He's got a documented history of it along with a history of both public blog posts and private CSAIL mailing list emails expressing very problematic beliefs. He got canned from MIT for good reason and it's a disgrace the FSF brought him back.

That site is debate bro nonsense and this is a very weird hill to die on

Yeah, Stallman resigned from MIT a few years ago because he kept making comments defending Jeffrey Epstein. Which he didn't even need to do, at all.

He's either a weird pervert or he's so detached from humanity he doesn't understand anything outside of code anymore

She's not that wrong, the FSF has been pretty successfully been painted as "the smelly radicals" by the "moderate and reasonable" liberals that are on the open source side and that honestly fucking sucks.

Despite all the great work they are doing they offer little pushback to these shit people. My best hope is that the FSF endures against all this and the winds of history mercilessly swipe all of the garbage put on it, they are correct in this struggle after all.

I know all of this history and I know what I am talking about. Also, it's not written SystemD but systemd ;)

"It is inadvisable to describe the free software community, or any human community, as an “ecosystem,” because that word implies the absence of ethical judgment."

An ecosystem works regardless of ethics, just because GNU does not like a word being it used doesn't change the world around them. Hell I could quote Engels about this!

People and groups have ethics they put into the software and an ecosystem builds around this software. I say this ecosystem needs more GPL.

The Linux kernel has already outgrown GNU in terms of scope and professionality. Also you've said Alpine don't even care about the naming. As the most important part of the operating system, the Kernel, is there and that's what matters.

Hell most distros don't care about the GNU/Linux naming.

You must be mistaken, GNU is not software, it is the name of the operating system

THEN WHY CAN A GNU LESS SYSTEM EXIST, AND STILL BE A VALID LINUX SYSTEM???

And what about glibc? Just because it's one of the more important components for much of software, which still can be replaced and you will have a valid system without it, they should get the credit? systemd is similar in this aspect and I don't see them crying about it, they are fundamental for many pieces of software.

They don't get the authority to call the system their own until they make one whole themselves or have authority over the most important/defining component! How's HURD going? And if that gets working I suggest you trying to use Linux software on HURD without utilizing BSD ports or replicating them.

You can call it GNU/Linux/SystemD/Wayland/Plasma/Non-free-firmware and you are within your bounds to do so as Free operating systems are not a monolith.

At least we agree on free OS's not being monoliths. At least in theory. But still if people ask me what OS I use, I will say Linux because whatever the fuck you promote is stupid. When they ask what distro, then I will simply reply Parabola. That's it.

They don't call POS' like Windows or MacOS by their technical components.

Because they aren't broken up into them, and don't utilize many parts for themselves from outside sources. Just like BSD operating systems, they've got a whole made by the same people. With the most important component of these systems being, guess which part, the kernel! I know because Debian GNU/kFreeBsd was a thing and I say this hodgepodge does deserve the name because the kernel was broken out of a while in which it normally operates, that being FreeBSD. Even then, sorry not a GNU OS but a FreeBSD one as it's more likely to work with software and ports for that system.

Linux has no such whole. Even if you try to claim it having one historically and through how many distributions do use GNU.

And last. Stop talking like it's 1993 and Linux just began. The world's changed Jack, and so did the wording with it.

Also you are the principal type of person that the FSF loves, and one which has made me no longer care for them that much. Resorting to meaningless debates and shit flinging that the rest of the community had already sorted out years ago, essentially being wreckers that add nothing new to the discussion and taking away everyone's time from now important matters. Those being, actually promoting and furthering the existence of Free Software and the idea of it.

But the most important part to realize, is that Free Software will perish under capitalism. Capitalism is my prime enemy, because I'm a Marxist first and Free Software extremist second. Be pragmatic, not dogmatic.

EDIT: Just take a look at my PFP and the communities I moderate on Lemmygrad. That should tell you enough about me. Because I know my shit, and I've read everything you linked to me before.

given the long history of documented misogyny attributable to him ('not aware of any women contributors to GCC or Emacs', Emacs virgins joke, etc.) you'd have to be awful fucking naive to think he didn't contribute to that

again, do some fucking self crit we're begging you

I do not respect the FSF nor the OSI, yes, that is correct.

The fossil fuel industry is an excellent metaphor actually, It is winning. It continues to win. The propagation of "green" alternatives has done nothing to slow it down. Cap and trade has not slowed it down. Numerous international agreements that NGOs have pushed for and that have been signed and summarily ignored by partner nations have done nothing to slow it down. Lib green politics has only served to give cover to governments that need to pretend that they're doing something.

CW: csam, SA.

Okay, I'll be honest and I went and dug into the controversial stuff he apparently said. Considering he's ND, I find it a bit uncomfortable that the whole world seemed to take a lot of it out of context, since he's retracted his views on children SA and has hurt no one. I don't want to further this act of ableism.

Originally, I wasn't commenting on those scandals. I admit I didn't even know all that much about them. I used to just read his political notes before I was radicalized and now looking back a lot of his notes, there's a lot of liberal takes on China, HK and the likes that I have no interest in reading about anymore, because he doesn't engage with those topics with as much nuance as he does with his main work and other US/EU topics. I'll edit to retract the sentiment in my OP where it indicated that he's "old and irrelevant".

He advocates for social justice alongside very militant software beliefs that honestly should be pinned, and not mixed in between with his liberal world news stuff. However, he can structure his blog anyway he wants to.

The point is, I have no ill beliefs regarding his profession work. I also don't really find it necessary to "dunk" on his takes, most of them are good, perhaps lacking a bit of reading at most (but that's not his field). He seems to have received enough hate from people that just heard and regurgitate the sentiment that "he's weird", which is indeed, like you said, character assassination to a certain extent.

At the very least the Epstein stuff and the pedo defending make him extremely . People here labelled Chomsky a pedo for less.

The double standard regarding the "old blog posts" is weird to me as well. Imagine if Shabibo or Jordan Peterson had written something like that, they'd be rightfully raked over the coals for it even if it was "decades ago", but this fucker gets a pass.

Capitalism destroys everything it touches. The Free Software movement should be an openly and completely anticapitalist one. Allowing capitalism in is ultimately what led to the Open Source wreckers.

deleted by creator

Removed by mod