Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the resign:-to-sign-and-sign-again? dept.

Richard M. Stallman Resigns as FSF President and from its Board of Directors

https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-m-stallman-resigns (emphasis from original retained):

On September 16, 2019, Richard M. Stallman, founder and president of
the Free Software Foundation, resigned as president and from its board
of directors.

The board will be conducting a search for a new president, beginning
immediately. Further details of the search will be published on
fsf.org.

For questions, contact FSF executive director John Sullivan at
johns@fsf.org.

Copyright © 2004-2019 Free Software Foundation, Inc. Privacy Policy.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 license (or later version)Why this license?

Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Resigns from MIT Over Epstein Comments

Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Resigns From MIT Over Epstein Comments

Famed free software advocate and computer scientist Richard Stallman has resigned from MIT, according to an email he published online. The resignation comes after Stallman made comments about victims of child trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, including that the victims went along with the abuse willingly.

"I am resigning effective immediately from my position in CSAIL at MIT," Stallman wrote in the email, referring to MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. "I am doing this due to pressure on MIT and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations."

[...] Last week, Motherboard published the full email thread in which Stallman wrote that the "most plausible scenario" is that Epstein's underage victims in his campaign of trafficking were "entirely willing." Stallman also argued about the definition of "rape" and whether the term applies to the victims.

[Ed.'s note - just because Vice say things in the above blockquote does not mean that SoylentNews or its editors consider it a demonstrably provable representation of reality. We're just reporting that they are reporting, nothing more. At least this Ed. finds out-of-context quoting of short inflamatory phrases to be particularly disingenuous, and perhaps even a warning sign that manipulation of a quote has taking place. -- FP.]


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:35AM (20 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:35AM (#895031)

    "Entirely willingly"? This is what these people will never understand. Children cannot "will". They are not competent to make contracts, they cannot enlist in the military, and they cannot vote, and they certainly cannot "consent" to fuck Stallman, ESR, Ted Nugent, or Ted Cruz, no matter what the Bible says. So get this through your head, "No means no, and 'yes' by a minor still means 'no'". This is why the Runaway1956 confines hisself to livestock. While they, too, cannot grant consent, they also cannot tattle on you. Except for the DNA evidence, that comes (so to speak) out as foreign matter contamination in the sausage. Pro, or just plain common sense, tip: Never eat sausage from Arkansas.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Troll=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:42AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:42AM (#895037)

    16 and 17 year olds can consent to sexual activity in the majority of the U.S.

    • (Score: 1, Troll) by barbara hudson on Thursday September 19 2019, @12:53AM

      by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Thursday September 19 2019, @12:53AM (#895922) Journal
      There's a 5-year age difference allowance in some states. A 15-year old cannot consent to fuck RMS, despite how he says age should be irrelevant. And some states are so hill-billy white pride backwards that they can marry their underage first cousins. Same thing with uneducated people being Trump supporters. And being against same sex relationships, even though their pastors keep getting caught in all sorts of sexual hijinks. But, like Trump, they get a pass.

      RMS is trying to defend the indefensible, because he doesn't understand people, and he thinks that people should change their way of thinking rather than having any personal insight into the huge gaps in his knowledge.

      If aliens with an IQ of 2,500 came to earth he'd be telling them that they were wrong because he is a narcissist.

      --
      SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19 2019, @03:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19 2019, @03:36PM (#896120)

      But if they send a nudie pic to their classmate they suddenly found themselves at the sharp end of a pedo conviction...

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:47AM (7 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:47AM (#895039)

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richard-stallman-described-epstein-victims-as-entirely-willing [vice.com]

    Stallman emphatically did not say this woman was willing. He said that those who had sex with her may have thought she was (and may have thought she was legal -- in the incident discussed, she was 17 -- can you tell the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old without looking at their birth certificate?) , in that Epstein was coercing her to do this stuff -- and she likely didn't parade in and say, "Jeff is forcing me to have sex with you. Let's get naked."

    Stallman's argument (which in no way blamed the woman involved and in no way excused her treatment or Epstein's crimes) was cogent and logical. And it in no way did any victim blaming. At all.

    Why don't you read the email thread and decide for yourself?

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Pino P on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:13PM (6 children)

      by Pino P (4721) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:13PM (#895148) Journal

      can you tell the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old without looking at their birth certificate?

      Neither can tobacco dealers. This is why they ask for ID [wecard.org] before selling tobacco or vapor products.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by chewbacon on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:37PM

        by chewbacon (1032) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:37PM (#895157)

        This! I was maybe 21, DJing a highschool dance (great way to earn beer money and when it's a club, meet women). Some girl came up asked if I wanted to hang out sometime, gave me her number. I peered at her "How old are you??" "I'm 19, I swear." "You look the same age as everyone here!" "No, no, I'm chaperoning my sister." "This is gonna sound really out of place, but do you have ID?" She produced it. We went out once.

        A friend of a friend didn't exercise this kind of caution and ended up ruining his life over a 15 year old girl when he was 18. Hearsay story goes something like: she was really into me, she told me she was 16 (which is legal in that state, a 16yo and 18yo could knock boots). Could've prevented it if he stopped thinking with his penis and used his brain for a second.

      • (Score: 3, Touché) by cmdrklarg on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:13PM (4 children)

        by cmdrklarg (5048) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:13PM (#895229)

        And they NEVER have fake ID either.

        --
        The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:10PM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:10PM (#895400)

          And to makes matters worse, a fake ID isn't a valid defense for statutory rape.

          • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:54AM (2 children)

            by Pino P (4721) on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:54AM (#895448) Journal

            What other than marriage is a valid defense for statutory rape?

            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:41AM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:41AM (#895475)

              Ah, yes, the marriage exception, where full-grown adults can repeatedly rape and impregnate little girls. That truly makes me believe that society cares about protecting children, and that it isn't just some phony outrage by-and-large.

              • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday September 19 2019, @01:04AM

                by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Thursday September 19 2019, @01:04AM (#895930) Journal

                Maybe in the US, but in Canada sexual assault is sexual assault, marriage or no marriage. Surreptitiously removing a condom during sex is also sexual assault. No valid consent == rape. Withdrawal of consent during the act, you don't stop, == rape. Too drunk to give proper consent, even with consent, == rape.

                Don't like it, get a RealDoll or continue dating Thumbellina and her four sisters.

                When 97% of sexual assaults against women don't result in a conviction, and womaen are afraid to go through a dehumanizing process that 97% of the time gives back a big "fuck you bitch", it's not like the odds of getting convicted are much of a disincentive.

                --
                SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:54AM (5 children)

    by Arik (4543) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:54AM (#895042) Journal
    "Children cannot "will"."

    This is not at all consistent with my memories of childhood.

    "They are not competent to make contracts"

    Typically true, but not always. C.f. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors

    There's a subtle point that too often gets massacred here. It is indeed the case that we have an assumption in law that a minor cannot consent. This is done for good reason, don't get me wrong. But it's actively harmful to minors, particularly those who are victims of abuse, to pretend there is NO DIFFERENCE between violently forcing them and impermissably enticing them. They may both be illegal under the same statute, but they're very different cases in other ways. Confusing the two can cause unnecessary and inappropriate pain and shame to the victims going both directions.

    Children DO have will. They are merely presumed to be insufficiently prepared to rely on it.
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by choose another one on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:06PM (4 children)

      by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:06PM (#895168)

      It is indeed the case that we have an assumption in law that a minor cannot consent.

      Who is the "we" with that assumption?

      Age of majority relates solely to legal control over one's person / actions (and hence to contracts, although with some exceptions as you say).
      Age of consent for sex, as with age of license for other actions, is totally unrelated, if it is the same where you are that is pure coincidence.

      A lot of US states have age-of-consent below 18, most of Europe is 14-16 (yes, you read that right 14 - heck, Spain was 12 before the millennium) - and many of those have further exceptions which reduce it in the case of similar aged participants. Elsewhere in the world it's even more variable if anything.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe [wikipedia.org]
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States [wikipedia.org]
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority [wikipedia.org]

      Children DO have will.

      Hell yes - as any parent knows, even before they hit their teens. Their competency in exercising it doesn't magically appear at age of majority either.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:36PM (3 children)

        by Arik (4543) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:36PM (#895312) Journal
        "Who is the "we" with that assumption?"

        Pretty much the entire planet reflects that assumption in law to some degree.

        "Age of majority relates solely to legal control over one's person / actions (and hence to contracts, although with some exceptions as you say).
        Age of consent for sex, as with age of license for other actions, is totally unrelated, if it is the same where you are that is pure coincidence."

        I disagree completely, they are not at all unrelated. They're rooted in the same rationale. The minor variations in the specifics do not alter that.

        "A lot of US states have age-of-consent below 18, most of Europe is 14-16 (yes, you read that right 14 - heck, Spain was 12 before the millennium)"

        IIRC Mississippi allowed 13 in certain circumstances until recently. But so what? It doesn't change the underlying assumption driving the laws, you're talking about fine-tuning the arbitrary cutoff points. You can smoke and drive at one age, drink at another, that doesn't mean the laws that say this aren't based on the same fundamental assumption.

        --
        If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
        • (Score: 2) by choose another one on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:46PM (2 children)

          by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:46PM (#895635)

          you're talking about fine-tuning the arbitrary cutoff points. You can smoke and drive at one age, drink at another, that doesn't mean the laws that say this aren't based on the same fundamental assumption.

          That common assumption is that there should be a cutoff point in age, this is very different to "assumption in law that a minor cannot consent".

          What I disagreed with, and still do, is that the cutoff point is assumed to be the same for not-being-a-minor and consent-to-sex - for a lot of (maybe most of) the planet it quite simply isn't.

          • (Score: 2) by Arik on Thursday September 19 2019, @05:37AM (1 child)

            by Arik (4543) on Thursday September 19 2019, @05:37AM (#895996) Journal
            "That common assumption is that there should be a cutoff point in age,"

            That the younger people are not yet prepared to rely on their own judgement and/or will.

            "this is very different to "assumption in law that a minor cannot consent"."

            Is it? Isn't the whole idea of minority that young people are not completely prepared to exercise judgement?
            --
            If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
            • (Score: 2) by choose another one on Friday September 20 2019, @10:01AM

              by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Friday September 20 2019, @10:01AM (#896444)

              > Isn't the whole idea of minority that young people are not completely prepared to exercise judgement?

              No. The whole idea of minority is that someone else (usually parent/guardian) has legal/financial control over, and responsibility for, your affairs. Nothing more.

              You may be confusing minority with "age of license" which is a general legal concept of being old enough to have permission to do something in law (including, but not limited to, consent to sex). The fact that minors around the world can, and do, legally consent to sex, demonstrates clearly that the law considers minors adequately prepared to exercise judgement for the purposes of consent to sex.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:40PM (2 children)

    by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:40PM (#895315)

    What the hell does any of this have to do with Runaway? Stop with the bitching already

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:55PM (#895319)

      Runaway, khallow, alt-right, etc etc live rent free in aristarchu's head, so they're always on topic!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @10:51PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @10:51PM (#895391)

      DFTT? Just a thought.