this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
118 points (92.8% liked)

Linux

48310 readers
645 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
nooter692@lemmy.ml
MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml
cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
118
Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman (lemmy.world)
submitted 4 months ago by Tekkip20@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I've tried using my incredible (british) brain using Google to see if these open source titans ever engaged in a battle of "friendly conversation" with one another.

I was always interested what Stallman thought of the angry but smart finnish man who gave us the robust penguin kernel that breathes life into older machines and powers supercomputers for the weather.

The same with Torvalds thoughts on Stallmans GNU involvement and him as a person.

This is because you sometimes had different organisations in the FOSS and OSS community that take on different meanings so I wanted a better idea if these chaps ever spoke in an interview together.

TLDR : Does finnish man like bearded GNU jesus man and the same vice versa

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Unfortunately he's said a lot more than that.

Richard Stallman on paedophilia:

"The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, 'prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia' also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness."

RMS on June 28th, 2003

"I think that everyone age 14 or above ought to take part in sex, though not indiscriminately. (Some people are ready earlier.)

RMS on May 25th 2003

"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing."

RMS on June 5th, 2006

"There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children."

RMS on Jan 4th, 2013

People need to understand that you can be a champion of FOSS, and have some great ideas in terms of software liberty, while also having some really shitty views in other areas.

It's why people should avoid celebrity worship. Just because an engineer/sportsperson/actor/artist/CEO does something you like, doesn't necessarily mean they're a good person, or devoid of human flaws.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

His view did evolve after being talked to later about it. On the grounds that power dynamics involved in age differences create a coercive effect of even someone who could be mature enough to logically and emotionally grasp the concepts.

He is also deeply in the libertarian mind set that illegal means enforced with guns and batons and restrictions of rights, and that puts a higher bar to what should be legal.

Though I do totally agree with you on hero worship. Nobody is perfect and that impossibility is expontetially more true if want them to have been, to be and continue to be perfect forever.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Thing is, do we believe his sudden change of heart? It only happened once his job was on the line. He U-turned on his views that sex with children is fine just 2 days before he was forced out of his role.

To me, that reads as a last-ditch attempt to save his job, as opposed to a genuine sudden change in worldview for an opinion he held and championed for decades.

You know, like when a questionable politician has racist twitter posts from 5 years ago brought up in an election campaign and they're like *"Whaaaat? No no no I don't believe that anymore. I'm a changed man! Vote for me pls."

But maybe he really did change his mind 2 days before he was forced out of the FSF/MIT, and I'm just being pessimistic.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think that it was a few months or so before the resignation, but I can't find his post about it to really give the exact date.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Nope. 2 days.

Announcement that having sex with children is bad, actually: 14th September 2019

Resignation: 16th September 2019

E: not really sure why you'd downvote a factual statement. Go look at his blog (stallman.org) for those dates.

Please stop defending this. Raping children is a bad thing. He's not a deity figure to be worshipped. He is human and he is fallible. Having excellent ideas when it comes to software does not mean he has excellent ideas in every aspect of his life. You don't need to defend him on this.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

People are too quick to downvote for sure

[–] Gutless2615@ttrpg.network 2 points 4 months ago

The list of Stallman shitiness has no end apparently. Fucking gross. 🤢