> For one, the choice of child, is already creepy even if you refer to a pet as a child, but a software system as a substitute for childbearing, it reminds me of the claw cult, you can call it a company, a system, a project.

On the other hand, I feel like the obsession with childbearing (constant fear about birth rates, pressure on women to become mothers, etc.) to be a lot more creepy than someone having wholesome protective love for their pets.

I fully agree with you about the creepiness of software "children", but I can't really relate to the pet part. It's honestly weird to me when people just kind of think of their pets as like, non-human roommates or something, when there's clearly one entity that has a responsibility to care for the other one since they're dependent on them for food, water, and shelter.

▲

edgarvaldes 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> the obsession with childbearing

To be fair, I think all species are obsessed with producing offspring, regardless of culture.

	▲	saghm 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		That's a pretty silly argument to me. No other species uses toilets, wears clothes, or posts on Hacker News, but we don't treat those as arguments that we have to act like them in those ways.

▲

DonHopkins 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

http://www.art.net/studios/hackers/hopkins/Don/text/rms-vs-d...

>" Following your example, I might send the list an announcement whenever a new GNU program is written. That happens less often than babies are born, it does the world a lot more good, it reflects more conscious creativity and hard work, and some of the readers might actually find the information useful. Even so, I think most of the readers would consider this outside the scope and purpose of the list. Clearly that goes double for babies." -Richard M Stallman

I have a cat named Emacs -- I wonder how Doctor would analyze that?

▲

TZubiri 3 days ago | parent [-]

With all respect for Mr. Stallman, he has faced consequences of his choice of being childless, and it has been quite distressing for him.

Recently he was campaigning against being banned (or not accepted as a speaker) from schools. At age 70 something it must be quite hard not to have children or grandkids, but for parents to block you from their kids is even harder. At least that's how I understood his focus on clearing his name and being accepted as a speaker in highschools.

▲

DonHopkins 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

AI slop and hallucinations are bad, but what your own human imagination is pulling out of your own human ass is so much more pernicious and intentionally slanderous and demeaning.

What proof do you have about anything you're claiming so confidently? Do you know him? Did he tell you that? Can you quote his own words, or at least cite your sources?

▲

saghm 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Uh, I think it has a lot more to do with the sexual harassment than being childless. Plenty of people without kids don't have this problem, and it's kind of silly to frame it as "well if he only had kids then he'd be fine..."

▲

TZubiri 3 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, the sexual issues, harrasment or otherwise, are the reason he has trouble doing presentations in high schools.

The childless issue is what makes this so important for him personally, otherwise I believe it wouldn't have been so pressing a matter for him to engage in a crusade. It's his chosen way to engage with the new generation, and he has lost access to it.

	▲	DonHopkins 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		It's incredibly creepy for you to so confidently make such accusations about his state of mind and problems and motivations without evidence. So what is it?