Edit: I'm re-editing it now. (I should be in bed, ug tired)
03:45 I think it is a better job now ... hopefully you find it more acceptable; I'm starting to become a bit incoherent myself and need to catch a wink.
04:25 Just finished another round of editing. I do really hope everything is better. (4:50 still going ... )
It is simply not true that the article is "mostly in praise of his accomplishments," either. There is a brief description of LoseThos at the start and a vacuous upbeat sentence about workflows and usability near the end. In the middle sits an illustrated description of Mr. Davis's antics and a rather uninformative discussion about how mentally ill people are mentally ill. You cap it off with a quote from the DSM describing behavior similar to his, and reflect that you can "understand and appreciate" someone's illness now that you have blurb, even one which says nothing more than "yeah, schizos do that sometimes."
The article, aside from rubbernecking at a mentally ill man, has almost no actual content. It seems you were more interested in telling a "tortured genius" story. You insinuate that mental illness would be some sort of creative advantage if only society were more accommodating, that his mental illness and his writing an operating system are somehow two sides of the same coin.
He's been unemployed and stuck at home for 7 years. I don't think it so notable that a programmer in that situation might do some programming. LoseThos is neat, but let's be level headed. Writing a basic kernel (and this one doesn't even have virtual memory or preemptive multitasking) and a basic compiler are both common projects for CS undergrads. To produce this over 7 years isn't some unfathomable feat, though I can't imagine being sick and medicated made it any easier. I absolutely don't mean to be critical of him, and the treatment he received on Something Awful was really unappetizing. But it does seem that you're building his accomplishments up a little. And it seems that you're doing it because you want to write a moving story and parade his personal tragedy through the streets like some nerd Oprah.
This post is too long already, but I also want to say your blaming the community's lack of acceptance for the progression of diseases is ridiculous and trivializes mental illness. Smiling and nodding at his PRNG won't make him better. Finally, your stamping the article with a little self-aggrandizing blurb about yourself and a link to your github account leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Did you notice the part where he also runs goofy JIT/linking, or has annotated source code with pictures and compiler for same, and that the virtual memory/preemptive multitasking was explicitly omitted? Or several other nifty/quirky features of the OS? (http://www.losethos.com/LTHtml/Doc/Features.html)
He's done work that any of us should respect as fellow programmers, crazy or not.
Also, his source comments are...colorful in some cases. :)
(OTOH, he's fairly public already, and I'm sure he's been called insane before.)
He is a public figure already, as you say so yourself, regardless of whether we can hold him responsible of it. If anything, this piece served to humanize him, and spreading knowledge of his condition may, at least, serve to secure better treatment for him from his peers.
Alright, I think most of the finger-pointing is gone. Hopefully it's better ... I need to get to bed.
Naming the person is probably not such a good idea. There's a reason why films insert those disclaimers that characters do not reflect a real person.
I also removed all references to his name except for the initial one where I cite him as the author of the software. I've also made more of the paragraphs general, trying to remove him as the focus of the article, and instead just as a topic.
I think publishing an article like this is not only distasteful, I for one find it deeply disturbing. We all have a right to dignity.
You guess you could have been non-specific or asked for consent of the family? You bet.
Even if you claim you only tried to help, say that all the information is available publicly or even make efforts to edit it after publishing, discussing a fellow human being's mental condition this way is just morally wrong.
* I didn't post the article here and I wrote it in about 70 minutes; I had no intention of opening up this discussion in HN.
* All the information is very public, most of it authored by the gentleman in promotional materials.
* The article is about accepting and awareness. There's been much harsher words said about the individual and his project.
* The article is mostly in praise of his accomplishments.
* I have known very similar people and so this hit me on a personal level.
* As an article there's some general rules that yield a good read. I guess I could have been non-specific, or asked for consent of the family, I didn't know this was going to gain so much traction.