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

51–60 of 223 posts

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#51

Post by fatbird »

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.

One of the issues that's been topical around here lately is that the cost of being found not guilty by a jury, is itself ruinous, if not totally out of reach of most people. This is part of the fed's strategy in massively overcharging people: It pressures them to accept a plea deal, which is how the vast majority of cases are resolved, because they can't possibly afford to stick it out long enough to be found not guilty.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#52

Post by Illychnosis »

potatolicious wrote: post #38
objclxt wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"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.

> A court cannot let someone walk after a crime simply because the law itself is unjust.

Incorrect. That's what the power of jury nullification is for. It's been ensconced in Western law for centuries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lilburne

Aaron only committed a crime worthy of severe punishment if one takes the point of view of the Crown...I mean, of the government.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#53

Post by codygman »

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…

What crimes do you actually believe he committed? He downloaded a ton of academic articles, and then he did as JSTOR asked him to, and returned the Intellectual property.

The focus should be on getting mental health services to those that need it most AS WELL AS ceasing to judge prosecutors based on their prosecution rate.

This sets the stage for over-prosecution and can blind the prosecutor into not just trying to prove everyone guilty, but force them into submitting that they are guilty whether they are or not.

Police officer's used to be judged on arrest rate, we figured out that wasn't actually doing any good, and changed the criteria to lower crime rates.

The prosecutor who grossly over-charged Aaron (and is obviously technically illiterate) should be forced to resign. If you think that sending someone to jail for 30 years (or even the minimum of 5) for downloading academic articles is fair, then you should do the right thing and resign from your position as a state level prosecutor too.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#54

Post by rokhayakebe »

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…

I do not remember intentionally downvoting anyone on the internet, your comment made me want to break that pattern.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#55

Post by potatolicious »

kennywinker wrote: post #37
potatolicious wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I agree, and it's why I find the witch hunt angle all the more troubling. Half of the people making angry diatribes right now on HN couldn't write a cogent paragraph about the failings of the American prosecutorial system, two days ago.

And now they're busy tripping over each other with hyperbole-filled condemnations, and casting all members of the justice system as something subhuman.

And in all of this noise we've only heard a few whimpers about the systemic failings that have brought about this tragedy, with vastly more voices calling for specific heads to roll. This is a classic pitchfork-wielding mob - less concerned with the future prevention of the injustice, and much more concerned with blame and vengeance.

There is justice, and there is mob justice. HN has seen vastly more of the latter than the former in the past couple of days.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#56

Post by jacquesm »

Illychnosis wrote: post #52
potatolicious wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> A court cannot let someone walk after a crime simply because the law itself is unjust. Incorrect. That's what the power of jury nullification is for. It's been ensconced in Western law for centuries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lilburne Aaron only committed a crime worthy of severe punishment if one takes the point of view of the Crown...I mean, of the government.

Jury nullification is to all intents and purposes mostly a theoretical thing nowadays.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#57

Post by dialtone »

potatolicious wrote: post #38
objclxt wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"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.

As a matter of fact a jury can do that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification although of course this is a controversial topic.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#58

Post by Kylekramer »

asdfologist wrote: post #32
potatolicious wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Families aren't unerring. Taking a person's family reaction as the ideal course of action post tragedy is a hornet's nest of problems.

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#59

Post by hamai »

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…

His "crimes"[1] were not worthy being intimidated with a 35 year old sentence. In any sane society this young man could've done community work(if guilty). A sane society would like to use his skills to teach at schools or something, not throw him in a hell-on-earth prison system were humans are disposable.

The justice system can be a game[2], strong players have it their way, and the seminal work by Aaron's "Demand Progress" was a direct affront to very strong players. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, "the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs", and tragic events like these are what move people in one direction and make things change. His mental state is secondary to the injustice he suffered.

[1] http://unhandled.com/2013/01/12/the-truth-about-aaron-swartz... [2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/harveysilverglate/2013/01/03/bla...

Re: MIT President on Aaron Swartz

#60

Post by waterlesscloud »

losvedir wrote: post #33

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 m…

That's Abelson as in SICP, isn't it?
Post reply on HN