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

Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

blog.achernya.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 220 posts

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#161

Post by cadlin »

btilly wrote: post #97
latj wrote: post #14

I do not condone the attacks that may be occurring. However, if you are trying to get someone's attention- it makes more sense to get the attention of the students rather than the administration. Today's MIT students are tomorrow's death-ray designers, robot-maintainers, and policy makers. They are tomorrow's administration- and they may not have made up their minds yet about ethical issues of intellectual property o…

This is true if by "get the attention of" you mean "shoot yourself in the foot". People who are sympathetic to political action tend to become significantly less sympathetic when they are personally inconvenienced by said political action. And their ire tends to be directed at whoever they see as being most directly responsible for their inconvenience. I am someone who broadly agrees with Aaron's goals. I agree with…

Just because that's true for you doesn't mean it is for everyone. If an institution I'm associated with or deal with regularly is doing/has done something unethical, I have no problem with people inconveniencing me to raise awareness of that. I would rather support justice rather than convenience.

It's not like MIT has apologized for this, either.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#163

Post by simonster »

aaron695 wrote: post #112

This cause is trying to change the access across the world for scientific articles and you're complaining for a short period "A few class websites are inaccessible, a few friends' blogs are down, and web development is a bit annoying" That's the most selfish thing I've seen today. No argument why this form of protest won't work just it interrupts your current lifestyle. And IMO it will help, it keep momentum and adds…

> This cause is trying to change the access across the world for scientific articles and you're complaining for a short period

Many MIT professors make their academic articles freely available on their lab websites. As Anonymous continues to attack the MIT network, they are making it more difficult for members of the general public to access academic articles. This isn't about open access. It's about exacting revenge for Aaron Swartz's death. Unfortunately, it's targeting the wrong people.

> No argument why this form of protest won't work just it interrupts your current lifestyle.

MIT students would support an effective protest that interrupts their lifestyles, but attacking student-run websites won't work because the only people who suffer are students who have to clean up after you. The people responsible for Aaron Swartz's prosecution couldn't care less.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#164

Post by btilly »

cadlin wrote: post #161
btilly wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true if by "get the attention of" you mean "shoot yourself in the foot". People who are sympathetic to political action tend to become significantly less sympathetic when they are personally inconvenienced by said political action. And their ire tends to be directed at whoever they see as being most directly responsible for their inconvenience. I am someone who broadly agrees with Aaron's goals. I agree with…

Just because that's true for you doesn't mean it is for everyone. If an institution I'm associated with or deal with regularly is doing/has done something unethical, I have no problem with people inconveniencing me to raise awareness of that. I would rather support justice rather than convenience. It's not like MIT has apologized for this, either.

If you already support the protest, then you're likely to be more forgiving of being inconvenienced by it. But if you don't, what happens then?

As for MIT's response, see http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2013/letter-on-death-of-aaron-... for something that suggests that something much more useful than a formal apology is coming. If you're inclined to be cynical about the inquiry that we've been promised, I highly recommend researching Abelson first.

Of course this is too little, too late for Aaron Swartz. But I couldn't have asked for an MIT president who presumably does not have the full picture to have made a more meaningful gesture.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#165

Post by FireBeyond »

subsystem wrote: post #113
FireBeyond wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must not have read the part about Aaron not actually being an MIT student at all - hence the trespass charges.

The trespassing charges were dropped. He was indicted for wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer and recklessly damaging a protected computer.

None of which makes my point untrue. That he was not a student there. He may not have been charged with trespass, but MIT was not his alma mater, and thus owed him nothing in that regard.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#166

Post by MrScruff »

Cushman wrote: post #144
Jach wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. All the tweets from that twitter account come from comments made by HN users.

I realize that. I'm just struggling to find one that seems unreasonable even out of context. It reads like as a list of valid opinions the curator disagrees with, which comes across as more than a little bit pissy.

Really?

'Affiliation with MIT right now, even as a student, looks to me like affiliation with the Nazi youth.'

Not unreasonable?

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#167

Post by wavesounds »

btilly wrote: post #93
wavesounds wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I was comparing a DDoS to lunch counter Sit-ins of the 60s. During the civil rights movement blacks and other protestors would overwhelm a restaurant taking up all the space at the counter until the owners agreed to meet their demands. It's a proven non-violent protest that works and is very similar to what DDoS does, except instead of human bodies filling up a restaurant you're using http requests to fill up a…

The significant difference is that when the owner gets unhappy about it, it is trivial to figure out who to talk to to get the problem fixed. The same is not true of DDoS attacks.

Thats a good point. But It all depends if you block your IP address or not. If it was a legal form a protest that people didn't have to worry about going to jail for you could easily make your information known. Problem is the government doesn't understand technology and will label you a hacker instead of non-violent protestor.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#169

Post by danielweber »

aaron695 wrote: post #121
danielweber wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a first guess, MIT students are very unlikely to react to someone causing them trouble by become more sympathetic with the people causing them trouble. Especially if the message of the attackers is "people who break into the network shouldn't have the cops called on them." (Although we should wait for Hal Abelson's report to find out what happened behind the scenes.)

I couldn't disagree more. These are MIT graduates, highly intelligent people, not some slack jaw locals. They are fully capable to look at the issues and take moral responsibility for the University they are part of. How can an intelligent person support a organisation by being part in it, then take no responsibility for what it does. Yes I know the commoners do this all the time for their entire lives, but being bet…

I really hope "better educated" and "looking at the total issue" isn't code for "agrees with me."

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#170

Post by tedunangst »

leepowers wrote: post #103
sethist wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to be a common misunderstanding of what protest rights you have in the US. The first amendment does not give you the right to protest anything, at any point, in any manner that you want. In fact, the government has a duty to protect my rights if your protest in infringing on them. The Occupy movement is another group that completely failed to understand that fact. You are legally allowed to protest, but p…

Civil disobedience is illegal by definition. DDoS attacks are illegal. Marching down the middle of the street is illegal. But are these acts immoral?

The easy answer if you want to march down the street is you tell city hall and get a parade permit. Did anybody tell MIT and apply for a packet storm permit?
Post reply on HN