Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago • Hacker News Board

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#421

Post by jonmc12 » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:45 AM UTC

edw519 wrote: post #260

[deleted] wrote: post #104

[deleted]

I may or may not have something to say about this, but not here, and not now. Can we please just let the family grieve? We are the family.

To all those replying to edw519 - please stop witch-hunting. First prosecutor, then MIT, then.. edw519? Its possible any of these parties made a mistake.. now that they can look back and reflect. But, even after reflection its very possible that each party made the best decision they could with the information at hand. Maybe I'm lucky, but I find 99%+ of people I meet in this world are well intentioned, and if I invest the empathy cycles I almost always can see their point of view and understand why they made the decision that they did.

Does your sympathy towards aaronsw merit that you throw empathy out the window? No. Do you actually understand the complex set of events that occurred and how these events relate to one another and the rest of the world? No. Surely, a solution to prevent such a terrible scenario from re-occuring is far removed from personal attacks:

  - if you don't like how district attorney works - get moving on changing the law
  - don't think prosecutor did their job?  point out their job description vs their actions to the proper authority
  - don't like how MIT managed case?  reach out to the MIT beaurocracy and work with them to improve their process
  - don't like edw519 *most upvoted* post on the Sept article?  suggest policy changes that could prevent such a comment from appearing on HN
  - etc

When you start with the point of view that we are all reasonable, and well intentioned.. the problem then becomes about process and culture, and you can actually start making progress.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#422

Post by defen » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:45 AM UTC

herbart wrote: post #417

DannyBee wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edw519 is allowed to have an opinion, and his opinion does not, at least to me, seem unreasonable. Not everyone is going to agree with your civil disobedience actions, or you asking for help with the consequences. That doesn't make them bad people, or wrong people, for saying they don't like your approach, think you should accept consequences, or whatever else. For example, MLK didn't hate the clergymen that disagree…

>Not everyone is going to agree with your civil disobedience actions No, but those who don't support, say, MLK Jr., deserve to be shamed for their regressive attitude. Practically speaking, the forces of regression are always louder and stronger than the voices for progress. But if we don't denounce and shame those regressive voices, then the voices for progress end up feeling so alone and unloved. The truth about HN…

This is so deranged that I can't tell if it's a parody of HN's reaction to this turn of events or a serious post.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#423

Post by herbart » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:46 AM UTC

NZ_Matt wrote: post #46

jacquesm wrote: post #18

Here is the HN thread from back then. Some of it makes for pretty uncomfortable reading right now. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484

God dam I hate the term "man up", it really is a hugely degrading phrase. If someone is having a hard time and asks for the help the worst thing you can do is tell them to "man up" or "get over it".

It's also sexist, but that's pretty much what you can expect from the tech community. Shameful.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#424

Post by anthonyb » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:48 AM UTC

hindsightbias wrote: post #409

anthonyb wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, hopefully the next time that you feel like making a 'meh' comment, you will at least consider whether you're making a positive contribution. Ed made a comment that was pretty harsh, although true given the information available at the time, and is now being singled out by Techcrunch and the rest of the HN community. Of course, in fine HN tradition everybody is now jumping on Ed in exactly the same way that he j…

It was 80 IQ points and Alan Kay said it.

Thanks. I should've looked that quote up before posting.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#425

Post by herbart » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:49 AM UTC

ChristianMarks wrote: post #116

The principle of free information transmission must extend to its advocates: if you advocate that information must be free and you engage in civil disobedience, then you ought to expose your finances to the world when requesting support for a legal defense fund. Exposing one's finances at such a time demonstrates adherence to principle, and it blunts skepticism.

There is a big difference between public and private information. Aaron does not need to give up his privacy to be justified in asking for help.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#426

Post by salemh » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:56 AM UTC

davorak wrote: post #385

djt wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be honest, I thought the same thing as Ed originally. It's a tragic story and I'm sure there is much to learn but let the family grieve rather than make click bait and throw people to the wolves ( ironically what this article is commenting on)

How should people who though like you and ed act differently now? Aaron did not receive enough help on his defense bills. This likely part of the reason he is now dead, but only part of it. Given this how should actions change, if at all? If you think the world would be better if people that held similar opinions to you ed's were slightly different, how should they be different and what argument would have moved you…

Remembering the earlier thread through the fog of memory, I assumed he had the funds to pay it himself, and that was cause of much derision, ala "why is he asking for help? He's rich!" and things of that nature.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#427

Post by sethbc » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:58 AM UTC

jonmc12 wrote: post #421

edw519 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may or may not have something to say about this, but not here, and not now. Can we please just let the family grieve? We are the family.

To all those replying to edw519 - please stop witch-hunting. First prosecutor, then MIT, then.. edw519? Its possible any of these parties made a mistake.. now that they can look back and reflect. But, even after reflection its very possible that each party made the best decision they could with the information at hand. Maybe I'm lucky, but I find 99%+ of people I meet in this world are well intentioned, and if I inve…

> - don't like edw519 most upvoted post on the Sept article? suggest policy changes that could prevent such a comment from appearing on HN

Let's just eliminate the ability to vote on comments. Seems reasonable. Or pg could shut down the site. Then Ed couldn't make the comment in the first place, right?

Maybe Ed still thinks he was right and he feels compelled to backpedal because in hindsight his comments seem insensitive.

Or maybe your 99%+ statistic is wrong and wisdom of the crowds isn't all it's cracked up to be. If anything, the juxtaposition between this thread and the original thread shows the hypocrisy endemic to crowd driven discussion.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#428

Post by roguecoder » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 1:58 AM UTC

edw519 wrote: post #260

[deleted] wrote: post #104

[deleted]

I may or may not have something to say about this, but not here, and not now. Can we please just let the family grieve? We are the family.

We are not "family".

We are the people who called him Paris Hilton and told him to man up. We are the people who consistently criticized him just because he was well known. We told him to shut up about ethics and get back to coding. We told him he wasn't any good at coding, either. We didn't treat him as badly as we could have, as we've treated some other people, but I think trying to recast ourselves as "family" is incredibly disrespectful of his actual family who lost their child.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#429

Post by noahc » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 2:00 AM UTC

jonmc12 wrote: post #421

edw519 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may or may not have something to say about this, but not here, and not now. Can we please just let the family grieve? We are the family.

To all those replying to edw519 - please stop witch-hunting. First prosecutor, then MIT, then.. edw519? Its possible any of these parties made a mistake.. now that they can look back and reflect. But, even after reflection its very possible that each party made the best decision they could with the information at hand. Maybe I'm lucky, but I find 99%+ of people I meet in this world are well intentioned, and if I inve…

To add to this, it might be useful to add why Ed was wrong. He wasn't wrong because he lacked empathy or because he was looking to be a bully. He was wrong because his mental model of how federal cases work was wrong.

He, much like my self, probably assumed that someone with millions of dollars could fund the litigation of a federal case, however, the nature of these prosecutions tend to freeze assets, alienate friends and business partners who could help fund a defense and generally make it impossible for justice to be done. I would have been wrong about this too.

We all get stuff wrong from time to time, and to be honest, I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. However, I firmly believe edw519's comments come from a place of experience, love, and support even if it might not be what we always want to hear.

My hope is that my comments when based in love and charity would not be subject to similar comments that edw519's comments have been. It's okay to disagree and edw519 might even disagree in someways with what he wrote.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#430

Post by illuminate » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 2:01 AM UTC

illuminate wrote: post #407

derleth wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Feminism benefits men as well. It depends on how it's applied, doesn't it? > Patriarchy DOES exist to the detriment to men Thank you for restating my point. > your anger is misapplied. How? I don't understand how my anger is misapplied here.

"> Feminism benefits men as well. It depends on how it's applied, doesn't it?" Destroying systems of entrenched privilege may not be viewed as beneficial by all men that cling to these systems, no. But equality does provide for a healthier system, if one appreciates women healthy in mind and body. Harping on straw "Feminists" won't improve our situation.

"And this is an example. It states that gender equality from the female perspective is automatically equivalent to "Destroying systems of entrenched privilege", which is a courtesy not given to the male perspective on the same concepts."

As I stated, it does by lessening strict gender roles.