seebs
The key is, you do not "rephrase texts". You get a court order REQUIRING all communications to go through an app that can be monitored by the court for compliance with the protective order:
https://www.ourfamilywizard.com/practitioners/courts
Otherwise... Honestly, the people who should be rephrasing the messages are quite possibly the police, depending on the terms of the protective order, but if the messages are that upsetting... Once you already have the protective order, the next step is enforcing it. Sorry.
(I am not a lawyer and cannot give legal advice. I heard about the program from a person I know who worked on it, which got me curious about the existence of such things.)
I dunno what you think you're arguing, but it's nonsense.
I doubt the rust team will try to "fix" that.
Xe's post struck me as accurate at the time, and having that context to compare with makes V look a little better now, because it at least establishes that progress is being made towards those claims.
I don't know where you're getting the idea that this is based on some kind of sinister "personal agenda" other than "this thing sounds interesting, I investigated it, it seems less cool now", which is a pretty defensible position for someone to reach.
But also remember, surprise pentesting with an ad hoc payment model is crime.
If Ukraine's goal is to exist, concessions of any kind at all to Putin make that harder. It's not "because Russia is wrong" that I don't think they should make concessions. It's because, if they make concessions, Russia will try again, because it worked.
Also, I think you're massively overestimating the strength of Russia's position here.
> hello i'm from the tech industry. today i'm going to explain how to solve all problems with whatever it is you do! based on my experience of writing software! which means i'm qualified to solve any problem in any field. i have checked this with zero people
Which the IRB missed because they didn't understand that, to ask questions about a website's policy, you must get an answer from a human.
So yeah, pretty sure it's that. I almost never get harassed by people who think I'm cis male, the bulk of the harassment came from people who thought I was transmasc.
Probably the furry stuff too, which is honestly sort of terrifying, do these people not know how much infrastructure relies on stressed and overworked furries?
If you don't see a difference between the things called "cancel culture" and the mob rule with violence, that's not because they're not different. It might be because you're uncritically accepting the lies people tell because they don't like any kind of accountability at all for their actions.
This is why we have US Senators on TV and publishing articles in major newspapers about how they're being silenced because a company decided not to work with them on something. You don't see these posts from the people who actually got silenced, because they were actually silenced. But if you believe someone who is using multiple media channels with international distribution to tell you that they are being silenced without recourse, that's sorta on you. You can do better than that.
He's been accused of things that are at the very least Somewhat Creepy. "Abusive" is a pretty high standard to reach, but I also think it's irrelevant. The way he treated people, coming from a person with power or authority, was likely to make people feel unsafe, and he was unwilling to recognize that the desire to have that position of social authority implied an obligation to mitigate such behaviors.
I think the community would be richer and better (and probably noticably more diverse in a number of ways) if either he'd changed his behavior and recognized the importance of these effects, or he'd been considered a non-leader of the community and merely an active contributor with strong opinions.
It's easy for people not familiar with these dynamics to massively underweight how much implied social pressure comes with being hit on by a person in a position of power within an organization. My usual assumption for someone with as much implied social authority as he had at MIT would be that it would basically be generally inappropriate for them to be hitting on anyone who wanted to be in or work in the lab or department they were affiliated with, because even if this specific person genuinely wouldn't abuse their power, many other people in comparable situations would and it's not really reasonable to expect people not to react to the possibility when it's such a widespread problem. (And yeah, that can sorta suck if you're lonely but in a position that makes it hard for you to hit on people without making them uncomfortable or afraid. One alternative is not to pursue or remain in such a position if it's a problem for you.)
When I wrote that I was unaware of some of the Sort Of Creepy stuff. I recognize that some of the allegedly creepy stuff is sorta misquoted. I think that matters. But I don't think it changes my overall conclusions, which is that RMS was acting in a way that he could reasonably predict would hurt or distress people, and he didn't think it was important to change this.
But I also note that, completely unaware of any of the allegations now being discussed, I thought he was bad for the development of free and open source software because he was bad at treating people in ways conducive to positive outcomes, and I knew many people who worked on free or open source software, or worked with the FSF or on FSF projects, who also felt that way. I believe quite a few of them had told him of these concerns.
I wrote about the specific more-recent RMS stuff last year: https://www.seebs.net/log/post/2019/09/21/rms-minsky-and-the...
Thomas Bushnell wrote about this, too, and honestly his post was much better: https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/a-reflection-on-the-depa...
It is perhaps worth noting that, maybe thirty years ago, I had some run-ins with Thomas Bushnell, and I thought he was sort of a jerk at the time, but when I called him out on an example of that, he acknowledged it and apologized and said he'd try to do better. Nothing external to RMS was preventing RMS from doing that if people said his behavior hurt or distressed them.
The idea that we couldn't try to do better because we were being threatened by Microsoft is honestly sort of condescending and insulting in and of itself.
Lots of people in open source were never particularly toxic, and there's no reason they should have been. Even granting the existence of the external stress (and it really was NOT that big a deal), not everyone reacts to stress by treating people badly. Furthermore, people who didn't grow up around those OSS advocates have exactly the same problems sometimes, for the same reason that people in every field of human endeavor have those problems sometimes.
In the sense of a likely reason for someone to draw an inference: Most people do not specifically seek out excuses to take tests, and do so only because they want something that the test provides them with, such as access to a job-hunting platform. Most people who want access to a job-hunting platform want it because they are job-hunting or plan to be soon.
Keep in mind that Triplebyte profiles have no reason to exist except people looking for work, and that most people have a reason to want to be sure that a current employer does not have an easy way to find out that they're looking for work. I can have a HN account and it doesn't make anyone think I'm looking for work, but if an employer sees my profile on Triplebyte, it tells them at the very least that I was at some point looking for work. If they see it on Triplebyte after having previously not seen it, it tells them that something changed recently.
I would definitely think this should be an opt-in thing.
> OP: "CBP waved me through with hardly a word last week (TSA did grumble at me, for not moving fast enough through their fondling queue)." > > RMS: I generally ask, "Could I please be checked by a woman? It's not fair that only gays get to enjoy this."
I don't have a link, but I have not seen this one grow or change at all, everyone referring to it refers to the same thing.
And that one is pretty damn creepy.
There is also no reason that "male" should be a relevant qualifier.
No basis is offered for why we should think this is "most plausible", except that Stallman likes Minsky and does not think it plausible that he did a bad thing.
There are some summaries which misrepresent what he said, but what he actually said was definitely something people could reasonably object to, especially given the longer context of him saying crazy stuff on related topics before.
Back in the 90s, it was a running joke that if you were going backpacking, you should take along a 3' length of fiber optic cable. "If you get lost, just bury the fiber optic cable and ask the backhoe operator for a ride back to town."
In at least three programming-related communities I'm in, I have made a quip about "I think I'm gonna replace the 3' length of fiber optic cable in my backpacking gear with a short post about Go's garbage collector", and people have filled in "so if I get lost, I can just take the post out, and then ask pcwalton for a ride back to town".
I can't say whether or not the argument is made in good faith, but man, there sure is a lot of it.