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

Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 270 posts

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#121

Post by clarky07 »

legutierr wrote: post #84
asmithmd1 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ortiz specifically has brought other cases that have made me furious. Check out this one where she is trying to seize a family owned budget motel. There is no complaint whatsoever against the owner, but about once every other year the cops bust some low-level drug deal. The motel is paid-off and owned by the son of the founder and is worth 1.5 million, therefore she saw an easy civil forfeiture target. She is out of…

This was written over a year ago. Do you know the resolution of this case?

Hasn't been resolved yet. Trial was in November, no verdict yet - http://www.lowellsun.com/todaysheadlines/ci_22253534/caswell...

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#122

Post by drcube »

illuminate wrote: post #110
drcube wrote: post #104

I'm 100% behind changing the laws and punishing the overzealous prosecutor. Don't get me wrong. But I'd like to see the millions of poor black kids whose lives are destroyed by the justice system every day get this kind of response, and not just when it's a handsome rich white kid like Aaron.

It's easier to take on a specific cause than address every systemic ill at once. "But I'd like to see the millions of poor black kids whose lives are destroyed by the justice system every day get this kind of response" People are taking on the war on drugs, what else is clear-cut and concise enough to address? "Poverty" and "racism" are wayyyyyyyyyyy too complex for anyone to easily identify around it, and the condit…

Sure. I agree, it's a hard problem. Doesn't mean it shouldn't get attention.

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#123

Post by aw3c2 »

thoughtcriminal wrote: post #27
malandrew wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably the most worrying issue with this article. It places the blame on two individuals who are characterized as out of control instead of a system that is out of control. The entire system needs to be held accountable and corrected and those highlighted as having benefited their careers through this widespread misconduct should be individually held accountable just like individuals were held accountable a…

Mother Theresa once said that when she looked upon the many she could do nothing, but when she focused on the one, she could do something. The same applies here. Someone needs to be held accountable. Change needs to start somewhere.

Mother Theresa let people die slow, horrible and unnecessary deaths. You should never use that person as a good example for anything really. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa#Criticism

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#124

Post by MichaelSalib »

ucee054 wrote: post #118
MichaelSalib wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You NEED access to journals and conferences And you have them, in dead tree form at every big university. Universities functioned long before JSTOR. BLACKMAILED If you think this is blackmail, you don't know much. if you want to pretend that the 50K multiplies by the potential readership as "loss due to copyright theft" I don't believe that at all. My point was just that the archive has serious commercial value. If y…

Swartz's actions would have been an "attack" on a research archive, which the article classifies as having "little" commercial value (and Swartz wasn't profiting, it was civil disobedience). The Reuters news for yesterday lists the LIBOR scandal, which was an "attack" on financial data. The fine alone, for UBS alone, was $1.5Billion . Now that's what I call "serious commercial value". JSTOR, not so much. Do you want…

Swartz wasn't profiting, it was civil disobedience

As I've explained above, I don't think Swartz was trying to profit from this scheme. But I do think he was trying to destroy significant financial value (yes $50million/year is significant for me). And from a legal perspective, that's extremely serious.

Now that's what I call "serious commercial value". JSTOR, not so much.

So if I rob a bank and steal $30 million, that's not a crime with serious commercial value? Interesting.

Of course JSTOR was small potatoes compared to LIBOR. So what? 99% of all crimes are small potatoes compared to LIBOR. That argument proves way, way too much.

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#125

Post by YuriNiyazov »

kragen wrote: post #106
MichaelSalib wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that vengeance can be satisfying, but it means sending a message. And the message that US attorneys are going to hear is "don't fuck with young affluent white hackers with powerful friends". I never met Swartz, but I'd be surprised if he'd have wanted his legacy to be people that look like him getting a pass while everyone else suffers the same as before.

Having grown up in New Mexico, I didn't classify Aaron as "white". I don't know if he did.

What do you mean?

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#126

Post by Natsu »

fatbird wrote: post #63
Natsu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which statements, specifically, do you see as being unrealistic? Edit: I'd like to know what the downvoter is thinking, too, but I wonder if I'll get any answers.

Greatest prodigy of his generation is one such example of hyperbole.

How many other 20-somethings can you name who have impacted the world for the better as much as he has?

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#127

Post by raldi »

GHFigs wrote: post #120
ucee054 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you making that point in the abstract, or were you, I don't know, in a thread of comments on an article about Aaron Swartz?

He was responding to a comment making the argument that something cannot be a crime if no damage is done and no one is hurt. He even quoted the as much of the comment he was replying to. Please, please, please , pay attention to context before accusing someone of ignoring context. It makes it very difficult for people to have nuanced debates about complex events if nobody is allowed to isolate a part of the problem i…

> It makes it very difficult for people to have nuanced debates about complex events

Yes! Thank you, I was trying to put in words why the initial downvote wave on my comment really bothered me, and this is exactly it.

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#128

Post by stch »

kragen wrote: post #106
MichaelSalib wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that vengeance can be satisfying, but it means sending a message. And the message that US attorneys are going to hear is "don't fuck with young affluent white hackers with powerful friends". I never met Swartz, but I'd be surprised if he'd have wanted his legacy to be people that look like him getting a pass while everyone else suffers the same as before.

Having grown up in New Mexico, I didn't classify Aaron as "white". I don't know if he did.

What did you classify him as? What is your classification of white?

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#129

Post by biot »

fatbird wrote: post #63
Natsu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which statements, specifically, do you see as being unrealistic? Edit: I'd like to know what the downvoter is thinking, too, but I wonder if I'll get any answers.

Greatest prodigy of his generation is one such example of hyperbole.

The article says "one of the greatest" which isn't inaccurate; we're all among the greatest 7 billion people on the planet.

Re: Carmen Ortiz Strikes Out

#130

Post by Natsu »

MichaelSalib wrote: post #62
moxie wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the hardest part. Ortiz is obviously disgusting, but she's not really different than anyone else in her position. These kinds of tactics are employed every day. So what do we do? I support the demonization of Ortiz purely on the level of revenge. In a world where we typically have no agency, it's satisfying to make someone like her uncomfortable. But on another level, it's frustrating that it's imposs…

I get that vengeance can be satisfying, but it means sending a message. And the message that US attorneys are going to hear is "don't fuck with young affluent white hackers with powerful friends". I never met Swartz, but I'd be surprised if he'd have wanted his legacy to be people that look like him getting a pass while everyone else suffers the same as before.

Most here would prefer that they take home a lesson not to throw the book at people who are trying to make things better.

I think it's been pointed out that he's popular (and thus, has "powerful friends") because they sided with him in trying to do good and improve things. This is a far cry from someone using their celebrity status to flout the law for personal gain, which is the sort of thing one usually condemns.

> I'd be surprised if he'd have wanted his legacy to be people that look like him getting a pass while everyone else suffers the same as before.

Well, that's why Reason magazine (among others) has endorsed Aaron's law to at least fix one part of this. We can't change the system all at once. But we should make whatever progress we can, one law at a time. Perhaps eventually we will go to something like the German system, which dispenses efficient justice without any use of plea bargains. HN was discussing that the other day as well.

Post reply on HN