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

MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

web.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 96 posts

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#61

Post by burntsushi »

res0nat0r wrote: post #56
chaostheory wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I'm wrong but they deserve blame for initiating the destruction of someone's life (jail time and fines in the millions) and not doing anything to stop it like JSTOR did. Yes not everyone offs themselves when their lives are ruined, but there are a lot of people who do. Now they're essentially trying to be free of any blame by releasing a CYA document during a time when everyone's attention will be on so…

> Correct me if I'm wrong but they deserve blame for initiating the destruction of someone's life (jail time and fines in the millions) So Aaron had nothing to do with getting himself into the situation that he did?

There exists such a thing known as a disproportionate response. I assumed that was the implication here. (Not that Aaron did nothing wrong, but that the response to his wrong-doing was wildly disproportionate.)

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#62

Post by rdl »

larrys wrote: post #53
rdl wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A factual one, which has been widely reported over the years. Universities pay for their own police. The goal of the university is to avoid incidents which would deter parents from sending their children to the school. Rape, particularly date rape/incidents involving alcohol are quite common on campus, if only due to demographics (young, socially connected, etc.) There are three ways to solve it -- either actually ad…

Interesting. So you are saying it has to do with essentially restricting or retarding the flow of information that could be harmful to the University. Then I would expect over time with the Internet that that would not be as effective as it was in years past before the Internet. Do we have any data on how this has changed now that anyone can broadcast anything and get attention? I would expect that if the primary rea…

Good question. I think it's more about having alternatives to official reporting channels so the stuff never actually gets reported, vs. hiding reports. But, we've seen citizen cameras as a huge force to accountability in cases of police abuse, too (Rodney King for a city PD; BART and Toronto for transit police, various people who came forward at Penn State after the Sandusky stuff blew the issue up there). So it seems plausible.

I'm not saying the only thing the police do is hide rapes, it's that their essential differentiation vs. other LEOs would be to protect their employers from embarrassment which would be detrimental to the organization's mission, which rape would be. So the reason it exists as a distinct force is that, whereas they still spend a large percentage of their effort in duties totally in common with a city police force.

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#63

Post by danielweber »

burntsushi wrote: post #61
res0nat0r wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Correct me if I'm wrong but they deserve blame for initiating the destruction of someone's life (jail time and fines in the millions) So Aaron had nothing to do with getting himself into the situation that he did?

There exists such a thing known as a disproportionate response . I assumed that was the implication here. (Not that Aaron did nothing wrong, but that the response to his wrong-doing was wildly disproportionate.)

People are discussing when the disproportionate response occurred. Was it calling any police at all? Was it a prosecutor offering a six-month plea bargain to a charge that likely would not have gotten Swartz any jail time at all even if guilty on all charges?

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#64

Post by burntsushi »

danielweber wrote: post #63
burntsushi wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There exists such a thing known as a disproportionate response . I assumed that was the implication here. (Not that Aaron did nothing wrong, but that the response to his wrong-doing was wildly disproportionate.)

People are discussing when the disproportionate response occurred. Was it calling any police at all? Was it a prosecutor offering a six-month plea bargain to a charge that likely would not have gotten Swartz any jail time at all even if guilty on all charges?

What? That wasn't what I responded to. Look at the progression of the parent comments:

    >> Correct me if I'm wrong but they deserve blame for initiating the 
    >> destruction of someone's life (jail time and fines in the millions)
    
    > So Aaron had nothing to do with getting himself into the situation that 
    > he did?

    There exists such a thing known as a disproportionate response. I assumed 
    that was the implication here. (Not that Aaron did nothing wrong, but that
    the response to his wrong-doing was wildly disproportionate.)
My response is saying that nobody is claiming Aaron doesn't deserve any blame. Only that there was a disproportionate response. Just because X acted wrongly doesn't mean Y had to have acted rightly.

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#65

Post by sadfaceunread »

sadfaceunread wrote: post #42
sadfaceunread wrote: post #25

The number of people in this comment thread who have not read this report in detail is outstandingly large. It is a 100+ page document and I've been reading it for longer than this link has been active and I still haven't finished reviewing finely enough to comment intelligently on the contents.

Update: Still on Part III. I am amazed that people are posting like they have gotten through it all.

Finally read all the the text and most appendices (skipped the definition of terms at the end). Overall I think that this report is very long but unfortunately difficult to process. In the end it, in compliance with its charge, does not propose recommendations but merely provides statements of facts, and identifies critical questions.

The overall opinion I'm left with is that the legal system is incredibly complex, and that MIT's decision to take a position of neutrality and active disinterest in the case while a defensible position made it harder for the administration and others to act. In the end MIT did not identify an outcome it wanted for the process, which is _okay_ but far from world leading, or inspiring. I agree with the sentiment of the report in the conclusion that " Looking back on the Aaron Swartz case, the world didn’t see leadership. As one person involved in the decisions put it: “MIT didn’t do anything wrong; but we didn’t do ourselves proud. "

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#66

Post by res0nat0r »

burntsushi wrote: post #64
danielweber wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are discussing when the disproportionate response occurred. Was it calling any police at all? Was it a prosecutor offering a six-month plea bargain to a charge that likely would not have gotten Swartz any jail time at all even if guilty on all charges?

What? That wasn't what I responded to. Look at the progression of the parent comments: >> Correct me if I'm wrong but they deserve blame for initiating the >> destruction of someone's life (jail time and fines in the millions) > So Aaron had nothing to do with getting himself into the situation that > he did? There exists such a thing known as a disproportionate response. I assumed that was the implication here. (Not…

The question above: Is a 6 month sentence and no jail time plea bargain considered disproportionate?

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#67

Post by saraid216 »

rdl wrote: post #62
larrys wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. So you are saying it has to do with essentially restricting or retarding the flow of information that could be harmful to the University. Then I would expect over time with the Internet that that would not be as effective as it was in years past before the Internet. Do we have any data on how this has changed now that anyone can broadcast anything and get attention? I would expect that if the primary rea…

Good question. I think it's more about having alternatives to official reporting channels so the stuff never actually gets reported, vs. hiding reports. But, we've seen citizen cameras as a huge force to accountability in cases of police abuse, too (Rodney King for a city PD; BART and Toronto for transit police, various people who came forward at Penn State after the Sandusky stuff blew the issue up there). So it see…

Really, leveling such an accusation at the university police is trying to deal with a symptom. Abolishing university police forces won't cause rape instances to decline appreciably, but it will accelerate the implosion of higher education as a whole. Precisely for the reasons you stated.

Perhaps it would be better to look for a solution where universities are less motivated to compete for student head count, so that their police forces are less motivated to cover up incidents that would reduce it.

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#68

Post by whyme »

bguthrie wrote: post #9
mitmatt wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The report appears to find that MIT should not have changed its neutral stance, which is disappointing, and I'm skeptical. The report does not have any findings about what MIT "should" have done, as it states many times, such as in the last paragraph of the Introduction section: > It was not part of our charge in this review to draw conclusions, but rather to determine facts and to consider what can be learned from…

I'm skimming quickly for the gist, and certainly didn't intend to misrepresent its contents. That being said, I'm not going to change what I wrote; that quote presents a value judgment, one that I'm skeptical of, and since the broader report doesn't appear to admit to any responsibility for subsequent events, I think it's disappointing. I have a lot of respect for the authors of the report, and I trust their integrit…

"I have a lot of respect for the authors of the report, and I trust their integrity"

Respect and trust are lost much more easily than gained.

Re: MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case

#70

Post by chaostheory »

res0nat0r wrote: post #66
burntsushi wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? That wasn't what I responded to. Look at the progression of the parent comments: >> Correct me if I'm wrong but they deserve blame for initiating the >> destruction of someone's life (jail time and fines in the millions) > So Aaron had nothing to do with getting himself into the situation that > he did? There exists such a thing known as a disproportionate response. I assumed that was the implication here. (Not…

The question above: Is a 6 month sentence and no jail time plea bargain considered disproportionate?

That was only mentioned AFTER he died. Let's take a look at their press release: http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/news/2011/July/SwartzAaronPR....

"AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution, forfeiture and a fine of up to $1 million."

Gee I wonder why someone would contemplate suicide?

Post reply on HN