Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Drew DeVault (drewdevault@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:00:32 JST Drew DeVault

   Copyleft licenses are not “restrictive”

   https://drewdevault.com/2024/04/19/2024-04-19-Copyleft-is-not-restrictive.html

   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:00:32 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     @drewdevault I cant tell you how many times people released their innovated idea under a copy-left license only to be angered when they realized the consequences, the vital nature, and the lock-in that resulted. Many abandoned the project and had to start over...

     To each their own, but I will never use a copyleft license again.

   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:03:49 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     @drewdevault No, I didnt say anything about proprietary software. And it allows for that just fine.

   • Embed this notice
     Drew DeVault (drewdevault@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:03:50 JST Drew DeVault

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     @freemo oh no, it prevented you from making proprietary software, what a tragedy...

     翠星石 likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:07:48 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     @drewdevault

     I assume you mean "virality".. and no, it prevents quite a bit else.. for example it prevents switching or in some cases even using other copy-left licenses. It is also well known for not working well along side other open-source licenses in general.

     There have been countless open-source projects that had to be abandoned and restarted from scratch due to the virality of a copyleft license that prevented progress regarding open-source interests due to licensing conflicts.

   • Embed this notice
     Drew DeVault (drewdevault@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:07:49 JST Drew DeVault

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     @freemo that's literally the only thing that vitality prevents

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:22:36 JST 翠星石

     in reply to
     @drewdevault I believe one point that you missed is that the licenses in the GPL family are crafted to contain no restrictions, rather only *permissions*.
     
     The government says you may not share, modify or understand the software etc, but the GPLv3 says you *can*, just as long as you don't *restrict* these freedoms for other people.
     
     I wouldn't call these terms obligations, as you aren't required to take any action at all - just to not carry out restrictive actions.
   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:32:56 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     @drewdevault

     X.org server I think was the one that had to be abandoned, or was it XFree86.. one of the major X11 implementations had to be completely abandoned and rewritten as whatever replaced it.

   • Embed this notice
     Drew DeVault (drewdevault@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:32:57 JST Drew DeVault

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     @freemo name one?

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 22:37:32 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     @freemo >the viral nature
     No copyleft license acts as a virus, as copyright cannot infect merely aggregated software - it's a spider plant nature, if you explicitly take a piece, the freedom grows.
     
     >the lock-in that resulted
     Please don't twist terms to suit your argument.
     
     License incompatibility is completely different to lock-in
     
     >for example it prevents switching or in some cases even using other copy-left licenses
     If you want to change the license, you need permission from all copyright holders - this is true for all licenses.
     
     >There have been countless open-source projects that had to be abandoned and restarted from scratch
     I've only really heard of cases where people developing a project wanted to make things proprietary and a freedom defending license said no - which is a feature and not a bug.
     
     I've heard of a few cases where projects determined that there was an incompatibility with other projects due to a poor licensing choice, but in the end, the goal of compatibility was reached by asking copyright holders to relicense and re-writing the few parts by non-cooperative or unreachable holders, but certainly not to the level of a full re-write.
     
     
     People and those writing licenses have had 17+ years to be compatible with the GPLv3, so compatibility problems now were arguably foreseeable and intentionally made (too bad some people are still intentionally setting themselves up to be incompatible with the GPLv4 (if it's ever required), by licensing GPLv3-only or LGPLv3-only).
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:00:37 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     @freemo Actually looking up the details, XFree86 wasn't copylefted or abandoned and rewritten - someone just finished off waning developer interest by adding credit requirements that were incompatible with the GPLv2 (despite the ease of achieving the same thing without being GPLv2-incompatible); https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFree86?useskin=monobook#2004:_Licensing_controversy https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#XFree861.1License
     
     In response to the poor license change, some developers forked a version before the change and made it into X.Org Server (only small changes were made after that version, so "completely abandoned and rewritten" to refer to rewriting small changes is completely wrong).
   • Embed this notice
     djsumdog (djsumdog@djsumdog.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:06:54 JST djsumdog

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     Yea I remember when this a happened too .. I would download and run the latest XFree86 binaries instead of using the ones from Slackware. There was a whole kerfuffle about attribution. Xorg stayed GPL.
     
     GPL/AGPL are for people who don't want their software to ever become part of an AWS/Azure offering or packaged commercially without code changes being released. But if you're writing a library in GPL (and it's not LGPL) don't expect anyone to use it. My current company has strict license checks as part of VC funding and we've removed and replaced parts of the code if it's discovered a dependent license is GPL (there's a CI check to prevent this now).
   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:12:42 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     @drewdevault

     It literally did, though as pointed out by another commenter it didnt require a complete rewrite only partial, but did require a complet reorg and rename.

   • Embed this notice
     Drew DeVault (drewdevault@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:12:44 JST Drew DeVault

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     @freemo that didn't have anything to do with copyleft.

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:35:15 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     @djsumdog >But if you're writing a library in GPL (and it's not LGPL) don't expect anyone to use it.
     Proprietary software developers being unable to use it is the whole point.
     
     They either can join the free world and respect the users freedom, or they can't use the best libraries in the world is one of the tactics that GNU uses to defend freedom.
     
     At least one piece of software that was proprietary is now free due to the choice of GNU Readline using the ordinary GPL (GPLv2+ I believe, although its GPLv3+ now) - the developer could have torn out line editing support, but determined it was easier to stop trampling the users freedom (too bad someone has now written a readline implementation that doesn't defend freedom, but thankfully that rarely happens); https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
     
     GPLv3+ libraries are used heavily in free software - exactly where they're intended to be used, despite how hard those with proprietary agendas seethe.
     
     
     Btw, there's a good chance that proprietary software company is infringing the LGPLv2 and LGPLv3 by a blanket freedom-denying clause that also demands that reverse engineering to find the malware is not allowed, while those 2 licenses require that reverse engineering for the purpose of debugging modifications is allowed.
   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:37:26 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog

     @djsumdog

     I have no real issue with anyone using GPL.. you are giving your time for free, put whatever rules on your contribution you want, im just happy your contributing.

     But **I** will never contribute to a copyleft project, and I certainly never want to be limited with how I can use my own projects either. So I will certainly never support anything copyleft if ic an help it.

     @Suiseiseki

   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:38:35 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     @freemo @djsumdog well then GPL is working as intended. its meant to cut off proprietarybros from the commons.
     Sick Sun likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:43:00 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     • iced depresso
     • djsumdog

     @icedquinn

     The vasy majority of my contributions are in no way proprietary and have no real use for me in a proprietary setting. Some other stuff does.

     And yea, it is doing its job by cutting off developers from wanting to contribute to it, which is why copyleft has been dying out significantly in recent years and largely replaced with MIT and apache licenses.

     The trend of GPL to isolate itself and push developers away by punishing the very people who release under it is exactly why its dying.

     @djsumdog

     Sick Sun repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     djsumdog (djsumdog@djsumdog.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:43:52 JST djsumdog

     in reply to

     • iced depresso
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     Just out of curiosity, do you use a Linux as your operating system? Or are you on Win/Mac?
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:47:01 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     @djsumdog Linux is not an operating system, as it doesn't operate unless you at least add systemd (or another init); https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/init/main.c#n1492
   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:47:07 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     • iced depresso
     • djsumdog

     @djsumdog

     Linux, usually ArchLinux or NixOS, lately NixOS has become my main choice.

     @icedquinn

   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:48:37 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     @freemo @djsumdog they just hate copyleft because its doing its job.
     
     there were always huge FUD pushes and smear campaigns and pushes to exile GPL code, until big tech discovered the network loophole. then suddenly GPL was fine because it didn't affect their ability to colonize the commons anymore. then AGPL comes along and fixes that, and suddenly GPL is bad again.
     
     Except for VC frauds who were never open source, and were always just using that as a gimmick to submarine their way in before the license twist came.
     
     (FWIW i think OSLv3 is a much cleaner license than AGPL; it's mostly the same thing, but significantly easier to read, even though one or two bullet points are left out on purpose because they didn't want to try to explain linking to judges.)
     
     Rich Gold's _The Plenitude_ is a good book on that one. There's a chapter where he talks about "colonizing the commons" and the constant trend companies have to take what belongs to everyone, proprietarize it, and then seek to make people dependent on it. And they pretty much do it automatically, impulsively, thus why it is necessary to explicitly oxidize the behavior.
     djsumdog and Sick Sun like this.
   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:49:34 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     • Ailunarenth
     @Ailunarenth gpl doesn't require dividends. it just requires the code be open and serviceable.
     
     @djsumdog @freemo
   • Embed this notice
     Ailunarenth (ailunarenth@breastmilk.club)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:49:35 JST Ailunarenth

     in reply to

     • iced depresso
     • djsumdog
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     Not really. GPL licenced software is still getting lifted and implemented into proprietary projects without paying dividends back to the maintainers that are developing the underlying project.

     That is to say nothing of people and their inability to separate their politics from the free and open source projects they participate in, giving rise to a gatekeeping and exclusionary environments through policies intended to promote diversity and inclusion.

     @icedquinn @djsumdog @freemo

     #Hyprland, #FOSS, #FreeSoftware, #OpenSource, #OSS, #Wayland, #FreeDesktop, #RedHat, #FreedomOfSpeech, #FreedomOfExpression, #Politics.

   • Embed this notice
     djsumdog (djsumdog@djsumdog.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:51:03 JST djsumdog

     in reply to

     • iced depresso
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     • Ailunarenth

     I thought proprietary project could use GPL code, even for commercial offerings, without releasing the code. If they packaged it and sold it to you as something you ran, then it's a GPL violation. That's the whole reason AGPL was created, because people were doing "cloud offerings" of GPL stuff with their mods without releasing those modifications.

     That's also how you get non-FOSS licenses like the Redis license, the Elastic license, etc. .. You know, I highly doubt the AGPL would be approved as an OSI compliant open source license if it was written today.

   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:52:03 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     • Ailunarenth
     @djsumdog @Ailunarenth @freemo the reason those other licenses are rejected is because they discriminate on what you can do with the code.
     
     agpl doesn't discriminate. you can do anything with the code, you can make a competing database engine, you just cannot close the source.
   • Embed this notice
     Hugo 雨果 (whynothugo@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:53:39 JST Hugo 雨果

     in reply to

     @drewdevault The CDDL restricts me from mixing to code with GPL'd code. I really don't see a way to frame this as an obligation.

     Sick Sun likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     djsumdog (djsumdog@djsumdog.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:56:38 JST djsumdog

     in reply to

     • iced depresso
     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     Everything that use in your desktop environment, every single tool, came from the GPL era of the 90s/2000s. Even as some of the default licenses people use has changed, nothing on the Linux desktop would exist without the GPL and the impossibility of Microsoft to compete with truly free software (well without eventually trying to embrace, extend and extinguish it .. which is still hasn't done .. not really).
     
     Even the Mastodon server you run is AGPLv3.
   • Embed this notice
     djsumdog (djsumdog@djsumdog.com)'s status on Friday, 19-Apr-2024 23:57:40 JST djsumdog

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     Hey guys check it out! We've got a Richard M. Stallin over here! "WELL AKUCHULLY" "GNU+LINUX"
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 00:02:51 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     @freemo >I will never contribute to a copyleft project,
     I have little interest in contributing to a project that won't defend the freedom of my work, so I have contributed to copylefted projects, but never to pushover-licensed ones.
     
     >I certainly never want to be limited with how I can use my own projects either.
     I suggest never using other developers libraries and writing everything yourself, if you feel like you're limited by not holding all of the copyright.
     
     >which is why copyleft has been dying out significantly in recent years and largely replaced with MIT and apache licenses.
     The fact is it hasn't - there exists more copylefted software now then in the past and freedom is being defended better than ever before.
     
     Yes, microsoft and others have tricked many new developers into doing gratis work for them and their buddies, by making it seem that MIT expat and Apache 2.0 has "largely replaced" freedom-defending licenses, so more and more people make the mistake of using those licenses.
     
     If they could, microsoft would make it that you couldn't even select say the GPLv3 as the license on github, but instead they've settled for making it ambiguous if a project is GPLv3-only or GPLv3-or-later (proven to be intentional as they refused to accept commits correcting this issue).
     
     >The trend of GPL to isolate itself and push developers away by punishing the very people who release under it is exactly why its dying.
     In reality, the floating island of freedom is bolstering itself slowly but surely with only high-quality developers, rather than welcoming low-quality ones, who will turn around and make the software proprietary.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 00:05:14 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Ailunarenth
     @Ailunarenth >GPL licenced software is still getting lifted and implemented into proprietary projects
     Please point out which distributed software this is occurring in, so it can be reported to the copyright holders and freedom ensured.
   • Embed this notice
     🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 00:06:36 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     • 翠星石

     You do you.. most developers prefer apache license these days, im one.. you dont, and are in a minority, thats your right.

     @Suiseiseki

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 00:09:34 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     @djsumdog Don't forget there's 3 versions of the AGPL.
     
     >I highly doubt the AGPL would be approved as an OSI compliant open source license if it was written today.
     The goal of the AGPLv3 is to be a free software license that ensures freedom, not "open source".
     
     Even if it was written today, it still passes the 10 requirements.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 00:13:00 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     @freemo >most developers prefer apache license these days
     Source?
     
     I see that Apache 2.0 may be the most preferred license on github and other proprietary code hosts, but those aren't the only places to host software.
     
     >are in a minority
     Yes, freedom enjoyers have always been a minority, but just look how much has been done.
   • Embed this notice
     Ailunarenth (ailunarenth@breastmilk.club)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 00:25:34 JST Ailunarenth

     in reply to

     • 翠星石

     The Linux kernel with Android is probably one of the more well known cases of a company using free software in a proprietary project. There’s also Microsoft using the GNU core utils on Windows to emulate a WLS2 environment.

     @Suiseiseki

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 00:25:34 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Ailunarenth
     @Ailunarenth >The Linux kernel
     Don't forget that Linux is only a kernel, so you should just say Linux to refer to Linux, instead of a naming pattern that is used to name the kernels of OS's where the kernel doesn't have any particular name.
     
     >probably one of the more well known cases of a company using free software in a proprietary project.
     google tends to follow Linux's license - the issue is mainly with Chinese companies and a lack of willingness to enforce by most copyright holders of Linux.
     
     The issue could be solved tomorrow if major copyright holders informed these companies that their license is terminated and they'll be collecting damages for every following case of copyright infringement after the notice, with the license reinstated only if they start complying with the terms - but of course not.
     
     >There’s also Microsoft using the GNU coreutils on Windows to emulate a WLS2 environment.
     "WSL1" was pretty much reverse WINE (is Not an Emulator) to run GNU software and libraries without Linux (including, but not limited to coreutils; https://www.gnu.org/software/ ).
     
     "WSL2" is glorified GNU/Linux (or BusyBox/Linux) VMs, without any emulation.
     
     microsoft has been careful to comply with the license of both GNU software and Linux and they don't have the gall to dare infringe the FSF's copyright (as they know they'll be coming for the source code of *all* derivative works).
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 15:24:55 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • djsumdog
     • Yuchen Pei
     @semi @djsumdog >No, theres only one version
     Why would you doubt my word?
     
     AGPLv1; https://web.archive.org/web/20191123101252/http://www.affero.org/oagpl.html
     AGPLv2; https://web.archive.org/web/20191123102313/http://www.affero.org/agpl2.html
     AGPLv3; https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html
     
     Yes, AGPLv3 is based on GPLv3, but AGPLv1 was based on the GPLv2.
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (semi@peister.org)'s status on Saturday, 20-Apr-2024 15:25:01 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     @Suiseiseki
     > Don't forget there's 3 versions of the AGPL.
     
     No, theres only one version. It's called v3 because it's based on gplv3
     
     @djsumdog
   • Embed this notice
     get@glee.li :adm1::adm2: (get@glee.li)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 04:21:19 JST get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:

     in reply to

     • þernia
     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     • get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:
     @pernia @Suiseiseki @djsumdog https://www.foxnews.com/us/mit-professor-jeffrey-epstein-associate-entirely-willing
     twl likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     get@glee.li :adm1::adm2: (get@glee.li)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 04:21:20 JST get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:

     in reply to

     • þernia
     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     @pernia @djsumdog @Suiseiseki It's so funny RMS spending his whole life doing nothing but reciting the GNU faq but then Jeffrey Epstein getting caught is the one time when he decides to go off script and it's to defend the island LMAO
   • Embed this notice
     þernia (pernia@cum.salon)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 04:21:21 JST þernia

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     @djsumdog @Suiseiseki all this faggot does is recite the gnu faq. its pathetic
   • Embed this notice
     þernia (pernia@cum.salon)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 04:22:12 JST þernia

     in reply to

     • þernia
     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     • get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:
     @Suiseiseki @djsumdog @get it seems he's being a stupid autistic lawyer kike in here, not something unexpected or malicious. however, he didn't even offer a "more accurate term".
     
     he'll go ahead and defend a pedophile for raping a kid by downplaying the act, and suggesting a terminology hack to make it sound less bad, and won't even denounce the act itself. you may say he's being autistic or whatever, but this is peak kike wordplay, victimization of a rapist, and moral lawyering over a seps crime.
     
     Not only is richard stallman is gorilla nigger "programmer", he's a vicious, soulless, morally bankrupt kike demon.
     twl likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     þernia (pernia@cum.salon)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 04:22:13 JST þernia

     in reply to

     • þernia
     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     • get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:
     @get @Suiseiseki @djsumdog found it
     https://itsfoss.com/richard-stallman-controversy/
     
     
     The announcement of the Friday event does an injustice to Marvin Minsky:
     
     “deceased AI ‘pioneer’ Marvin Minsky (who is accused of assaulting
     one of Epstein’s victims [2])”
     
     The injustice is in the word “assaulting”. The term “sepsual assault” is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X.
     
     The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference reports the claim that Minsky had seps with one of Epstein’s harem. (See https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-seps-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed.)
     Let’s presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it).
     
     The word “assaulting” presumes that he applied force or violence, in some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing.
     Only that they had seps.
     
     We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.
     
     I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term “sepsual assault” in an accusation.
     
     Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the criticism.
   • Embed this notice
     þernia (pernia@cum.salon)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 04:22:14 JST þernia

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     • get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:
     @get @djsumdog @Suiseiseki "leaked emails" fox boomers don't know what a mailinglist is.
     
     i want to see the actual email archives, shit sounding funny as hell
     >child rape victim was probably entirely willing
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 22:10:28 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:
     @get Stop making shit up degenerate.
     
     rms called Jeffrey Epstein a serial rapist and never defended the island.
     
     He rather defended his late friend Minsky (who cannot defend himself as he's dead) from what turned out to be untrue allegations (he's one the few people who appeared to have a non-criminal reason to be on the island, as Epstein was a big MIT donator and it seems he requested that Minsky give a presentation about a nice technical topic with fancy words in return for the donations (Epstein instructed one of the victims to have sex with Minsky, but that didn't happen, presumably because Minsky said no)) and of course the proprietary software companies twisted that to say he supported Epstein, while covering up how Bill Gates was directly associated with Epstein and then idiots like you recite their propaganda without thinking.
     
     
     rms writes the GNU articles, updating them to cover recent freedom issues, rather than merely reciting them.
   • Embed this notice
     meso [netzsphaere era] (meso@netzsphaere.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 22:13:55 JST meso [netzsphaere era]

     in reply to

     • þernia
     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     • get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:
     @pernia @djsumdog @Suiseiseki @get >pernia hates rms for no reason and doesnt know the only valid reason
     翠星石 likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     þernia (pernia@cum.salon)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 22:13:56 JST þernia

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • djsumdog
     • get@glee.li :adm1::adm2:
     @get @djsumdog @Suiseiseki holy shit did he actually