[GTALUG] Surveillance Capitalism [was another thread]

[Russell Reiter]

On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 5:46 PM Nicholas Krause <xerofoify at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 4/2/21 5:27 PM, Russell Reiter via talk wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021, 4:38 PM Dhaval Giani, <dhaval.giani at gmail.com
> <mailto:dhaval.giani at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >      >
> >      >> are all aware of. Many women were uncomfortable around RMS and
> avoided
> >      >> him. Many refused to participate in our community because of
> >      >> interactions with him. Do you think RMS is more important than a
> >      >> community of developers he is pushing away?
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > See all the stuff you say we are all aware in this message is
> just rumors and innuendo to me.
> >      >
> >
> >     Wait, so all these women saying those words are rumours and innuendo?
> >
> >
> Greetings,
> > You know what, thats exactly what innuendo is, saying "all these women"
> without even a link to a personal quote from them, not a one.
> That's a  very dangerous to do. Lots of cases of mistreatment against
> minorities or other groups historically
> aren't reported because of power conflicts. I mean would you really we
> comfortable with staying the same
> thing if it was happening to children? I'm not stating the facts would
> hope up in a court but just stating
> to forget about them because there is no trail runs into this problem of
> power conflicts. Not to mention
> if they are stated then it runs into another problem of being traced back
> to them which is a dangerous
> in another light. Forgetting about this isn't a good idea.
>

You know there is a very famous loaded question journalists use to generate
headlines, to which there is no
correct yes or no answer. "Have you stopped beating your dog/wife/child
yet?. If you answer yes you are
damned as a dog/wife/child beater. If you answer no you are damned as a
dog/wife/child beater.

Mixing factual metaphors when someone's professional reputation is on the
line, makes your question about children
just over the top for me. I'm not sure which is most dangerous to
democracy, innuendo whether legal or other, or
actual slander and libel. So to answer your question, I never said forget
about anything, I said do the research and
make your arguments. I said this to someone who dismissed me entirely by
editing my post in order to invalidate me,
I guess as some sort of reactionary, instead of acknowledging that there
may be more to this situation than meets
the eye.

It's a sad fact of the internet and the newspeak of tabloid journalism,
also known as yellow journalism apparently for
the colour of the cheap paper those inflammatory statements were published
on, that sensational stories sell copy or
in the modern sense get you likes on twitter etc. It's a new kind of
journalistic capitalism but journalistic capitalism
all the same.

That's why I posted the link to someone who is digging deeper.


> >
> >     You choose to disbelieve them? After a pattern of behaviour that
> >     multiple people have confirmed and talked about?
> >
> >
> > I can't disbelieve that which I can find no record of. What multiple
> people are you talking about?
> >
> > What I can do is check some facts, to the best of my abilities. This
> link I came across in my opinion has a more balanced view than yours.
> >
> > https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ <
> https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/>
> >
> >
> >      > What are not rumors and innuendo are the historical facts on IBM,
> their influence, their power and powerful friends and most importantly
> their big ball of money which they spend on influenceing the influencers.
> >      >
> >      >>
> >      >> I want to explicitly state this. RMS is a major reason free
> software
> >      >> is where it is. RMS's contributions to free software are
> gigantic.
> >      >> However, RMS cannot be a leader of our community if he continues
> to
> >      >> isolate a significant population of prospective developers. RMS
> the
> >      >> contributor - YES. RMS the leader - NO.
> >      >>
> >      >> RMS cannot be the poster child of our community if it is going
> to be
> >      >> relevant in the future.
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > This is where being the willing poster child of a charitable
> institution, used to raise funds, diverges from the science of truth and
> innovation.
> >      >
> >      > In the legal science of truth, a person is innocent until proven
> guilty in a court of law. However, media and the media barons in conteol,
> crucify persons and their personas daily, just to make a buck.
> Sure but again your assuming being guilty in a court of law is better than
> being found guilty by the public.
> There is lots of evidence that the court system isn't as infallible as you
> think it is for both cultural
> and other reasons.
>

I never said I thought the court system was infallible. What I always try
to say is that Canada is governed under the rule of law and nobody should
be judged guilty without evidence and based on gossip, innuendo and worse,
misstated and omitted facts.

>      >
> >
> >     And no one has charged RMS with a crime. All we are saying is, he is
> >     not representative of a majority of us, and we don't want him to
> >     represent us. Some of us are minorities who have heard racist
> >     statements being made by prominent folks in the community and have
> >     made us feel our contributions are not valued. It is not hard to
> >     believe after that experience that other prominent folks can be
> >     sexist. RMS has not stepped up and owned up to his actions and
> >     apologized. I have no problem with people growing. We all make
> >     mistakes. But doubling down like this, well I don't want to be a part
> >     of that community. And the reality is, there are tons of "other"
> >     people who will not join in and we will never know. So yes, if the
> >     choice is between thousands of those people, having a diverse
> >     community, growing and being relevant to the world, I would rather
> RMS
> >     step down than us lose this community. And I would rather you leave
> >     the community if you think being more welcoming to other voices is
> not
> >     important. We don't need your contributions at the risk of alienating
> >     many more people.
> >
> >
> > Wow that last paragraph was a completely off the wall projection of
> negative personal attributes towards RMS without a shred of evidence. I
> wasnt aware that Stallman was a deemed racist by association.
> >
> > Its bad enough that someone on this list deemed him to be an incel. Just
> type incel into google and you can see the links to terrorisim.
> >
> >
> >     Again, I restate this. RMS as a contributor - yes. RMS as a leader -
> >     no. He doesn't represent me, and he certainly doesn't represent the
> >     community of foss developers. This is a discussion about RMS, not the
> >     conspiracy theories you are throwing about.
> >
> >
> > I first came across evidence of survelance capitalisim at a tlug meeting
> in 2003 or so. So its not a theory to me, it is a fact of the corporation
> and its predatory nature in order to make profits for the investors.
> >
> >
> > What conspiracy theories are you talking about.
> >
> > Survelance capitalisim is a real thing, funded by real corporations.
> Stallman is aware of this and pissed lots of people off by talking about it
> in public.
> >
> > Or are you saying IBM didn't develop software and market it to both
> sides of the conflict in WW2. Thats not a conspiracy its business as usual
> for a global corporation like them.
> >
> > Just to be clear, IBM weren't the only ones who made money from the
> holocost. You should read the quote about remembering the past on this site.
> >
> > https://www.holocaustcentre.com/HEW <https://www.holocaustcentre.com/HEW
> >
> >
> > Coca Cola sold its german equipment to a company now known as Fanta.
> >
> > Ford motors provided truck engines and parts to germany.
> >
> > Through a blind company Standard Oil provided their propritarey additive
> for gasoline to the Luftwaffe for their planes so they performed better at
> altitude.
> >
> > So let me phrase this issue a little differently once again.
> >
> > What part of the money which IBM used to purchase Red Hat, that came
> from investments made by IBM, after they obscenely profited by trading with
> the Nazis, is the amount you would be willing to use to fund your work,
> voluntarily or paid at Red Hat today.
> >
> So that's a  logical fallacy Russell you can't just attack someone's
> opinion by overextending it like that.
>

You think that's a logical fallacy and an over extension, how so?  Is it
because a multinational corporation can spin itself off into other
corporations and sever the past associations or change operations to a
country of convenience, or all the other tools of making big money?

Or don't you believe IBM made money from both sides of the second world
war? That's pretty much a historical fact for survivors of the holocaust.

So I'm still trying to figure out what conspiracy theory I was accused of
propagating. I don't think what I said about IBM's acquisition of Red Hat is
a logical fallacy at all. I think it's all just business as usual for
dominating US based corporate profiteers.

But that's just my opinion.

Nick
> >
> >     Dhaval
> >
> > Russell
> >
> > “Th’ newspaper does ivrything f’r us. It runs th’ polis foorce an’ th’
> banks, commands th’ milishy, controls th’ ligislachure, baptizes th’ young,
> marries th’ foolish, comforts th’ afflicted, afflicts th’ comfortable,
> buries th’ dead an’ roasts thim aftherward.” F. P. Dunne
> >
> > ---
> > Post to this mailing list talk at gtalug.org
> > Unsubscribe from this mailing list
> https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
> >
>


-- 
Russell
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210402/c143b152/attachment.html>