It's from November, but it's still new if you've never seen it. https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201611/the-sorcerers-code ​I fully agree with the below review of the article, which may recall for some the UofT meeting many years ago that he walked out from when attendees wouldn't conform to his many naming protocols (to him there's not such thing as a "Linux system", only a "Linux-based GNU system"). He wouldn't even exchange emails with LPI unless it changed its name. I've known RMS for, well, a very, very long time. There are points on

​ ​ which we agree, and many points on which we do not -- we've had and ​ ​ have a number of serious long-term and shorter-term disagreements. His ​ ​ embrace of Julian Assange is difficult to forgive, but our continuing ​ ​ communications are cordial. Fundamentally though, my foundational ​ ​ disagreement with Richard relates to his "religious" fervor. For he ​ ​ does tend to elevate his views to the status of "my way or the highway" ​ ​ technological spiritualism. My view is that the sort of absolutism ​ ​ that is the hallmark of Richard's philosophy is not particularly ​ ​ helpful in the modern world in any contexts -- and in fact has often ​ ​ been damaging to civilization throughout history. Compromise and an ​ ​ acceptance of practical considerations are crucial to cooperation and ​ ​ advancement in human societies, and we've seen all too often that ​ ​ absolutist views can have very dark outcomes even with the best of ​ ​ underlying intentions. All that said, Richard is a nice guy, and I'm ​ ​ glad that Psychology Today has never done a profile on me.

​I've had more than my share of encounters with him, which have been personally pleasant but rhetorically and logically insufferable. Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56