5 ms·

Thanks for the link. He actually compares homosexual with pedophiles. I want to have absolutely nothing to do with such a degenerate.

by pothibo 12y ago

tellitlikeitis 12y ago
This is great. He's pointing out the facts! Your comment appears to be a classic case of projection. How is pointing out the facts about homosexual behavior a characteristic of a degenerate? Au contraire, your protestations signify you as a likely degenerate.
pothibo 12y ago
For those of you brave souls who downvote me. I'm wondering which part of my statement you disagree with. - You think homosexual are pedophiles? - It's not important what he thinks about homosexuals. You're going to support him by using his software. If he had held the same hate speech about women in 2014, everyone would be here talking how imbecile this guy is.
- dubfan 12y ago
  Maybe people are downvoting you because you're showing an incapability to distinguish between someone's expressed beliefs and their personal character?
  - astrodust 12y ago
    Aren't those two a little intermingled? "Apart from the fact that he hates Jews, he's a really nice guy!"
- edwintorok 12y ago
  People can have different political, religious, etc. views than you, but why should that influence whether you use his software or not? Do you check the political views of all authors of each software before you decide to use it? What if those views (or your own) change over time and you disagree with them?
  - icebraining 12y ago
    (ESR aside) Why not? If I believe that someone's exposed views are harmful, doesn't it make sense to avoid increasing his/her overall influence? I mean, the fact that we're discussing ESR's views on pedophilia shows that his influence in an unrelated area (software) increases the exposure of those views. If he was just a nobody like me, would we be discussing his blog post on Catholic priests? Not likely. Do you check the political views of all authors of each software before you decide to use it? I sure don't, but why does that mean one should actively ignore gained knowledge?
    - edwintorok 12y ago
      First of all it would take too much time to find out all the authors of all the software that I routinely use, and then keep up with what their current views are on various topics. But I think the main reason is that most software has more than one author, and it would be unfair to judge the usefulness of that software based on the (non-technical) views of just one of its authors. Your reasoning would apply only for single-author software, and TBH I would consider those pet-projects anyway, and I don't think the original author would care much whether you use it or not. Edit: about gained knowledge: I think you could apply this if you compare multiple competing solutions, one deciding factor could be the author's thoughts on various topics. Just like how a company's attitude towards various topics might be influencing your purchasing decision: for example Nvidia doesn't support open-source drivers, hence I don't buy Nvidia when choosing a graphics card. But again for me those are all technical reasons, I wouldn't factor an author's/company's political views into that decision, unless it was something really horrible.
      - icebraining 12y ago
        Your reasoning would apply only for single-author software But doesn't that fit SRC itself? But again for me those are all technical reasons, I wouldn't factor an author's/company's political views into that decision, unless it was something really horrible. Ah! But then you're not arguing whether it makes sense to factor the political views in the decision - what you're actually arguing is that ESR's views are not really horrible. But since pothibo supposedly considers them really horrible, it makes sense that (s)he would factor in those views, no?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- wolfgke 12y ago
  > For those of you brave souls who downvote me. I'm wondering which part of my statement you disagree with. This part: > I want to have absolutely nothing to do with such a degenerate.
  - gonzo 12y ago
    ESF is degenerate. That you choose to support him says more about you than esr, or OP.
- fetbaffe 12y ago
  You know, the world does not consists of two opposing positions, like republicans or democrats. There could actually be other positions than those two you pointed out. One for example that this is Hacker News and not Huffington Post. Your comment about "support him by using his software" is just silly. Lots of creators in this world have had less than flattering opinions in different topics, but does not take away what they produced. I can still enjoy Wagner regardless of his views on the jews. I don't have to reformat all my ReiserFS based hard drives after Reiser murdered his wife. And The Pianist by Roman Polanski is an absolute masterpiece, even though Polanski raped that poor girl. So I evaluate SRC based on merits, not the creators.
  - icebraining 12y ago
    In general, I agree. The question is whether you're helping promote the "bad parts" by promoting the good ones. I mean, why are we reading and discussing ERS's views on Catholic priests if not because many people like his software? I don't think it's fair to dismiss it as silly.
    - fetbaffe 12y ago
      But by your definition you are already promoting other peoples opinions by using their stuff. It is unavoidable. The only difference is that you don't care about those opinions because either you don't know about them or you don't think it is important. But they still exist.
- sampo 12y ago
  > If he had held the same hate speech about women in 2014 The same hate speech about gays in 2014, in Western Europe, would also be widely condemned.
Karunamon 12y ago
Wow.. classy guy. That said, people can change. 12 years is a long time.. does he still think that way?
- tptacek 12y ago
  http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1063 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1063
  - Karunamon 12y ago
    Thank you for locating this. After reading, I'm not sure what to think. I do not have the subject matter familiarity necessary to take a position on his claims, nor does he cite anything other than personal experience and his own research. If his historical claims with regard to homosexuality are correct, then I can say with great certainty that his other claim as to how these facts will be interpreted in the modern climate is distressingly right. Worth noting that he takes no position on the rights of homosexual couples. The only value judgement made therein is that (assuming the information used to reach this conclusion is correct) that historically, homosexuality been associated with some pretty ugly and downright evil things. If they're not correct, then this amounts to a very, very disgusting and ugly smear piece worthy of groups like the infamous Westboro church. So now I wonder.. which is it? If it weren't for the Eich/Mozilla thing from a few months ago, I'd have looked at these claims a lot less skeptically coming from a technologist who's intimately familiar with logic, and who would necessarily place facts above all else when it comes to arguing a point. That's not a thing I can do anymore, especially considering the tendency of actual bigots to couch their own personal prejudices in superficially-correct-sounding scientific language.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      I'm not trying to interpret him, just to answer the question about whether there's evidence that his thoughts have evolved. Here's a more recent example: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5651 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5651 The only analysis I'll give for it is that I was also disturbed by the idea of Eich being forced out, but would never donate a penny to organizations fighting marriage equality; two wrongs can't make a right. OK I give up. I find his thoughts on race to be alarming, too. It's hard for me to reconcile the idea that ESR's beliefs are germane and troubling with the principle of tolerance for other people's beliefs. But: I think there's something substantively and intrinsically disturbing about the specific things ESR says. I don't think I'd have trouble being friends with someone who opposed marriage equality. But I do have trouble with what ESR says about LGBT people. It might be the whole package of positions that ESR takes, not just about LGBT issues but about race, politics, &c. I have friends with very conservative beliefs (though none, to my knowledge, have ever argued that homosexuality is inextricably bound with pederasty). But none of them have a cohesive worldview in which their own attributes just happen to define the ideal human, compared against which all nonconformant humans are inferior. ESR, on the other hand...
boards2x 12y ago
Up voted.
angersock 12y ago
Not only does he compare them, he contrasts that societal relationship over time. Doing so doesn't make him a degenerate. A windbag, sure, or a liar, but degenerate is a particular term. Do you disagree with his premises or his facts, or just his conclusions? For example, I think he's wrong because he doesn't cite sources for his assertions about the demographics of various types of porn or sources for his claims of historical homosexuality/pedophilia. But that's a straight matter of "Where did you get this idea from?".

Thanks for the link. He actually compares homosexual with pedophiles. I want to have absolutely nothing to do with such a degenerate.

by pothibo 12y ago

Thanks for the link. He actually compares homosexual with pedophiles. I want to have absolutely nothing to do with such a degenerate.

tellitlikeitis 12y ago

This is great. He's pointing out the facts! Your comment appears to be a classic case of projection. How is pointing out the facts about homosexual behavior a characteristic of a degenerate? Au contraire, your protestations signify you as a likely degenerate.

pothibo 12y ago

For those of you brave souls who downvote me. I'm wondering which part of my statement you disagree with. - You think homosexual are pedophiles? - It's not important what he thinks about homosexuals. You're going to support him by using his software. If he had held the same hate speech about women in 2014, everyone would be here talking how imbecile this guy is.

dubfan 12y ago
Maybe people are downvoting you because you're showing an incapability to distinguish between someone's expressed beliefs and their personal character?
- astrodust 12y ago
  Aren't those two a little intermingled? "Apart from the fact that he hates Jews, he's a really nice guy!"
edwintorok 12y ago
People can have different political, religious, etc. views than you, but why should that influence whether you use his software or not? Do you check the political views of all authors of each software before you decide to use it? What if those views (or your own) change over time and you disagree with them?
- icebraining 12y ago
  (ESR aside) Why not? If I believe that someone's exposed views are harmful, doesn't it make sense to avoid increasing his/her overall influence? I mean, the fact that we're discussing ESR's views on pedophilia shows that his influence in an unrelated area (software) increases the exposure of those views. If he was just a nobody like me, would we be discussing his blog post on Catholic priests? Not likely. Do you check the political views of all authors of each software before you decide to use it? I sure don't, but why does that mean one should actively ignore gained knowledge?
  - edwintorok 12y ago
    First of all it would take too much time to find out all the authors of all the software that I routinely use, and then keep up with what their current views are on various topics. But I think the main reason is that most software has more than one author, and it would be unfair to judge the usefulness of that software based on the (non-technical) views of just one of its authors. Your reasoning would apply only for single-author software, and TBH I would consider those pet-projects anyway, and I don't think the original author would care much whether you use it or not. Edit: about gained knowledge: I think you could apply this if you compare multiple competing solutions, one deciding factor could be the author's thoughts on various topics. Just like how a company's attitude towards various topics might be influencing your purchasing decision: for example Nvidia doesn't support open-source drivers, hence I don't buy Nvidia when choosing a graphics card. But again for me those are all technical reasons, I wouldn't factor an author's/company's political views into that decision, unless it was something really horrible.
    - icebraining 12y ago
      Your reasoning would apply only for single-author software But doesn't that fit SRC itself? But again for me those are all technical reasons, I wouldn't factor an author's/company's political views into that decision, unless it was something really horrible. Ah! But then you're not arguing whether it makes sense to factor the political views in the decision - what you're actually arguing is that ESR's views are not really horrible. But since pothibo supposedly considers them really horrible, it makes sense that (s)he would factor in those views, no?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
wolfgke 12y ago
> For those of you brave souls who downvote me. I'm wondering which part of my statement you disagree with. This part: > I want to have absolutely nothing to do with such a degenerate.
- gonzo 12y ago
  ESF is degenerate. That you choose to support him says more about you than esr, or OP.
fetbaffe 12y ago
You know, the world does not consists of two opposing positions, like republicans or democrats. There could actually be other positions than those two you pointed out. One for example that this is Hacker News and not Huffington Post. Your comment about "support him by using his software" is just silly. Lots of creators in this world have had less than flattering opinions in different topics, but does not take away what they produced. I can still enjoy Wagner regardless of his views on the jews. I don't have to reformat all my ReiserFS based hard drives after Reiser murdered his wife. And The Pianist by Roman Polanski is an absolute masterpiece, even though Polanski raped that poor girl. So I evaluate SRC based on merits, not the creators.
- icebraining 12y ago
  In general, I agree. The question is whether you're helping promote the "bad parts" by promoting the good ones. I mean, why are we reading and discussing ERS's views on Catholic priests if not because many people like his software? I don't think it's fair to dismiss it as silly.
  - fetbaffe 12y ago
    But by your definition you are already promoting other peoples opinions by using their stuff. It is unavoidable. The only difference is that you don't care about those opinions because either you don't know about them or you don't think it is important. But they still exist.
sampo 12y ago
> If he had held the same hate speech about women in 2014 The same hate speech about gays in 2014, in Western Europe, would also be widely condemned.

Karunamon 12y ago

Wow.. classy guy. That said, people can change. 12 years is a long time.. does he still think that way?

tptacek 12y ago
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1063 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1063
- Karunamon 12y ago
  Thank you for locating this. After reading, I'm not sure what to think. I do not have the subject matter familiarity necessary to take a position on his claims, nor does he cite anything other than personal experience and his own research. If his historical claims with regard to homosexuality are correct, then I can say with great certainty that his other claim as to how these facts will be interpreted in the modern climate is distressingly right. Worth noting that he takes no position on the rights of homosexual couples. The only value judgement made therein is that (assuming the information used to reach this conclusion is correct) that historically, homosexuality been associated with some pretty ugly and downright evil things. If they're not correct, then this amounts to a very, very disgusting and ugly smear piece worthy of groups like the infamous Westboro church. So now I wonder.. which is it? If it weren't for the Eich/Mozilla thing from a few months ago, I'd have looked at these claims a lot less skeptically coming from a technologist who's intimately familiar with logic, and who would necessarily place facts above all else when it comes to arguing a point. That's not a thing I can do anymore, especially considering the tendency of actual bigots to couch their own personal prejudices in superficially-correct-sounding scientific language.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    I'm not trying to interpret him, just to answer the question about whether there's evidence that his thoughts have evolved. Here's a more recent example: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5651 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5651 The only analysis I'll give for it is that I was also disturbed by the idea of Eich being forced out, but would never donate a penny to organizations fighting marriage equality; two wrongs can't make a right. OK I give up. I find his thoughts on race to be alarming, too. It's hard for me to reconcile the idea that ESR's beliefs are germane and troubling with the principle of tolerance for other people's beliefs. But: I think there's something substantively and intrinsically disturbing about the specific things ESR says. I don't think I'd have trouble being friends with someone who opposed marriage equality. But I do have trouble with what ESR says about LGBT people. It might be the whole package of positions that ESR takes, not just about LGBT issues but about race, politics, &c. I have friends with very conservative beliefs (though none, to my knowledge, have ever argued that homosexuality is inextricably bound with pederasty). But none of them have a cohesive worldview in which their own attributes just happen to define the ideal human, compared against which all nonconformant humans are inferior. ESR, on the other hand...

boards2x 12y ago

Up voted.

angersock 12y ago

Not only does he compare them, he contrasts that societal relationship over time. Doing so doesn't make him a degenerate. A windbag, sure, or a liar, but degenerate is a particular term. Do you disagree with his premises or his facts, or just his conclusions? For example, I think he's wrong because he doesn't cite sources for his assertions about the demographics of various types of porn or sources for his claims of historical homosexuality/pedophilia. But that's a straight matter of "Where did you get this idea from?".