undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnikdaheratik6y ago0 comments

I think that it has next to nothing to do with technology. MIT was still reeling from the fall out with the Media Lab and Epstein. If it wasn't for that, they might have gotten by with a simple apology, but that wouldn't be enough at this point.

There is also a history of controversial stuff related to his time at the FSF which meant that probably wouldn't settle for a simple apology either (not that RMS seemed willing to give one).

As organisations change over time, what they need in leadership also changes. In this case, they didn't need an ideologue with a history of generating controversy, they needed someone who can keep the ship going forward so that the projects they are overseeing don't lose enough talent that they become irrelevant.

0 comments

raxxorrax6y ago

I think without heavy proponents for free software, we would be in a worse place, especially technologically. Never met a software developer that wasn't dependent on free software to learn about the fundamentals of programming and system design.

Calling him an ideologue in contrast to current pioneers in the software industry is a bit much, maybe he just had some hard principles.

> wouldn't settle for a simple apology

To whom? To those that endorsed questionable business relations that drew attention in the first place that still are in leading positions at the MIT?

> need in leadership also changes

Visionaries and thought leaders can probably have a positive influence. I doubt we will get a adequate replacement. There also is no strong leader/mentor that can make you magically smart. He would need to inspire you to learn yourself which I would argue Stallman did pretty well.

"Controversies" are seldom intellectually engaging and if you look at the core of his statements, the subject and reactions become quite ridiculous.

throwaway89416y ago

>Never met a software developer that wasn't dependent on free software to learn about the fundamentals of programming and system design.

You probably have been in a bubble all this time. I grew up in former Soviet Union without an internet connection with whatever software I was able to buy around the corner. It wasn't Linux and GCC, it was Windows 9x, Delphi, then MSVC, and so on.

I think the first time I've used (any) FOSS application was after 4 or 5 years of using computers. I had the fundamentals more or less covered by then.

This only strengthens your point though.

nikdaheratikOP6y ago

> To whom? To those that endorsed questionable business relations that drew attention in the first place that still are in leading positions at the MIT?

Side note: Ito, at least, is out at MIT. Others may be as well.

As far as to whom, it would have been to "anyone who was harmed by his statements". This could include those at the FSF who he represented, the students and researchers at MIT, who also were associated with the statements, and to people victimised by Epstein and others like him.

It's not as hard to find someone to apologise too, as it would be for the guy to actually admit he's wrong in the first place.

raxxorrax6y ago

nobody was harmed by his statements.

roguecoder6y ago

He also sort of tried to apologize and ended up making it worse because he was obviously neither sorry nor interested in how to avoid doing the same thing in the future.

syshum6y ago

the FSF is a Ideological organization, how can you say " they didn't need an ideologue" when that is EXACTLY what they need

FSF entire purpose is to push for the adoption of Free Software licensing (in opposition to Both "Open Source" and Commercial licensing)

galactus6y ago

What's with the downvotes? All of this is absolutely correct

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

raxxorrax6y ago

Calling him an ideologue in contrast to current pioneers in the software industry is a bit much, maybe he just had some hard principles.

> wouldn't settle for a simple apology

To whom? To those that endorsed questionable business relations that drew attention in the first place that still are in leading positions at the MIT?

> need in leadership also changes

"Controversies" are seldom intellectually engaging and if you look at the core of his statements, the subject and reactions become quite ridiculous.

throwaway89416y ago

>Never met a software developer that wasn't dependent on free software to learn about the fundamentals of programming and system design.

I think the first time I've used (any) FOSS application was after 4 or 5 years of using computers. I had the fundamentals more or less covered by then.

This only strengthens your point though.

nikdaheratikOP6y ago

> To whom? To those that endorsed questionable business relations that drew attention in the first place that still are in leading positions at the MIT?

Side note: Ito, at least, is out at MIT. Others may be as well.

It's not as hard to find someone to apologise too, as it would be for the guy to actually admit he's wrong in the first place.

raxxorrax6y ago

nobody was harmed by his statements.

roguecoder6y ago

He also sort of tried to apologize and ended up making it worse because he was obviously neither sorry nor interested in how to avoid doing the same thing in the future.

syshum6y ago

the FSF is a Ideological organization, how can you say " they didn't need an ideologue" when that is EXACTLY what they need

FSF entire purpose is to push for the adoption of Free Software licensing (in opposition to Both "Open Source" and Commercial licensing)

galactus6y ago

What's with the downvotes? All of this is absolutely correct

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse