←back to thread

The Stallman Report

(stallman-report.org)
197 points pkilgore | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
bringen ◴[] No.41840470[source]
How curious to see that the authors of this character assassination are anonymous. I wonder if it's a cabal of closed-source proprietary software authors behind this.

If this was being released 10-20 years ago, I'd suspect the involvement of Microsoft and their allies. These days, who knows. The Free Software movement has been attacked from many angles over the years, from those who want to destroy it completely to those who want to control and usurp it. There certainly are a long list of suspects for who may have authored this screed.

It would be interesting to see if a stylometric analysis could unmask those responsible. Perhaps we'd find dark skeletons in their closets, as is so often the case for those who point accusatory fingers at others using spurious evidence.

replies(2): >>41840906 #>>41843223 #
cassepipe ◴[] No.41840906[source]
You haven't read it and you should, maybe it would cut down the paranoia. This is not an attack on the free software movement and this is clearly from people who do care about the free software movement values.
replies(1): >>41841002 #
bringen ◴[] No.41841002[source]
I've skimmed through it and see nothing much to actually be concerned about. We all know Stallman is a rather strange, socially awkward man with some oddball views that go against the grain.

A document berating him for being a weirdo, while shrilly exaggerating all the "evidence" in an effort to destroy him and everything he's built over his lifetime, is not particularly useful or necessary.

The purpose of this is clear, and it's very telling that it's being fired at Stallman from the shadows by the unknown and unaccountable.

replies(4): >>41841261 #>>41841306 #>>41841966 #>>41892789 #
jdiez17 ◴[] No.41841966[source]
It seems to me that the purpose of this report is not to say "look, that guy is a weirdo". But rather, to point out in excruciating detail how he is enabling vile behaviours (like normalizing possession of CSAM, pretending like making out with 14 year olds is not sexual abuse, etc) in the FOSS community, by being a very visible figure head that some people look up to.
replies(1): >>41843116 #
bringen ◴[] No.41843116[source]
But he isn't enabling any of that. You're spinning a narrative that is fundamentally untrue.
replies(1): >>41845581 #
1. jdiez17 ◴[] No.41845581[source]
Please read this[1] while keeping in mind that a 14 year old does not fit into Stallman's definition of "child":

> I don't think it is wrong to distribute "child porn" images, even when they [depict] children rather than adolescents. However, making them is wrong if it involves real sex with a child. For the sake of opposing sexual abuse of real children, I suggest that you boycott the images that involve real children. Imaginary children can't be hurt by drawing them.

In other words: pornography involving 14, 15, 16 year olds is all good according to Stallman. He is enabling all of the above by changing the definition of what child pornography is, responding to someone who emailed him asking for advice, and then posting about it publicly.

[1]https://www.stallman.org/articles/witch-hunt.html

replies(1): >>41877775 #
2. asrt ◴[] No.41877775[source]
That's not what it says at all. In that quote Stallman makes a distinction between pornography that depicts real children and drawings, which he claims hurt no one.

This distinction is also made by the law in the USA, so this quote merely reflects USA law.

You can disagree with this quote and even find it gross, but to claim this quote aims to normalize CSAM is a blatant lie.