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

U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

cornyn.senate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 144 posts

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#61

Post by rayiner »

justin66 wrote: post #49
rayiner wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Swartz case aside, nobody likes the DOJ. Liberals don't like them because they're tasked with defending laws like DOMA (until recently), drug laws, etc, and people like John Yoo, etc, that are unpopular with their contingent. Conservatives don't like them because they are tasked with defending laws like the Sherman Act, etc, that are unpopular with their contingent. But each side likes the laws that are unpopular…

There are some pretty serious oversimplifications there. I can "like" an office or department even if its current inhabitant is doing something I don't like. For obvious reasons, this is doubly true when we're talking about an office inhabited by political appointees.

Oh sure, people like the DOJ conceptually. But nobody ever likes the actual DOJ that exists at any given time.

To a liberal, the DOJ is in the abstract the agency that enforces anti-trust laws or the like against big companies. But the actual DOJ is the one going after people growing weed. To a conservative, the DOJ in the abstract is the agency that goes after drug traffickers. But the actual DOJ is the one meddling in mergers.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#62

Post by jacoblyles »

tptacek wrote: post #60
jacoblyles wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thomas, could you be any more hateful? The guy is doing something right. Who cares if he's a Republican?

I could be a lot more hateful about John Cornyn, who is repugnant to me and an all-around force for evil. For now, I'll just stick to the bare facts. If Dick Cheney wrote this letter, a big chunk of HN would have no trouble identifying the problem. But very few HN'ers pay enough attention to national politics to understand that John Cornyn is one of the Senate's answers to Dick Cheney.

You're giving "your side" a bad name. You're heading into self-parody.

Mitt Romney and his sons once rescued a family from drowning when the family's boat sunk on a lake. I imagine you could find some ulterior evil motive in that.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#63

Post by olefoo »

veridies wrote: post #45
honu wrote: post #33

The good news is that some good questions have been asked, and the reply will be available for scrutiny. I'm not sure Cornyn was the best member of Congress to write this sort of letter. Yes, he is on the Committee of the Judiciary, but his political leanings might result in posturing that obfuscates the issues we care about. That being said, I'm glad someone asked.

Perhaps, but this letter was focused and, on the whole, loaded with serious and important questions. It looks like his political posturing on this one is going to be aligned with our politics.

Just keep telling yourself that politics is a branch of biology, not of physics. It's messy, unclear, somewhat random and does not operate by simply observable rational rules.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#64

Post by Aqueous »

dos1 wrote: post #50
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

> what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think about this clown using his name to score political points? I'm not sure I understand why the "clown" scoring political points is so bad. Where in the rulebook does it state that doing the right thing must be completely devoid of agenda or beneficial byproducts? Take, for example, volunteering. There are many who "volunteer" because they have to - whether it be for…

> Where in the rulebook does it state that doing the right > thing must be completely devoid of agenda or beneficial > byproducts?

When every policy he supports is, both in effect and in spirit, nearly diametrically opposed to the beliefs of the dead person whose name he's using to score political points?

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#65

Post by jacoblyles »

pemulis wrote: post #16
danso wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is most definitely a proxy in the ongoing political battle between the Senate Republicans and the DoJ. It's a little surprising that he would side with Aaron just to take a potshot at the U.S. attorney's office. It's also worth pointing out that Texas (at least until recently) had some of the best open-records laws in the country. Cornyn argued that the Feds should emulate Texas in this regard -- during the…

If he was advocate for more open access to government records, why is it surprising that he would be concerned about the Aaron Swartz case? I agree that this letter could be seen as part a larger battle between Republicans and the Obama DoJ, but does that mean that questions about Aaron Swartz' prosecution are only valid if they come from Democrats?

I think tptacek's point is that he hates Republicans.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#66

Post by berlinbrown »

tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

Why can't you just take the questions at face value and leave it at that.

You are doing the same thing that Carmen Ortiz did to Aaron. You are attacking this guy.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#67

Post by tptacek »

jacoblyles wrote: post #62
tptacek wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could be a lot more hateful about John Cornyn, who is repugnant to me and an all-around force for evil. For now, I'll just stick to the bare facts. If Dick Cheney wrote this letter, a big chunk of HN would have no trouble identifying the problem. But very few HN'ers pay enough attention to national politics to understand that John Cornyn is one of the Senate's answers to Dick Cheney.

You're giving "your side" a bad name. You're heading into self-parody. Mitt Romney and his sons once rescued a family from drowning when the family's boat sunk on a lake. I imagine you could find some ulterior evil motive in that.

I wouldn't dream of insulting Mitt Romney by comparing him to John Cornyn.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#68

Post by michael_nielsen »

tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

Cornyn has for many years been a leader on open access to science. Together with Joe Lieberman he introduced the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA) into Congress in 2006. This Act would, if passed, make almost all scientific publications funded by the US Govt openly accessible within 6 months of publication:

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

The act has not yet passed. It was re-proposed in 2010 and 2012, each time with increased support from a bi-partisan group of sponsors, in both Houses. Cornyn is still a sponsor.

My understanding is that Cornyn was instrumental in the passage of the 2008 NIH public access policy, which makes NIH-funded research available within 6 months of publication:

http://publicaccess.nih.gov/

This is by far the largest victory for open access to date. It would, however, be eclipsed by FRPAA, should it pass.

Given all this, I believe it is natural that Cornyn has an interest in the case, and questions.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#69

Post by gyardley »

Aqueous wrote: post #64
dos1 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think about this clown using his name to score political points? I'm not sure I understand why the "clown" scoring political points is so bad. Where in the rulebook does it state that doing the right thing must be completely devoid of agenda or beneficial byproducts? Take, for example, volunteering. There are many who "volunteer" because they have to - whether it be for…

> Where in the rulebook does it state that doing the right > thing must be completely devoid of agenda or beneficial > byproducts? When every policy he supports is, both in effect and in spirit, nearly diametrically opposed to the beliefs of the dead person whose name he's using to score political points?

Good lord, you don't have to agree with Aaron's left-wing politics to be concerned about federal abuse of power. Seeing justice done isn't a partisan issue.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#70

Post by tptacek »

michael_nielsen wrote: post #68
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

Cornyn has for many years been a leader on open access to science. Together with Joe Lieberman he introduced the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA) into Congress in 2006. This Act would, if passed, make almost all scientific publications funded by the US Govt openly accessible within 6 months of publication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Research_Public_Access_... The act has not yet passed. It was re-…

John Cornyn and science get along great, as long as the science doesn't involve stem cell research (which he has casted Senate votes to ban) or climate change.
Post reply on HN