3 ms·

I think that bashing bad code, bad practices and whatever lead to any security-critical bug (and any bug whatsoever, for that matter), should happen. If there w

I think that bashing bad code, bad practices and whatever lead to any security-critical bug (and any bug whatsoever, for that matter), should happen. If there weren't rants, flame wars and insults in the free software movement, I guarantee it wouldn't have come near where it is today. It's a big part of what drives innovation in all spheres, not just this one: the harsh (and not-so-harsh, sure) comments, the passive-aggressive forks, the rewritings, the heated discussions. But bashing a person for writing that code? Never. I can't say my views on software politics are aligned with Mr. Stallman's, and neither I can say I have given that much thought to them. But I have enormous respect for everyone who has contributed to free software and helped shape the world, even with the smallest contributions... And Mr. Stallman's are one of the biggest. Everyone in this area should have the deepest respect for the enormous amount of work this man has done, and given it all to the community. It's hard, if not impossible, to stumble upon an anticonformist such as Stallman, who honestly does not care about the superficial things we all, unfortunately, do. I guarantee he could've leveraged everything he's done and been a multi-billionare by now. Instead he decided that the benefit the community can get from his work is far greater than the benefit he himself can get, so he did the only moral thing to do: he gave it all for free. And look at the GNU project now, or the FSF. Magnificent stuff. Mistakes such as this one (and a great majority of developers make dozens of these on a weekly basis), are probably the most idiotic reason to call out a person for incompetence or senility. It's ridiculous. It's completely unacceptable to now demonize a man such as RMS, if not for other reasons, then because none of us will probably ever come close to what he has done to change this world for the better.

jjnoakes 12y ago
I see many people calling him out not for making a mistake, but for downplaying its significance when confronted with its full ramifications. I agree that mistakes happen. But someone who deserves respect, in my opinion, owns up to mistakes and tries to get them fixed. Someone who downplays the mistakes in order to save face deserves nothing from me.
- Donzo 12y ago
  I don't think he wants anything from you. Perhaps you're putting too high a premium on your gratitude.
  - jjnoakes 12y ago
    I sincerely hope that anyone that acts as he does is not looking for anything from me. > Perhaps you're putting too high a premium on your gratitude. I think it's quite the opposite - people demand that he be respected solely because of what he's contributed to the free software movement, including even the lowliest gratitude from the smallest voices (of which I'm at the bottom of the list). But what really should happen is that each individual action and contribution should stand on its own, unmarred by its relationship (through its author) to any other action or contribution. People (the high and the low of us) should respect the free software movement and some of the software it has provided to the world, and simultaneously deride the position that this serious security problem should be shrugged off or downplayed, despite the fact that the same person or people are responsible for both.

jjnoakes 12y ago

I see many people calling him out not for making a mistake, but for downplaying its significance when confronted with its full ramifications. I agree that mistakes happen. But someone who deserves respect, in my opinion, owns up to mistakes and tries to get them fixed. Someone who downplays the mistakes in order to save face deserves nothing from me.

Donzo 12y ago
I don't think he wants anything from you. Perhaps you're putting too high a premium on your gratitude.
- jjnoakes 12y ago
  I sincerely hope that anyone that acts as he does is not looking for anything from me. > Perhaps you're putting too high a premium on your gratitude. I think it's quite the opposite - people demand that he be respected solely because of what he's contributed to the free software movement, including even the lowliest gratitude from the smallest voices (of which I'm at the bottom of the list). But what really should happen is that each individual action and contribution should stand on its own, unmarred by its relationship (through its author) to any other action or contribution. People (the high and the low of us) should respect the free software movement and some of the software it has provided to the world, and simultaneously deride the position that this serious security problem should be shrugged off or downplayed, despite the fact that the same person or people are responsible for both.