Elias @eliasr@librem.one

@jfred @zwol @brainwane

I was thinking that, regarding Signal, maybe it does not matter so much that there are no commits since April 2020 because we anyway don't know what software they have been running on the server side. We don't know that neither before or after April 2020.

They could run something quite different, that just seems the same from the outside. Or they could just add some secret patches on top of the open-source code.

Or is there some way to verify what the server runs?

@brainwane Don't know, but I always wondered if it makes sense to talk about the server side of anything being open-source.

I mean, on my own computer it makes sense to want open-source software because I can verify it and I can modify it as I want.

But on someone else's server, if they say things are "open-source", I can anyway never verify that, and I can't change anything. In the server case "open-source" is just something they say, sounds good, but I don't know if it is true.

> brutality

Bullying tactics used to throw RMS out of the organization he founded while portraying him as a terrible person.

> the elite

Big Tech firms rejoice as RMS and FSF suffer, with Microsoft most clearly involved via Github.

Anyway, I recommend listening to the song, it's really good.

"What? The land of the free? Whoever told you that is your enemy!"

The whole album is good. It was a big deal when I was in high school. Still good stuff today. 🙂

> Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission

A stubborn person like RMS must compromise his beliefs and conform to the norms, it is not acceptable for him to be different.

> ignorance

People attacking RMS without knowing what they are talking about.

> hypocrisy

Excluding a person in the name of inclusiveness, in a letter preaching "digital autonomy" while hosted on Github, owned by Microsoft.

(to be continued)

Just listened to the great Rage Against the Machine song "Know Your Enemy", it struck me how it relates to the #RMS debate.

Here is how it ends:

"Yes, I know my enemies"

"They're the teachers who taught me to fight me"

"Compromise,
conformity,
assimilation,
submission,
ignorance,
hypocrisy,
brutality,
the elite"

"All of which are American dreams"

Thinking about those "enemies" in the context of the RMS debate and the infamous open letter:

(to be continued)

@xiroux We, human beings, need to control our technology instead of being enslaved by it. Free software allows us to take back control.

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

I did not mean this to become such a long rant, but anyway, there is is.

To summarize: the open letter, supposedly meant to fight for inclusion, itself has a fundamentally flawed approach to inclusion.

Therefore, signing the open letter is not a good thing to do. Note that this issue is bigger than RMS, and bigger than FOSS.

Do you see what I mean?

I have a couple of other comments as well, would you like to hear them?

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

After a while you detect that there are other misogynists in the FOSS world, they must also be removed. Who decides this? The power lies with those who have the magic power to determine who is a misogynist and who is not a misogynist. Note that this is in reality pretty much arbitrary since prejudice affects all of us from time to time, none of us is perfect.

I hope you get the point, why that is not a good system for the future.

(to be continued)

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

The people who signed the letter think that this is how the fight against misogyny is to be done: find the misogynists and remove them. This is problematic in several ways.

To understand why this is bad, consider the future. Assume that you succeed in removing RMS, that terrible misogynist.

(to be continued)

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

The open letter, in labeling RMS as "misogynist" and so on, as if that is his identity, makes a serious mistake.

Apparently, according to the letter, the fight against misogyny is about classifying people into two groups: some are misogynists, others are not misogynist. The people who signed the letter want to tell the world that RMS is a misogynist, while they are not misogynists.

(to be continued)

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

The open letter labels RMS as "misogynist", among other things.

You did mention that one of you found that problematic, but still you seem to look at it as a minor issue since you say you might anyway sign the letter.

Let me explain why it should not be considered a minor issue.

We live in a patriarchy, prejudice against women is everywhere and we are all part of it, we all need to think about how we act.

(to be continued)

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

Thanks for talking about this very important issue.

Having listened and thought about it for a while, I want to voice my disagreement regarding the open letter.

You said that one of you signed and one of you did not sign, but might end up signing after all. So overall that signals that you think it is probably a good idea to sign the open letter.

I object to this. Please hear me out.

(to be continued)

@redstarfish This is wonderful news!

Now if other government entities (local, regional, national) both in Germany and elsewhere look at that and the arguments behind it, how can they not follow suit?

@akenyg

https://bahnhof.se/press/press-releases/2021/04/01/bahnhof-lanserar-stream-share-alla-stromningstjanster-i-ett-enda-paket

@t0k There is something very weird about the fact that a whole bunch of organizations have decided to officially sign a text that makes grave personal attacks against an individual person.

How can that be even remotely okay with the stated purposes of those organizations, according to by-laws or whatever rules they have?

@volt4ire

> fuck you

I don't think that kind of language is helpful.

Could you please explain what you mean in a more respectful manner?

Preferably, start by reading what she wrote there and then comment on that. I would like to hear what you think about it.

@zbrown

> it's the best kind of contribution

Thanks 🙂

I was surprised to see your name in the list of signatures under the "open letter", after I have having read some different viewpoints for example this https://libreboot.org/news/rms.html and this https://www.arp242.net/rms.html it's hard for me to understand. Could you explain?

@joacim

> no other foundation, corporation or similar would put a person with that track record in a public facing leadership position. And yet, FSF did.

True. Note however that he is the founder of the FSF, kicking out the founder is a special situation, maybe not easy.

> a boost does not imply endorsement

Sure. Thanks for explaining what you meant.

Anyway, in my opinion, if more people did like like arp242 and thought carefully before accusing someone, the world would be a better place.