/tech/ - Tech


Mode: Reply

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

(143.65 KB 1395x1395 FlICmGnj.jpeg)
Comrade 08/01/2020 (Sat) 12:41:19 No. 3770
>he isn't Marxist - Leninist - Maoist - Stallmanist ngmi You know that Stallman is basically essential to understand if you want to liberate the working class of today. He teaches us to take our digital means of production, and it can be taken a step further when applying his thought to Free and Open Source hardware designs. Read Free Software, Free Society Then to take it to the hardware level, check out the Open Source Ecology project: https://www.ted.com/talks/marcin_jakubowski_open_sourced_blueprints_for_civilization?utm_source=tedcomshare&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=tedspread THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT PROJECT FOR THE REVOLUTION but it's never being talked about >The Global Village Construction Set (GVCS) is a modular, DIY, low-cost, high-performance platform that allows for the easy fabrication of the 50 different Industrial Machines that it takes to build a small, sustainable civilization with modern comforts. We’re developing open source industrial machines that can be made at a fraction of commercial costs, and sharing our designs online for free. Also relevant is the p2pfoundation, check out this video: https://youtu.be/sO-QJLDpHQ0 and their wiki: https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Main_Page
broke: eating ass woke: eating feet
(148.08 KB 952x1400 NSFW.jpg)
>>3772 master stroke: eating pussy
>>3783 godly stroke: sucking dick
>>3783 blessed yuriposter
(824.94 KB 1200x1054 1567601792580-1.jpg)
we need a dialectical synthesis of Cockshott and Stallman through open source linear programming algorithms and P2P cryptocurrency labor vouchers
(256.74 KB 1000x758 NSFW.jpg)
>>3784 You fail, bloke, that's not how you play. You need to come up with another -oke rhyme. >>3785 An Anon of refined taste. Have some more glorious pussy munching.
>>3770 Reminder that stallman was rendered a persona non grata because he was a major roadblock in the commercialisation of the FLOSS ecosystem. He did literally nothing wrong and is a hero.
>>3811 >He did literally nothing wrong and is a hero Stallman is a fucking massively dysfunctional weirdo, he didn't get thrown out of FSF or MIT because the glowies forced him out, he publicly claimed in a widely subscribed mailing list that the friend of his that raped an underage girl provided to him by Epstein couldn't have known that the girl was underage and didn't actually want to have sex with him, which is patently ridiculous Given that he's a public figure, and said this in a public forum, he rightly drew scrutiny for it, and being a massive sperg with an overinflated ego, he refused to apologise or clarify his position and chose to leave FSF and MIT while whining in such a way as to claim he was forced out, forced out actually meaning his colleagues not being happy with his defence of a rapist and choosing to withdraw their participation His work is incredibly valuable, but he, personally, is a terrible human being, and that was just the spark that happened to burn him, he's said plenty of indefensible and bizarre shit in the past about paedophilia not being harmful to children and that necrophilia and bestiality should be legal, and has a track record of taking any criticism leveraged at him or his positions as a personal attack regardless of severity or delivery
(25.94 KB 600x375 come-on-now.jpeg)
>>3849 >he publicly claimed in a widely subscribed mailing list that the friend of his that raped an underage girl provided to him by Epstein couldn't have known that the girl was underage and didn't actually want to have sex with him You realize this is /tech/, right? We actually read news about the tech industry here. Did you actually think repeating mindless clickbait slander here of all places would pass the smell test? Apply yourself anon, this is embarrassing.
>>3852 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 “sexual 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 sex with one of Epstein’s harem. (See https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-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 sex. 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.[note 2] I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual 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. His words not mine, and later in the list see pic, also note one of those evil people that forced him out telling him to consider how his posts would effect the organisation and other members of the mailing list, which he proceeded to ignore https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6405929-09132019142056-0001.html You don't read news about the tech industry, you watch grifters on youtube and read the odd blog and twitter account
>>3853 >His words not mine Indeed, and your words back here >>3849 are rather different from his. The irony of this entire thing is that Stallman was calling out the very thing used to slander him: the use of ambiguous, imprecise words and phrases that project intent where they shouldn't.
>>3854 >My ancient friend probably didn't know that the 17 year old girl he was introduced to by the jet setting billionaire serial paedophile on his infamous sex slave rape island (after said paedophile was already registered as a sex offender) didn't actually want to have sex with the pensioner she'd just been introduced to >Is it really sexual assault if he didn't beat her into submission before having non-consensual sex with her? Do you seriously think Minsky didn't know? In what possible world could he not have known? Do you think Stallman is correct to assert his friend probably didn't know that he was raping a 17 year old girl, and that you can't describe a much older man forcing himself on an exploited teenager as sexual assault if there wasn't any physical violence involved (apart from the raping, obviously)? The entire mailing list reads like a repeat of Stallman's past ah but you see [technicality] makes it OK defences of kiddy fiddling and he can't manage to take the obvious advice that this would get to the media and that the entire thing reads like a desperate defence of Minsky But yeah, he wrote an editor, and has some good takes on software, so we should overlook this and all the other shit about it being ok to fuck corpses and dogs so long as you get consent and that people hate most paedophiles because parents don't want to admit that they're kids are blossoming
>>3855 >we should overlook this There's nothing to overlook, he literally said nothing wrong. Keep reaching, charlatan.
>>3856 Good comeback, only took you more than two hours, instead of the 30 minutes for the others, did you go away and try and find something to prove me wrong then get frustrated and deny he said anything wrong when he continually defended his rapist friend so you could have the last word?
>>3855 1. This has no relation to his fields of expertise 2. These are only his views on the matter, why should I care if he thinks it's alright to fuck dogs or whatever else as long as he hasn't done it? 3. He wasn't kicked out because of his controversial views on sexuality, he was kicked out using those views because he had controversial stuff such as the GPL license (which companies such as Mozilla hate), his support for unionism and his comments on the sketchy stuff done by tech companies. 4. Stallman has had controversial points on sexuality since before 2003 even, I have read those emails. He was however kicked out at this time not because of his controversial statements, which he has a ton of him, but because of his views in regards to tech and law.
>>3853 Different Anon. There is one nuance that you seem to ignore. It is obvious to us and to most humans that the girl would only have faked some pretense of consent due to coercion. It is also obvious to us that most functioning humans could never have mistaken that for actual consent, even without the known sex offender and pedo running the island. But Installman Gentoo is so utterly clueless about anything female that e.g. he had to have it explained to him that a woman always declining his date requests as being busy means he should get the hint and stop asking, and he lives in an alternate reality where in countries without legalized prostitution there are magical enclaves where independent prostitutes can operate without being under the control and exploitation of pimps and gangs. So while his Minsky comments are indefensible, to his understanding of the world they were also not made in bad faith. He genuinely believes batshit insane stuff like the girl could have offered such a pretense that Minsky could not have known it to be fake and coerced. As for the "because the glowies forced him out" bit, ask yourself why the obvious lie of equating "pretended to be willing under coercion" with "was willing" was pushed so hard and for so long in every venue. Could all those people genuinely have been so dumb that they couldn't differentiate between the two? Remember that he was forced out on the strength of the reaction to and image damage by "was willing", not "pretended to be willing under coercion".
>>3849 >terrible human being >because he had an autistic argument of the meaning of certain words tbh it would be better fitted to an anonymous imageboard but it doesn't make him a terrible human being, are you for real?
>>3863 >He was however kicked out at this time not because of his controversial statements, which he has a ton of him, but because of his views in regards to tech and law. obviously this why do people have such a hard time wrapping their head around the concept that people use sex-stuff as pretext for persecuting people for their political views.
(5.16 KB 320x180 mqdefault.jpg)
https://www.healthline.com/health/high-functioning-autism https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/the-gift-aging/201304/people-autism-spectrum-disorder-take-things-literally https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/high-functioning-autism https://www.helpguide.org/articles/autism-learning-disabilities/autism-spectrum-disorders.htm https://www.iidc.indiana.edu/irca/articles/social-communication-and-language-characteristics.html https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-mild-autism-260244 The two most common indicators of detecting an high-functioning autist is how they are very literal and persnickety and how they are unaware of socially inappropriate behaviors (ex. eating dead skin off your foot in front of a live audience, defending pedophilia and not understanding why age of consent exists). Eating dead skin off foot: https://hooktube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ Having an autistic meltdown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jskq3-lpQnE Unable to react to jokes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFMMXRoSxnA There are endless videos of his "awkward" behavior. He should be known for his work on GCC, GNU, GPL licenses, free software advocacy, and nothing else. Any other subject you shouldn't take him seriously due to his neurological disorder.
>>3869 How do you know his neurological disorder isn't exactly why he's so good at GCC, GNU, GPL licenses, and free software advocacy?
>>3870 Is this a rhetorical question?


no cookies?