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

Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

bostonmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 211 posts

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#111

Post by mtrimpe »

ams6110 wrote: post #87
tomphoolery wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was Aaron's choice to kill himself. He wasn't a victim of anything but his own mind.

Choice is probably not the right word, in that a suicidal person isn't thinking clearly (even if in his own mind he thinks he is). But it was his doing, not anyone else's.

Let's keep in mind that there is a pretty good example of external pressure and/or threat of persecution elevating suicide rates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_among_LGBT_youth

If you also consider the differential susceptibility thesis (which seems to apply to Aaron rather well) then it's easy to argue that the government's conduct most likely did significantly contribute: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_susceptibility_hyp...

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#112

Post by weland »

sneak wrote: post #101
suprgeek wrote: post #35

MIT Played a key role in Aaron's Death: http://gothamist.com/2013/01/15/aaron_swartzs_lawyer_mit_ref... They refused to sign-off on any deal that did not involve Jail time. This was THE one point that weighed more on his mind than any else per the recorded statements of his partner. MIT's pig-headedness in this aspect really destroyed any respect I had for that institution. JSTOR made a much more reasoned statement h…

> They refused to sign-off on any deal that did not involve Jail time. It's not up to the victim how the perp gets prosecuted. It has absolutely nothing to do with them - it is up to the prosecutor alone.

On the other hand, the prosecutor will often take their views into account when deciding how to conduct his activity and, especially, what charges to press, what bargains to offer and what stance to adopt during the trial. Making a stand in court becomes far more difficult when both victims insist that whatever damage was done was easily repaired and of little consequence to their well-being. MIT's ambiguous -- at best -- position in this case fueled a great deal of the moral abuses of the prosecution.

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#113

Post by idle_processor »

mpyne wrote: post #89
nitrogen wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When "we" decided to grant the government a monopoly on violence, there was nothing in the contract about letting them hack and sabotage American computer systems or commit other crimes at will.

Has NSA sabotaged American computer systems? Most IP 'pirates' seem quite willing to claim that copying data is not at all destructive, and the NSA can make similar claims. But either way, "we" also didn't put anything in our "contract" that let them make nuclear weapons, air forces, computer inter-networks, or social security/welfare programs.

Do you not consider this[0] evidence of them sabotaging cryptography systems?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6944118

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#114

Post by coldtea »

sneak wrote: post #101
suprgeek wrote: post #35

MIT Played a key role in Aaron's Death: http://gothamist.com/2013/01/15/aaron_swartzs_lawyer_mit_ref... They refused to sign-off on any deal that did not involve Jail time. This was THE one point that weighed more on his mind than any else per the recorded statements of his partner. MIT's pig-headedness in this aspect really destroyed any respect I had for that institution. JSTOR made a much more reasoned statement h…

> They refused to sign-off on any deal that did not involve Jail time. It's not up to the victim how the perp gets prosecuted. It has absolutely nothing to do with them - it is up to the prosecutor alone.

>It has absolutely nothing to do with them - it is up to the prosecutor alone.

The "absolutely nothing to do with them" is patently false. Prosecutors listens to victims about such things and are influenced by them all the time.

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#115

Post by coldtea »

vex wrote: post #2

Suicide is completely a personal choice. MIT had no reason to try and defend an outsider who hijacked part of their network, and trying to make them seem like they caused him to hang himself smacks of tunnel vision. It's a natural response to a suicide; we try and search for something to blame. But unless you argue that MIT should have known Aaron was mentally unstable, saying MIT "caused" him to kill himself is illo…

>Suicide is completely a personal choice.

There's no such thing as a "completely personal choice".

In fact the whole notion of a "completely personal choice" is ludicrous, bordering on the metaphysical.

There is an outside world, a reality, and things that happen there influce our actions, including any decision to commit suicide.

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#116

Post by bhitov »

sneak wrote: post #101
suprgeek wrote: post #35

MIT Played a key role in Aaron's Death: http://gothamist.com/2013/01/15/aaron_swartzs_lawyer_mit_ref... They refused to sign-off on any deal that did not involve Jail time. This was THE one point that weighed more on his mind than any else per the recorded statements of his partner. MIT's pig-headedness in this aspect really destroyed any respect I had for that institution. JSTOR made a much more reasoned statement h…

> They refused to sign-off on any deal that did not involve Jail time. It's not up to the victim how the perp gets prosecuted. It has absolutely nothing to do with them - it is up to the prosecutor alone.

As explained by the director of the Media Lab:

"Apparently a grand jury is meeting to render an indictment on Wednesday and there is really only one more day to provide any input into the process. Since it is a criminal case and the prosecutor needs to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was unauthorized, I think MIT is in the position to “cast doubt” if it desires."

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#117

Post by fastball »

meritt wrote: post #85
vex wrote: post #2

Suicide is completely a personal choice. MIT had no reason to try and defend an outsider who hijacked part of their network, and trying to make them seem like they caused him to hang himself smacks of tunnel vision. It's a natural response to a suicide; we try and search for something to blame. But unless you argue that MIT should have known Aaron was mentally unstable, saying MIT "caused" him to kill himself is illo…

He was facing 35+ years of prison. Suicide -- while I agree is a personal choice -- it's not exactly an unreasonable decision given the outlandish sentence.

Suicide is always an unreasonable decision, unless you face something which is literally worse than death.

A lifetime in prison is not worse than death. At least you can still talk to your family. You can acquire new skills. There is the chance you get paroled early. Etc, etc.

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#118

Post by samastur »

mpyne wrote: post #91
wpietri wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a thoroughly dumb argument. You might as well say that cancer is perfectly nice given that most people survive, and that the ones who don't have something wrong with them. The mistake you're making is that responsibility isn't zero-sum. Is Swartz responsible for killing himself? Sure. But if prosecutors are unjustly harsh with a lot of people in a way that causes the suicide rate in that group to jump, are th…

But now the mistake you're making is that if everyone is responsible then no one is responsible, which is an even worse state of affairs.

He didn't say everyone was responsible. But even if we were it would not follow that no one is since responsibility is not something that depends on others not having any.

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#119

Post by jezfromfuture »

vex wrote: post #2

Suicide is completely a personal choice. MIT had no reason to try and defend an outsider who hijacked part of their network, and trying to make them seem like they caused him to hang himself smacks of tunnel vision. It's a natural response to a suicide; we try and search for something to blame. But unless you argue that MIT should have known Aaron was mentally unstable, saying MIT "caused" him to kill himself is illo…

Agreed , finally a post not blaming others for the individual choice of one man.

Re: Losing Aaron: Bob Swartz on MIT's role in his son's death

#120

Post by streetnigga »

ScottBurson wrote: post #92
inspectahdeck wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"MIT was never involved in any plea negotiation, and was never asked by either the prosecution or the defense to approve or disapprove any plea agreement" http://swartz-report.mit.edu/docs/report-to-the-president.pd... II.B.3, last sentence. Read the whole section for a summary of that event.

Here's more detail, from III.A.2 (top of p. 52): During the June 21 conversation, the lead prosecutor also told OGC [the MIT Office of General Counsel] that, essentially, his work was done, that the final decision about the prosecution was now in the hands of his supervisors, and that a decision would be made soon. The OGC attorney took the opportunity to suggest that some people at MIT would be likely to view the pr…

That paints the prosecution in a horrible light. Has anyone gotten further on who applied such pressure? Folks like the Secret Service[1]?

"The heavily redacted documents released today confirm earlier reports that the Secret Service was interested in a “Guerilla Open Access Manifesto” that Swartz and others had penned in 2008. In May 2011, a Secret Service agent and a detective from the Cambridge police department interviewed a friend of Swartz and inquired specifically about the political statement."

If you are a hammer, you must smash all nails as hard as possible until they commit suicide? Is that prosecution discretion?

[1] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/08/swartz-foia-release...

Post reply on HN