6 ms·

And your answer is Stallman? Yes, he is a nut. In the sense of "no one will ever take him seriously, especially anyone involved in mainstream decision-making,

And your answer is Stallman? Yes, he is a nut. In the sense of "no one will ever take him seriously, especially anyone involved in mainstream decision-making, who has ever read anything he has written," which is in this case the most relevant metric. Stallman is never going to be any help here, nor is anyone like him, because any "normal" person -- that is, one that other people won't ignore out of hand -- will ignore him out of hand. This includes politicians, to whom said "normal" people are the all-important majority. "We need more activists" is bullshit. You think we need more activists? More of those outliers that get lampooned in every media outlet for railing against the status quo? Because that's what activists are to most people: Nuts and/or malcontents. Of course, my real problem with this statement is exactly the same reason I'm not making it. You think we don't have enough activists? GO BE ONE. If you think they can do any good and you believe that "we are fucked" without them, stop posting on HN, get off your ass, and DO SOMETHING. Otherwise get back on the bench with the rest of us, because all your whining about mass media and celebrity culture is just that. You can gripe all you want that people aren't doing anything, but as soon as you start telling people what they SHOULD be doing, either you'd better be doing it yourself or you'll have to excuse those of us -- everyone -- who will not take you seriously. In the event that you actually are interested in backing up your hollow rhetoric: The only way to work this system is from the inside. So start campaigning, or start schmoozing, because while real change is essentially impossible, the only way to mitigate damage is by convincing the relevant politicians that it's in their best interests to do so.

kunai 13y ago
Do you really think that Aaron Swartz, Larry Lessig and the masses of people protesting Capitol Hill last year when SOPA came around didn't make a difference? They were activists. Do you really think we'd have so much free/open source software today without the contribution of Eric S. Raymond, Stallman, et al.? They're activists. Do you really think that we'd be here today if Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington never existed? They were -- yep, you guessed it -- activists.
- yareally 13y ago
  For what it's worth though, Ben Franklin was much more diplomatic and compromising than RMS. RMS would be more like a modern day Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine or Samuel Adams. Though all mentioned parties during the revolution played a key role in the independence of the United States. So I guess one could say it "takes people of all sorts."
- mtowle 13y ago
  The flow of human events isn't bound to individuals. Names merely get played up in the remembering, and the events downplayed. E.g., America was going to revolt regardless of whether T.J., et al had ever been born. Really amazing that a war is misremembered as activism....pass the K-Y.
  - dkuntz2 13y ago
    Not actually true. The colonies could have received the things they wanted had they actually attempted to fight for them (and by 'things they wanted', I mean the things we wrote about England (and specifically a king with little political power at that time (it was all parliament's by that point)) not giving us). The American Revolutionary War was started because of political activism. They saw a chance to start a new country in whatever manner they pleased, and leapt at the opportunity. Even just a little effort put to really trying to get a voice in parliament would have worked fine, but instead we went and write the bloody Declaration in an attempt to rally support of other nations not really pleased with England (I'm looking at you France), and filled it with rhetoric, half-truths, and blatant lies. Okay, maybe not blatant, but they're there. Really amazing that a war is mistaught to most American students. Okay, it isn't that amazing, I mean, you're going to teach your country's history in the most favorable light possible, but, still...
    - mtowle 13y ago
      I think you're misunderstanding me. It's my claim that any sufficiently profitable colony sufficiently far away from its mother country will inevitably cease to be a part of said mother country. The how is irrelevant.
EliRivers 13y ago
We need Stallman because he's our extreme figure. He sets the bar for crazy-level. He makes you look like Jimmy McReasonable and your demands look sane.
- cynicalkane 13y ago
  Crazy doesn't help in the long run and often isn't helpful even in the short run. People exhibit something like an immune reaction to crazy ideas, and develop an allergy to the stimulus. Marxism has scared people away from social policy. Andrea Dworkin types have scared people away from feminism. (When I left liberal Oakland to go to U Chicago for college, I was shocked to hear people say, "I support equal rights but I'm not a feminist...") The civil rights movement and the early neocon movement are two examples of movements that suppressed crazy elements, and were highly successful for it.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  Exactly, without a Stallman the overton window is narrowed in a non-beneficial way.
kintamanimatt 13y ago
The best thing Stallman could do is improve his outward image from hippy to something less ... hippy. Appearances matter and his, together with what he says makes him, and therefore his message, unpalatable and unrelatable to most people. We live in a shallow society and the best thing the pro-privacy movement can have are moderately attractive, presentable, glib spokespeople.
- ancarda 13y ago
  I don't see why Stallman doesn't wear something a bit more presentable, like a suit and tie and shave his beard. It looks a little repulsive to be honest.
  - kintamanimatt 13y ago
    He was actually a really attractive guy. [1] You can still see he's fairly attractive for a 60 year old under the disheveled hair and beard, and excess weight. [1] http://en.wikinoticia.com/Technology/linux/33921-the-young-richard-stallman http://en.wikinoticia.com/Technology/linux/33921-the-young-r...
    - dylangs1030 13y ago
      I don't mean to split hairs, but you might be exaggerating just a bit.
      - kintamanimatt 13y ago
        You're not splitting hairs because you're not being pedantic! How might I be exaggerating?
markdown 13y ago
Stallman isn't an activist for the end user, he's an activist for the activists. > Yes, he is a nut. Eccentric is what he is. Must be fun living in a black and white world.
- krichman 13y ago
  Yes, it's not reasonable to call him crazy since many things he's been predicting have come true. He's eccentric.
- fixxer 13y ago
  I'm kind of shocked by the extremist label. I don't think Richard Stallman is a nut at all. Eccentric, sure, but only for the unfortunate reality that it is rare for most people to stick with a principle over decades. EDIT: ok, that foot eating thing is weird.
  - btilly 13y ago
    As much as I appreciate Stallman, videos like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ show him as eccentric for reasons that go well beyond sticking to principle.
- ISL 13y ago
  If he is a nut, he's our nut. If advancing a rational cause is nutty, being a nut sounds like a good plan.
wwweston 13y ago
> And your answer is Stallman? Stallman is absolutely part of the answer. Sure, not everybody can be RMS and live the way he does. He's still correct about the importance of values he's staked out and made a lifelong effort to demonstrate and respect. And to the GP's point, when you have content producers arguing they need legalized malware to police every machine, it makes it all the more obvious how much we need voices insisting on user freedom. > More of those outliers that get lampooned in every media outlet for railing against the status quo? While I agree it's good for activists to consider how their messaging might be received by various audiences, the fact that media outlets -- and even everyday citizens or presumably otherwise intelligent commentators on HN -- tend to collapse people to caricatures may not be an indictment of activists. > Otherwise get back on the bench with the rest of us, because all your whining about mass media and celebrity culture is just that. You've managed to work up a good froth of whine yourself there for somebody complaining about whining -- apparently summoned up to promote the ethic of more quiet frustration. Even if effective political action can't let its end be posts on a website, it starts with people talking to each other. Maybe even here.
jacquesm 13y ago
Stallman is not a nut. Try finding one other nut that has so consistently foretold the future.
- Torgo 13y ago
  Being right is no defense. "you're a nut, that will never happen." "you're a nut, that's not what's happening." and finally "you're a nut. why does what's happening bother you so much?"

kunai 13y ago

Do you really think that Aaron Swartz, Larry Lessig and the masses of people protesting Capitol Hill last year when SOPA came around didn't make a difference? They were activists. Do you really think we'd have so much free/open source software today without the contribution of Eric S. Raymond, Stallman, et al.? They're activists. Do you really think that we'd be here today if Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington never existed? They were -- yep, you guessed it -- activists.

yareally 13y ago
For what it's worth though, Ben Franklin was much more diplomatic and compromising than RMS. RMS would be more like a modern day Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine or Samuel Adams. Though all mentioned parties during the revolution played a key role in the independence of the United States. So I guess one could say it "takes people of all sorts."
mtowle 13y ago
The flow of human events isn't bound to individuals. Names merely get played up in the remembering, and the events downplayed. E.g., America was going to revolt regardless of whether T.J., et al had ever been born. Really amazing that a war is misremembered as activism....pass the K-Y.
- dkuntz2 13y ago
  Not actually true. The colonies could have received the things they wanted had they actually attempted to fight for them (and by 'things they wanted', I mean the things we wrote about England (and specifically a king with little political power at that time (it was all parliament's by that point)) not giving us). The American Revolutionary War was started because of political activism. They saw a chance to start a new country in whatever manner they pleased, and leapt at the opportunity. Even just a little effort put to really trying to get a voice in parliament would have worked fine, but instead we went and write the bloody Declaration in an attempt to rally support of other nations not really pleased with England (I'm looking at you France), and filled it with rhetoric, half-truths, and blatant lies. Okay, maybe not blatant, but they're there. Really amazing that a war is mistaught to most American students. Okay, it isn't that amazing, I mean, you're going to teach your country's history in the most favorable light possible, but, still...
  - mtowle 13y ago
    I think you're misunderstanding me. It's my claim that any sufficiently profitable colony sufficiently far away from its mother country will inevitably cease to be a part of said mother country. The how is irrelevant.

EliRivers 13y ago

We need Stallman because he's our extreme figure. He sets the bar for crazy-level. He makes you look like Jimmy McReasonable and your demands look sane.

cynicalkane 13y ago
Crazy doesn't help in the long run and often isn't helpful even in the short run. People exhibit something like an immune reaction to crazy ideas, and develop an allergy to the stimulus. Marxism has scared people away from social policy. Andrea Dworkin types have scared people away from feminism. (When I left liberal Oakland to go to U Chicago for college, I was shocked to hear people say, "I support equal rights but I'm not a feminist...") The civil rights movement and the early neocon movement are two examples of movements that suppressed crazy elements, and were highly successful for it.
jlgreco 13y ago
Exactly, without a Stallman the overton window is narrowed in a non-beneficial way.

kintamanimatt 13y ago

The best thing Stallman could do is improve his outward image from hippy to something less ... hippy. Appearances matter and his, together with what he says makes him, and therefore his message, unpalatable and unrelatable to most people. We live in a shallow society and the best thing the pro-privacy movement can have are moderately attractive, presentable, glib spokespeople.

ancarda 13y ago
I don't see why Stallman doesn't wear something a bit more presentable, like a suit and tie and shave his beard. It looks a little repulsive to be honest.
- kintamanimatt 13y ago
  He was actually a really attractive guy. [1] You can still see he's fairly attractive for a 60 year old under the disheveled hair and beard, and excess weight. [1] http://en.wikinoticia.com/Technology/linux/33921-the-young-richard-stallman http://en.wikinoticia.com/Technology/linux/33921-the-young-r...
  - dylangs1030 13y ago
    I don't mean to split hairs, but you might be exaggerating just a bit.
    - kintamanimatt 13y ago
      You're not splitting hairs because you're not being pedantic! How might I be exaggerating?

markdown 13y ago

Stallman isn't an activist for the end user, he's an activist for the activists. > Yes, he is a nut. Eccentric is what he is. Must be fun living in a black and white world.

krichman 13y ago
Yes, it's not reasonable to call him crazy since many things he's been predicting have come true. He's eccentric.
fixxer 13y ago
I'm kind of shocked by the extremist label. I don't think Richard Stallman is a nut at all. Eccentric, sure, but only for the unfortunate reality that it is rare for most people to stick with a principle over decades. EDIT: ok, that foot eating thing is weird.
- btilly 13y ago
  As much as I appreciate Stallman, videos like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ show him as eccentric for reasons that go well beyond sticking to principle.
ISL 13y ago
If he is a nut, he's our nut. If advancing a rational cause is nutty, being a nut sounds like a good plan.

wwweston 13y ago

> And your answer is Stallman? Stallman is absolutely part of the answer. Sure, not everybody can be RMS and live the way he does. He's still correct about the importance of values he's staked out and made a lifelong effort to demonstrate and respect. And to the GP's point, when you have content producers arguing they need legalized malware to police every machine, it makes it all the more obvious how much we need voices insisting on user freedom. > More of those outliers that get lampooned in every media outlet for railing against the status quo? While I agree it's good for activists to consider how their messaging might be received by various audiences, the fact that media outlets -- and even everyday citizens or presumably otherwise intelligent commentators on HN -- tend to collapse people to caricatures may not be an indictment of activists. > Otherwise get back on the bench with the rest of us, because all your whining about mass media and celebrity culture is just that. You've managed to work up a good froth of whine yourself there for somebody complaining about whining -- apparently summoned up to promote the ethic of more quiet frustration. Even if effective political action can't let its end be posts on a website, it starts with people talking to each other. Maybe even here.

jacquesm 13y ago

Stallman is not a nut. Try finding one other nut that has so consistently foretold the future.

Torgo 13y ago
Being right is no defense. "you're a nut, that will never happen." "you're a nut, that's not what's happening." and finally "you're a nut. why does what's happening bother you so much?"