The difference is probably that Stallman has no money or power, so he's an easy, safe target to attack.
> Gates first met face to face on the evening of Jan. 31, 2011, at Mr. Epstein's townhouse on the Upper East Side (nyt)
What he said was that the girl who was ordered to offer sex to Minsky would have been ordered to present it as if it was a willing offer.
This should not have been controversial.
One of the first things covered in Evil Villain School is that when you are using your slaves (sex or otherwise) to try to curry favor with someone who doesn't know you are an evil villain you provide a cover story so that person won't know they are dealing with slaves.
That includes instructing the people you have enslaved to not act like they are enslaved when they are around people who don't know you are a sex trafficker. You provide them with plausible cover stories that explain why they are around and why they are offering services to your guests.
Also, note that Minsky was not accused of having sex with the girl. His name came up in a deposition where she was asked to list some of the famous people she was told to offer sex to. The deposition did not cover which of those people accepted the offer. Greg Benford was there when she approached Minsky and says that Minsky declined.
Also, come on, I'm 37 and I wouldn't have sex with a teenager. Even beyond legality (which isn't really an issue, the dude is dead) there are the ethical considerations. This dude was sketchy and RMS is sketchy for defending him.
Stallman's whole point is that Epstein almost certainly concealed these facts from his associates. Stallman does not in any way argue that these women's and girls aren't victims, only that Minsky was likely unaware of this.
I don't see anything sketchy about defending one's dead friend: Minsky isn't alive to say "I had no idea these women were underage and being trafficked" and it seems natural Stallman wants to point this out to people calling his friend a pedophile and a rapist.
It was in the US Virgin Islands where the age of consent was 16 at the time.
There are real crimes happening you can get upset about (and maybe even do something about). This is about internet points for people that want to be seen to be upset. They are trading on the suffering of the very people they purport to represent.
You are right that Stallman was trading on that suffering to defend his hero. There was no reason for him to say anything at all. His argument was not relevant as the hero he represented had been dead for year, and only served to shake a stick in a nest of already angry bees.
We don't have One World Government with globally consistent laws, and I hardly think that's what you want. Yes, the speed limit can change crossing a state border. Turning right on red may be legal in one place, and not legal a mile down the street.
You can still get a ticket for breaking the law.
Simple as
And real crimes? Like trafficking teenaged women around the world to be used as sex slaves to please one's powerful male associates?
RMS being a bozo isn’t a crime and internet outrage about it has no effect on real crimes.
If you donate $5 to a charity helping those affected, for instance, you’ll have done more than all the virtue signaling outrage in the world. You’re not raising awareness, you’re not changing opinions, it’s not “problematic”, you’re just getting your anger/attention rush. It has negative utility and value for the world, and you’re making things worse.
(You in the general sense, you understand. Not you specifically).
Not sure what this has to do with what I posted...
Outrage about the actual crime of human trafficking is of course called for but has nothing to do with RMS. Also, outrage at RMS won’t actually in any way address those crimes. But it feels good!
My issue is that “sketchy” isn’t enough to block a speaker from presenting on a subject where they have expertise. If MLK was alive today, would be be blocked for the “sketchy” behavior of cheating on his wife? Not that I have expertise enough to be invited to speak anywhere, but would I be blocked for the “sketchy” behavior of defending MLK?
This all seems like bikeshedding and is decreasing our intellectual growth that comes from sharing ideas about free software and developing from them.
Just looking at the natural experiment of differing ages of consent in different First World countries there doesn't seem to be an inherent problem with an age of consent below 18.
In the US it is 18 in only 11 states (Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin).
It is 17 in 6 (Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, New York, and Texas).
In the other 33 plus DC it is 16.
In Europe it is 18 in 3 countries (Vatican City, Turkey, Malta), 17 in 2 countries (Cypress, Ireland), 16 in 20 countries, 15 in 12 countries, and 14 in 14 countries.
It's 16 in Canada, Japan, New Zealand, and most of Australia (17 in the rest).
No, Stallman said that the people involved didn't necessarily know that the women and girls were trafficked - that Minsky was unaware that these people were victims as Epstein probably ordered them to present themselves as willing participants. This is a vastly different thing than claiming "the victims weren't victims". This comment just reinforces my belief that people's perception of Stallman are based in misinformation.
There are good reasons to distance oneself from Stallman - among others his assertion that being paid to write closed-source software is unethical, which I think is too radial to be productive - but I worry people are distancing themselves on account of mistruths.
The quote everyone seems to remember from Stallman was basically the same thing: he said that Minsky was deceived.
Stallman was also criticized for, inter alia, keeping lewd pictures on the wall of his office at the Free Software Foundation, and (IIRC) hugging people without asking in a way that made them uncomfortable. But I haven't heard anything about that in this thread until I said it myself.
Stallman's comments were later exaggerated by several bloggers, to make them sound outrageous. Somehow the untrue misdeeds have outweighed the real ones, which makes it hard to believe there has been an honest evaluation of the situation.
If you’re around criminals enough, most of them try to simultaneously deny involvement while at the same time trying to excuse the crime. I’m not saying Stallman has this criminal mentality. I don’t know. But the types of statements are similar to those we all run into. And I think this also causes people to raise red flags.
???
Then his wife proceeds to get out of there asap, idk man, actions speak louder ...
RMS doesn’t have Gates’ resources.