this thin-client internet-access project that he's been putting together with a bunch of folks in Brazil, which really sounds pretty awesome. This year they had Stallman give the keynote instead, and the auditorium was so crowded that I couldn't get in far enough to see him, so I hung out in the library's café instead. (This is Argentina; cafés are a necessity of civilized life, so there is one in the library.) So I didn't see the talk, and I didn't even see Stallman on his way out, but boy, did I hear about it afterwards in the café. Stallman apparently spent quite a bit of time ripping up the Conectar Igualdad program, because of the dual-booting, because of the lack of support for kids actually running Linux, because of the lack of source code for the modified Linux kernel that was actually running on the machines, and for other reasons. A person who obeyed social norms would not have considered doing this. After all, he was the guest of the Argentine government, who had invited him to come speak at this conference in order to reinforce their appearance of commitment to free software. Instead, he accepted the invitation and then spent his time shredding their appearance of commitment to free software. What a socially incompetent loser, eh? A week later I was at a party, and I happened to talk to a woman who works for Conectar Igualdad. She brought up Stallman's speech and said how she had been so happy about it, because he had said all the things that she had been unhappy about but hadn't been able to bring up. And apparently now there are meetings inside Conectar Igualdad to fix the problems that Stallman so publicly criticized. Stallman is what is colloquially known as an asshole. He has very little concern for other people's feelings or for social norms. And it's that very unbending nature that makes him an effective change agent. Deferring to social norms would cripple him. On the other hand, if he were at least aware of the feelings of other people, perhaps he could be leading a much more effective organization, instead of alienating even most of his closest friends over the years.

seven_stones 15y ago

The article doesn't make a case for Stallman being wrong, but merely for being "offensive".

sek 15y ago

He is a radical, he thinks in absolutes. We need these people to get something started because their motivation comes from seeing something black and white. The sad thing is just, that these people often die unhappy.

fredDouglass 15y ago

when you create the worlds de facto compiler, debugger and maybe the world's most powerful text editor, you can say whatever you want.

keeran 15y ago

> We can only hope his successors, as they attempt to carry on his legacy, will be less effective. I read this as a thinly veiled tribute.

jbp 15y ago

How many people support(ed) the freedom of artists to draw Allah? It is just non-sense that you'll be offended by someone unless you allow yourself to be offended. You don't like the comment, you ignore.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

wglb 15y ago

From the famous 2005 Commencement Address: And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary. Seems to be what Stallman is doing.

serge2k 15y ago

> I'm very sorry that he's gone followed by > There's no need to pretend that Stallman liked Jobs He said what he meant.

mattbee 15y ago

I rather agreed, but only because I think Stallman's achievements trump Jobs' in the long run - http://matthewblo.ch/34/keep-it-classy-richard-stallman/ http://matthewblo.ch/34/keep-it-classy-richard-stallman/