

The Most Excellent and Lamentable Tragedy of Richard Stallman (2005) - packetlss
http://edward.oconnor.cx/2005/04/rms

======
Joeboy
As with his recent statement on Steve Jobs's death, I suspect he's adopting an
extreme position in response to a normative position he opposes. I think
that's kind of how he operates.

I don't like the societal expectation that children are inherently to be
welcomed either. In some ways I wish I had the nerve to respond as
forthrightly as RMS, although I'm also glad I have sufficient social self-
preservation instinct not to.

I really don't want to be negative about Steve Jobs at the moment, especially
somewhere like HN where it's conceivable people who knew him in real life
might read it, but I am getting fairly tired of the endless hagiography, and
especially of semi-informed people telling me how enormous and positive his
influence on my life has supposedly been. While I don't think RMS's statement
was very sensible, I think perhaps I can sympathise with his motivation.

------
dlikhten
Honestly I love the comment on reproduction. TBH single cells can reproduce,
but having a child who is happy, healthy, and well educated is harder than any
computer programming I have or ever will do. So in the end that person should
take time to spend with his child.

However:

"It's like demanding that an atheist pray, lest he not "respect" the religious
people he is surrounded by." in response to the outrage at Stallman's lack of
caring for people announcing birthings. I think this is a great response. It
also is true for Stalman's response to Jobs' death, he may shit on him all he
wants, it is his rights, appearing to be a nut-case is a side-effect but that
does not change a lot of his actually legitimately good beliefs. And Jobs
definitely was in major conflict with OSS (see VLC trying to get on the
iPhone, which concluded that Apple's app store is not compatible with OSS
license requirements)

~~~
kragen
It's not that it's hard; it's largely out of your control.

~~~
dlikhten
Parts are, parts are not. I know kids of wealthy individuals who are terribly
unhappy, and kids of dead poor individuals who are the happiest kids I've ever
met. Its about the time spend with your kids and the caring you put into your
child's needs.

~~~
kragen
A lot of it is about random chance. Your kid could get kicked in the head by a
mule and spend the rest of her life suffering from severe brain damage, and
that's not your fault. Your kid could hang out with the wrong group of kids in
high school and end up as a stockbroker or otherwise doing something
worthless. You can't control who your kids hang out with in high school or
even in elementary school, you can't control their genes (much), you can't
control most of what happens to them.

Of course there are lots of kids who suffer because of things their parents
did, and you can avoid some of that. But mostly your child's life is not in
your control. And that's a good thing.

~~~
bdunbar
_But mostly your child's life is not in your control._

The parts that are in your control affect how the child acts for the rest of
his life.

------
kragen
I don't think the issue here is that Stallman lacks empathy, although he does,
but that he's attacking a cherished societal value: that reproducing is a good
thing to do. You would get the same negative reaction to someone declaring
that Christianity is just another false religion to a bunch of Christians, or
that atheism is a dangerous and foolish belief system to a bunch of atheists.

However, given that this value is currently the gravest threat to human
survival and human welfare, I wish more people would attack it.

Empathy and practicality, however, dictate that the time to attack natalism is
when people are considering conceiving a child, not when they're struggling
with postpartum sleep deprivation.

~~~
tptacek
It doesn't even make logical sense, what he's saying. If you've _had_ a kid,
it is in everyone's categorical best interests for you to do the best possible
job raising it. The guy didn't say he was putting Emacs on hold so he could
_conceive_ a child.

~~~
kragen
I don't think Stallman was trying to persuade someone to do something with
that email; I think he was speaking his mind about the circumstances that
already obtained. I agree that it doesn't propose any coherent plan of action
to improve the situation.

------
sadfasdfads
You're only posting this because he railed on Jobs, I assume. Childish way to
get back at him, imo.

~~~
packetlss
You're wrong. I saw this in my Twitter timeline and thought it was
interresting post despite its age. I wasn't aware RMS had railed on Jobs. I'm
no Jobs fanboy.

~~~
guelo
That might be true but the story is on the front page because of the fanboys
with their panties in a bunch. Childish and unbecoming HN.

~~~
Roboprog
Attention, brilliant people: don't be a boor. How is that not relevant? (my
wife gives me this advice frequently, it's a good one for hackers to
internalize)

