Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MIT President on Aaron Swartz

pastebin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 223 posts

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#31

Post by pc »

While it's painful that this is happening now and not a year ago, I'm heartened that Hal is heading the internal investigation. I can't imagine anyone better.

He was a major supporter of Star Simpson when most of the MIT administration hung her out to dry. He has as good a chance as anyone at understanding Aaron's goals in liberating JSTOR's archive: he's a founding director of the FSF, Creative Commons, and Public Knowledge. He led the creation of MIT's OpenCourseWare and the class Ethics and Law on the Electronic Frontier.

He's also just a deeply good guy.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Knowledge
  http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#32

Post by asdfologist »

potatolicious wrote: post #18
kristenlee wrote: post #7

Aaron Swartz was mentally ill and committed suicide as a direct result of his mental illness. He comtemplated suicide in 2007 long before any of this DOJ stuff happened. http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/dying Furthermore the "glorification" of his suicide is doing nothing more but encouraging other suicidal "hackers" to go over the edge so they have their "story" and inconsequential blog posts plastered all of Hacker Ne…

The witch hunt angle has been bothering me a lot, and should be ample evidence that the people of Hacker News are no better than the reactionaries of Reddit or even 4chan. No sooner had the man's death hit the news that people started foaming at the mouth, writing long manifestos and diatribes, and calling for the head of everyone and anyone related to the prosecution. We are better than this. Actually, evidently, no…

Say that to Aaron's family, who themselves blamed MIT and the prosecutors.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#33

Post by losvedir »

I'm impressed with this response. Two quick notes:

1) President Reif is brand new in the role -- the majority of events would have happened under Susan Hockfield, the previous president. It makes sense that he would want a report of what happened previously since he wasn't here yet.

2) Professor Abelson is a very well respected member of the MIT community, and the fact that he is heading up the investigation leaves me comforted. He's helped me before in the past and is so incredibly smart and kind hearted I can't think of a better guy for the job.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#35

Post by lazyGeneral »

kristenlee wrote: post #7

Aaron Swartz was mentally ill and committed suicide as a direct result of his mental illness. He comtemplated suicide in 2007 long before any of this DOJ stuff happened. http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/dying Furthermore the "glorification" of his suicide is doing nothing more but encouraging other suicidal "hackers" to go over the edge so they have their "story" and inconsequential blog posts plastered all of Hacker Ne…

Nature VS Nurture.

Both play a part.

Aaron's high expectations for himself sure made it hard for him to live up to them and be satisfied with whatever he was doing but....

Nurture plays a role in suicide. In this case, the Feds were definitely trying to stop this beautiful flower from growing.

It was having trouble on his own.

What they should have done, the "appropriate" thing to do, as Larry put it was to cut the weeds nearby and any sick branches he may have had. JSTOR apparently death with it pretty well and tied to cut off the sick branches that Aaron had on him.

No one has gloried the suicide either. He will just truly be missed. AND it is especially sad that he was put in a situation that was blown out of proportion and tried to crush him. It could happen to you.

Say you're in Cancun and some people find you having sex in public and then throw some cocaine at you, trying to accuse you of drug smuggling but it just so happens you don't have the money or the connections to ward them off. (This is everyday life in Latin America)

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#36

Post by jacquesm »

[deleted] wrote: post #29
jacquesm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and if you looked carefully you'll notice that he didn't actually do anything until he was threatened with spending a life in jail and being bankrupted , without the option to get off without pleading guilty. And all that for trying to do something good. You describe yourself as a 'public interest lawyer'. I suggest you try to live up to that title and have the public interest at heart. The subject of your littl…

[deleted]

> I am a state level prosecutor who specializes in domestic violence. I prosecute individuals for crimes and see myself as an advocate for victims, particularly victims of domestic violence. Public interest as it relates to the legal field includes prosecutors, public defenders, ACLU lawyers, and lawyers for causes similar to Aaron's.

So, how do you feel about a prosecutor that throws the book at a guy that wants nothing more than to improve the world and does what he can with the skills that he's given?

Does 35 years in prison and a ridiculous amount of money to defend yourself against a federal suit of which the aggrieved party wants no part make sense to you?

Do you feel that the prosecutor had 'no options' here or do you believe there was an element of discretion involved?

It would be really convenient if we could just say 'oh, Aaron killed himself because he was mentally ill', especially for all those in positions similar to yours. But as a person that is a lot more stable than Aaron I have to admit that I have no idea how I would react to being pushed by the system to this extent.

What should surprise us is that there are people that the system can waltz over like this that do not start to consider extreme options.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#37

Post by kennywinker »

potatolicious wrote: post #18
kristenlee wrote: post #7

Aaron Swartz was mentally ill and committed suicide as a direct result of his mental illness. He comtemplated suicide in 2007 long before any of this DOJ stuff happened. http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/dying Furthermore the "glorification" of his suicide is doing nothing more but encouraging other suicidal "hackers" to go over the edge so they have their "story" and inconsequential blog posts plastered all of Hacker Ne…

The witch hunt angle has been bothering me a lot, and should be ample evidence that the people of Hacker News are no better than the reactionaries of Reddit or even 4chan. No sooner had the man's death hit the news that people started foaming at the mouth, writing long manifestos and diatribes, and calling for the head of everyone and anyone related to the prosecution. We are better than this. Actually, evidently, no…

Better in what way? Less caring? More apathetic?

I think we should have been better than this too... I think we should have been up in arms while Aaron was still alive. It was wrong then too, but easier to dismiss because it was someone else' fight.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#38

Post by potatolicious »

objclxt wrote: post #30
jacquesm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and if you looked carefully you'll notice that he didn't actually do anything until he was threatened with spending a life in jail and being bankrupted , without the option to get off without pleading guilty. And all that for trying to do something good. You describe yourself as a 'public interest lawyer'. I suggest you try to live up to that title and have the public interest at heart. The subject of your littl…

>"he was threatened with spending a life in jail and being bankrupted, without the option to get off without pleading guilty." ...I don't quite understand this. Surely he did have an option to "get off without pleading guilty" - to be found not guilty by a jury of his peers.

Except he was guilty, and didn't stand a chance in an actual trial. This part's not even controversial - Aaron was evidently fighting laws that he believed were unjust. The fact that he violated them is not in question.

And a court would have no choice but to find him guilty, as that is the purpose of the judiciary. A court cannot let someone walk after a crime simply because the law itself is unjust.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#39

Post by adoyle »

wilfra wrote: post #9
michaelfeathers wrote: post #3

Why pastebin?

For anonymity. The person who posted it is likely an MIT Student/Alumnus/Faculty who received the email and others might not like them sharing it.

It went to the 'allmit' list (http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/allmit) which goes to "all current students (including incoming freshman and graduate students, special and cross-registered students) and all employees listed in the MIT directory or with SAP status=active" which is upwards of 22,000 people.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#40

Post by masklinn »

objclxt wrote: post #30
jacquesm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and if you looked carefully you'll notice that he didn't actually do anything until he was threatened with spending a life in jail and being bankrupted , without the option to get off without pleading guilty. And all that for trying to do something good. You describe yourself as a 'public interest lawyer'. I suggest you try to live up to that title and have the public interest at heart. The subject of your littl…

>"he was threatened with spending a life in jail and being bankrupted, without the option to get off without pleading guilty." ...I don't quite understand this. Surely he did have an option to "get off without pleading guilty" - to be found not guilty by a jury of his peers.

> Surely he did have an option to "get off without pleading guilty" - to be found not guilty by a jury of his peers.

1. That would have bankrupted him anyway.

2. He was guilty, as far as the law book is concerned.

Post reply on HN