Eric S. Raymond, who started the OSI. Popularised the term "open source".
It is incorrect to say he's done nothing in code - he's the maintainer (though not creator) of giflib, which is in every device with a screen; and of gpsd, the GPS decoder that's in every Android phone. Just not nearly as much as he talks about himself in terms of.
Apart from his awful views, the real problem is that he thinks his expertise generalises.
gpsd would be a daemon though, takes data, passes it back out, not very interesting, and he's a maintainer not creator. Decoding is usually all within the GPS device itself, or within the the low level driver.
Not that it should matter, but this whole "a genius should be allowed to be an asshole" is idiotic in every way - firstly if the rule is that a genius is not allowed to be an asshole, generally the geniuses simply aren't being assholes, and secondarily most of them really aren't that big of contributors and can easily do more damage than they ever contribute personally. Especially in a maintainer role.
As far as commercial software development goes, as a developer you are generally also a part of the hiring process - you review resumes, etc. Various [studies demonstrate discrimination](https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/09/11/1706255114) at that step. That discrimination is illegal.
Really with these self centered people who think only of their own persona and of whether it is "racist" or not, they seem to be completely unable to understand where their little stupid blogs fit into the picture.
Plus there's a cluster of theirs more often than not also being a toxic person in the workplace fully generally.
So yeah they know they're being completely unacceptable and they invent all this paranoia about PC culture.
edit: It doesn't even have to be race related, if someone in sales starts loudly arguing against antitrust law while the company is probably both breaking it and lobbying against it, they'll get shown the boot too.
Now as far as opensource goes they've been adopting practices from commercial development, gradually.
ESR has a history of taking things over and pretending they were his all along. [See also: the jargon file](https://news.slashdot.org/story/03/06/08/1534249/esr-recasts-jargon-file-in-own-image). The continued success of hacks and frauds is a really sad affair for me...
Interesting symptom of the times.
Normally you see people complain that a racist or sexist statement was "taken out of context", where said context is what ever persuaded them that the statement was true, as opposed to anything resembling negation of the statement.
Ultimately, people rank resumes lower if the name sounds non-white (or female). That's most certainly racist, however you look at it. Looking at priming studies, what ever they're spewing certainly would prime readers for a greater gap in resume rankings. Easy to see why in a certain sense they can be grouped with literally Hitler, whose writings have that same property, albeit to a much greater extent.
It is kind of curious that they seem genuinely unaware that anyone could be judged by consequences.
edit: I mean, I literally read (not very carefully) through the discussion and I hadn't seen anything resembling a judgement whether someone is racist or not based on whether what they're spewing would (in a reasonable person estimate) make things worse for some black guy with a black name and a profile icon submitting pull requests on some open source project.
It is curious that they're going on about software, because software is all consequences. A pull request is only a good pull request if it is making the end result (the whole project) somehow better.
edit: here's an idea for a study: get some like minded "SJW" programmers to write minor fixes for various open source projects, then in a randomized fashion submit those under names indicating different genders/races/etc, and measure acceptance rate.
Nah, this is what hardcore racists do in their own safe spaces. If you read a few hardline racist places this kind of shit pops up. Sexists do the same, all non ironically. (thinking about it it might be a trick like the one used by other minorities, trying to reclaim the bad word, like lgbt people reclaimed queer). See also ['fuck your optics, im going in'](https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-screw-your-optics-i-m-going-in-who-is-the-suspected-pittsburgh-shooter-1.6595724) (gap certainly is a safe space for racists).
It is the lack of empathy (yes duh, they are racists) they think people like esr are in their hart of harts just as racist as them but are just not open about it. The subgroup 'doesnt realise some things they think are actually racist, and with introspection would stop saying/thinking those racist things' (who amongst us hasnt) doesnt exist in their eyes, or at least isnt big.
And yes im using the word racism here without pointing out the difference between structural and institutional racism and interpersonal racism. But this is another commonly ignored distinction (to racists at least).
"I've tried not to be racist, but if you're going to call me racist anyway, fine, I'm going to go ahead and be racist," is such an amazing tell and I've encountered it from... lots of people. More often, "I've got no problem with The Good Ones" Totally Not Racists rather than rationalist types, but since they do seem to be an accretion disk of every terrible idea, it's unsurprising to see it with them as well.
I’m kinda surprised he was willing to put that huge block quote in
there, calling him insufficiently rational and “displaying an
emotionally-fixated need to continue [being wrong]”. There’s some nice
sneers in there
Why are people who worship logic so fucking bad at it? I mean, god
damn, I expect the racism, but the stupidity of these people who brag
about their IQs is flabbergasting.
If it weren’t for them being terrible people, I might actually feel
sorry for them - solely for how perplexing they must find ordinary
social interaction. The idea that “you can’t do anything to please the
SJWs, they’ll just call you racist for stating facts” clearly springs
from a feeling of helplessness in the face of an accusation of racism,
since they can find no fault in themselves upon first inspection that
would justify it, and so conclude that they are totally fine and it is
the other person who is unreasonable. For all their talk of cognitive
biases, they cannot grasp that the most common cognitive bias is to
think well of yourself even if you have hurt others or made an error.
Their ordinary experience must include many cases of
friends/coworkers/family expressing disappointment, hurt or frustration
and them uncomprehendingly brushing them off or lashing out.
Well they’re narcissists but bad at it. I am sure they also have trouble handling professional criticism of for example their coding style.
With racism, being narcissists, it would never occur to them that they have no big hero role in it all.
To the corporate they are just that dumb ass who sees a black name on a resume and then finds things wrong with the resume solely on that basis. And cant even get away with it because the dumb ass is ideological about it.
The whole “motte and bailey” essay is already accusing everybody who
rubs SA wrong of arguing in bad faith. Build a whole subreddit around
the harshest interpretation of that essay and you get a bunch of
reactionaries telling on themselves.
Jesus nonexistent Christ is esr still posting
It’s not a Motte thread unless the word “heuristic” comes out.
Also fuck these racist-ass people.
[deleted]
So they’re doing the old “everyone is bigoted; we’re just the ones brave enough to admit it” now huh?
“you called me a nazi so now I’m a nazi”
pretty sure this poster is just crying wolf
I’m kinda surprised he was willing to put that huge block quote in there, calling him insufficiently rational and “displaying an emotionally-fixated need to continue [being wrong]”. There’s some nice sneers in there
Why are people who worship logic so fucking bad at it? I mean, god damn, I expect the racism, but the stupidity of these people who brag about their IQs is flabbergasting.
If it weren’t for them being terrible people, I might actually feel sorry for them - solely for how perplexing they must find ordinary social interaction. The idea that “you can’t do anything to please the SJWs, they’ll just call you racist for stating facts” clearly springs from a feeling of helplessness in the face of an accusation of racism, since they can find no fault in themselves upon first inspection that would justify it, and so conclude that they are totally fine and it is the other person who is unreasonable. For all their talk of cognitive biases, they cannot grasp that the most common cognitive bias is to think well of yourself even if you have hurt others or made an error. Their ordinary experience must include many cases of friends/coworkers/family expressing disappointment, hurt or frustration and them uncomprehendingly brushing them off or lashing out.
Has someone already saved this to the wayback machine or some other archive?
The whole “motte and bailey” essay is already accusing everybody who rubs SA wrong of arguing in bad faith. Build a whole subreddit around the harshest interpretation of that essay and you get a bunch of reactionaries telling on themselves.