Hilariously janky. He can't watch something on zoom because of proprietary software. I can't watch Richard Stallman because the free software he is streaming with doesn't seem to work...
No, the Free Software Foundation has decided that the best person to be the public face of the movement, the best person to represent Free Software, is a walking media shitstorm known to creep on women and actively drive them away from participating with his behavior[0], who seems to spend an awful lot of words defending pedophiles on his blog, and who eats his toenails on camera.
That's who they think is the best leader to grow the Free Software movement.
Truth always lies in the middle. I suggest to read this article by Hannah Wolfman-Jones with a response from civil-rights expert Nadine Strossen about the whole ordeal and make up your mind [0]. I am indifferent but I think everyone should read the two sides of the story
Free software wouldn't even exist as a movement if it weren't for Stallman. Linux and *BSD wouldn't exist. Emacs and gcc wouldn't exist. Stallman is the FSF and they're irrelevant without him.
stallmans the founder and face of the free software movement plus most people like him despite the numerous hitpieces and toxic comments such as your own
More relevant than ever. I doubt you can find someone with a better accuracy track record than RMS. Unfortunately, the mass public, even apparently the mass HN public, simply doesn’t care until it’s too late to matter. That isn’t due to a lack of “relevance”.
If I dance in the nude on my roof every morning to stop climate change then my goals are very relevant, but my methods at actually doing something about it are not.
You "blame" the public and HN for not caring. I blame the FSF for being a horribly ineffective organisation to actually spear their message, much less enact any political change.
Yes they are; I think their mission is more important now than ever.
The same cannot be said for RMS however. His computing habits are so far detached from the reality of 99.9% of users that I feel he's become a caricature of himself, to say nothing of his problematic behavior that actively harms the image of the free software movement.
FSF needs to grow up and bring on a figurehead who's more broadly palatable.
I think what some are arguing, is not that their mission isn't important. It's that the FSF, at this point, is neither capable of carrying that mission, nor relevant (beyond historic interest) to that mission. Their inability to function without RMS shows that.
The SFC is today a much more relevant and capable organisation carrying the mission of software freedom.
Readit News
@ https://www.fsf.org/live
A player will be embedded in the page closer to the broadcast time.
That's who they think is the best leader to grow the Free Software movement.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21055792
[0] https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web
Deleted Comment
You "blame" the public and HN for not caring. I blame the FSF for being a horribly ineffective organisation to actually spear their message, much less enact any political change.
The same cannot be said for RMS however. His computing habits are so far detached from the reality of 99.9% of users that I feel he's become a caricature of himself, to say nothing of his problematic behavior that actively harms the image of the free software movement.
FSF needs to grow up and bring on a figurehead who's more broadly palatable.
The SFC is today a much more relevant and capable organisation carrying the mission of software freedom.