I’ve tried using my incredible (british) brain using Google to see if these open source titans ever engaged in a battle of “friendly conversation” with one another.

I was always interested what Stallman thought of the angry but smart finnish man who gave us the robust penguin kernel that breathes life into older machines and powers supercomputers for the weather.

The same with Torvalds thoughts on Stallmans GNU involvement and him as a person.

This is because you sometimes had different organisations in the FOSS and OSS community that take on different meanings so I wanted a better idea if these chaps ever spoke in an interview together.

TLDR : Does finnish man like bearded GNU jesus man and the same vice versa

  • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    5 days ago

    Unfortunately, that is not the case. Stallman is absolutely a defender of having sex with children.

    Richard Stallman on paedophilia:

    “The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, ‘prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia’ also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally–but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.”

    RMS on June 28th, 2003

    “I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.”

    RMS on June 5th, 2006

    “There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.”

    RMS on Jan 4th, 2013

    I understand that Stallman has excellent views on liberty in software, and he’s made enormous contributions to FOSS. But that does not necessarily mean he’s a good person or that all of his views are good ones. People are flawed. IMO his views on the morality of having sex with children aren’t good ones, but I recognise that I agree with him in other ways.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      0·
      5 days ago

      “There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.”

      But per the quote above, you can’t have willing participation, it is always coerced.

      IDK, you don’t provide sources, I hope your examples are misunderstood or out of context. Even if there isn’t evidence to show harm, it is still possible to err on the side of caution. It doesn’t mean he supports it.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        5 days ago

        I’d say the quotes above show he absolutely believes children are capable of consent. Why else would he use phrases like

        • “it’s fine so long as nobody is coerced”

        • “willing participation in pedophilia”

        • “the arguments [against having sex with children] seem to be based on cases that aren’t voluntary” (NONE OF THEM ARE VOLUNTARY! CHILDREN CANNOT CONSENT!)

        It doesn’t mean he supports it.

        He explicitly said it should be legal, and also alluded that parents are just prudish if they don’t want their children to be having sex. It’s very clear he supports it.

        You’ll be able to find this stuff in the articles that went around when he was pressured to resign from the FSF and from his role at MIT. It’s primarily quotes from him on his own site, stallman.org.

        • Shareni@programming.dev
          0·
          4 days ago

          Pre-blowback: fucking children is fine if they consent to it

          Post-blowback: friends explained to me that it hurts the children and that they can’t consent