Whom
almost as if there are parties trying to turn it into a big political issue to paint Russia as a victim
Idk, there’s probably some of that but until today with the clarification that the bans are happening from a list of employers they’re required not to work with, things were pretty unclear and I don’t think it was unreasonable to assume they were going beyond what was required…especially with Linus’ response being pretty tone deaf given the information critics had. People were angry what seemed like random Russian citizens were being targeted and Linus responded angrily as if we all already knew their employers were on a list despite it not being reported yet.
It’s not a huge deal but Linus is just not very good at handling this kind of thing. Nerds should have assumed there was more behind the scenes and given the benefit of the doubt, though.
Yeah, it seems like they genuinely are just trying to be compliant with the law. I do think the “anyone who has concerns about this is a Russian troll” thing is obnoxious though, knowing of the existence of sanctions doesn’t mean we’re all lawyers who know the requirements here for open source projects.
Wayland has security benefits over X11 so choosing one with a Wayland session is a good idea but other than that I’m not really aware of any breakdowns of security between DEs. My gut says the major options are pretty similar on that front, most hardening guides only mention DEs to tell you which ones support Wayland. The choices you can make to harden your system are changing things at a lower level that is entirely unrelated to your DE. That said I’m just a privacy/security interested layperson and security is a topic where you can always split more hairs if you want (or need) to.
I’ve no idea what Swartz said on the subject and I’m not sure if this implication is intended by you but I would not characterize rms as just being uninformed. There’s lots of evidence in this piece that he encountered information and testimonials from abused parties and nevertheless landed at the conclusions he did. I don’t know if he holds CSAM or not but I do know he is long past the benefit of the doubt when it comes to his words.
Oh absolutely, if following the trail of your beliefs leads you to a conclusion like this it should be a reason to interrogate those core beliefs and/or recognize where other core beliefs take priority, and not doing this is a major failure on his part that I’m sure is largely motivated by ultimately not really caring that much about sexual violence. It’s just that the pattern of reasoning here is so consistent with his approach to every other issue that he writes about that I think it’s reasonably likely that he just defends possession of CSAM on principle (as twisted as that is) rather than as as a defense of actions he’s made. This is not a defense of the man, to be clear, just a guess as someone familiar with his idiosyncrasies. What we know for sure from his own mouth should be more than enough to condemn him and get him the hell out of the FSF. Having a man who actively defends pedophilia in a leadership role in any capacity is an embarrassment and a failure of the organization as a whole, even if he also laid the intellectual foundation for its mission.
nfl-video.com is up to date though the quality is poor and there’s a delay of a few hours.
Sunday Ticket isn’t required for legal viewing if you’re willing to watch replays, btw. NFL+ Premium is $15/mo or $100/season and contains replays of all games.
Entirely possible but he’s also a stubborn man obsessed with his own ideological consistency and absurdly precise (if not commonly understood) language. He’s clearly a creep but having kept up with him over the years I think it’s similarly possible that those statements aren’t self-serving and are instead sincerely held dominoes 15 down the line from following the implications of some core principles.
That doesn’t make them not disgusting and also does not mean he should remain the voice of our movement, of course.
You’re free to look at the context that they frequently link to, it doesn’t help. His political notes that contain the majority of his public musings are typically very brief and the quotes used typically replicate the entirety of the original text or cut off changes of subject.
Stallman is very clear in his beliefs.
