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

181–190 of 211 posts

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

#181

Post by ericd »

Tloewald wrote: post #178
ericd wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but you clearly don't know what the culture at MIT is like. People at MIT break into places like network closets all the time , including picking the locks (a popular hobby). It's not officially encouraged, but it's endemic, and the administration generally doesn't mind that much. Accessing places you're not supposed to be in and doing neat hacks is a big part of the culture. Lots of people "get kicked off…

One of the interesting details in this article that I had not previously seen was that JSTOR had blocked MIT's access owing to repeated bulk downloads, which led to an investigation by MIT police. So this presumably went a bit beyond routine high jinks, and it presumably at least inconvenienced other users. The fact is that — much as we may sympathize with him — Aaron killed himself .

Yeah, when it creates more work for the admins is probably when the admins would start being pissed, not with the trespassing or w/e that people seem stuck on.

And he killed himself in the face of what must have seemed like a hopeless situation, much of that hopelessness created by the massively overzealous prosecution. I think the prosecutors deserve a good amount of that blame.

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

#182

Post by Moocat87 »

chmike wrote: post #176
Moocat87 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My feeling is that most people who commit suicide do it because they decided it on a rational basis. Some people commit suicide because they want to stop a pain they feel and in their view will apparently last forever or will get worse. I.e cancer, someone has to spend the rest of his life in a bed after an accident ... People can also commit suicide as a sacrifice to save others. But I guess you were not talking of…

No. I don't think that and I didn't said that. Cite? Just found this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide . From the graphic shown on the page, not all suicide are caused by mental illness. That was my main point. I have some doubts about the mental illness importance shown in this graph. Anyway, the mental illness could be the source of pain leading to the rational decision to end it by suicide.

I don't think 40-50% qualifies as a "small fraction."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Suicidecases.png

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

#183

Post by raingrove »

fastball wrote: post #117
meritt wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Live free or die.

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

#184

Post by gress »

mpyne wrote: post #172
gress wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you possibly assert that Aaron "knew what 'the time' was?" I'm sure he was aware that there could be legal repercussions, but I sincerely doubt that he thought he was risking a felony conviction, bankruptcy, and prison.

Surely Aaron was aware at the time of any of the prior CFAA cases on the books. It's not as if he was the very first "network hacker" in U.S. legal history. But either way even if he was not aware, that was a failure on his part, not the prosecutors. The law was not amended specifically for Aaron, it was on the books in substantially it's current form for more than enough time for Aaron to have researched it.

It's not at all obvious that he would be prosecuted under that law, assuming he was prosecuted at all.

And this has nothing to do with whether it's the prosecutors fault or not (although their behavior was clearly morally reprehensible).

The point is that he likely did not know to expect 'the time'.

You have committed numerous felonies. Did you consider 'the time' before you committed them? http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.asp...

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

#185

Post by PhasmaFelis »

benologist wrote: post #42
marincounty wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can guarantee by your quip; you have never dealt with our legal system.

If it wasn't the legal system it would have been literally any other reason, big or small, that Aaron felt was terminally wrong with his life.

Obviously false, or he would've killed himself years ago over someone buying the wrong kind of toilet paper.

Seriously, please educate yourself before offering embarrassing opinions. Clinical depression does not mean automatic suicide, it just makes you more prone to considering suicide when things are bad.

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

#186

Post by gress »

pdonis wrote: post #158
gress wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you want to avoid muddy language. Fine. Do you think MIT have any moral responsibility for what happened?

Yes, but the prosecutors have a lot more. Using muddy language obfuscates that.

No more than pedantically shooting down slightly muddy comments about it does.

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

#187

Post by mentalhealth »

BlackDeath3 wrote: post #159
mentalhealth wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned quite a long time ago that realistic discussion of mental health as it actually affects real people generally results in a lot of negative votes here on HN. But please, continue to dismiss my argument by attacking me and not the statement I made. More par for the course hereabouts.

I think the problem here is that you didn't really make an argument. You made an unsubstantiated claim (and misused "diagnosis" while at it) and just sort of left it there.

I appreciate your response -- regarding a misuse of "diagnosis", you're absolutely correct, "indication" would have been more accurate. I try to use medical terminology in a way that accurately communicates what I'm trying to say to a lay audience, and it doesn't always totally work out. Thank you for the correction.

Regarding the "unsubstantiated claim", I don't feel the need to substantiate every assertion I make on HN. People here are generally smart and motivated enough to do their own research (when they're not busily dismissing everything they can with "citation needed"), and suicidal ideation as mental illness is universally accepted by the professional community qualified to discuss the phenomenon.

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

#188

Post by x0054 »

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.

That's not true in CA. Prosecutors have to consult with victims in felony cases before accepting a plea agreement.

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

#189

Post by wmil »

streetnigga wrote: post #120
ScottBurson wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

It's not clear if there was any pressure. Carmen Ortiz was rumoured to be planning a run at MA governor. She might have thought this case was a good way to get her name in the press.

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

#190

Post by walid »

wmil wrote: post #189
streetnigga wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

It's not clear if there was any pressure. Carmen Ortiz was rumoured to be planning a run at MA governor. She might have thought this case was a good way to get her name in the press.

It did. In all the wrong ways. If she had any political ambitions, she can kiss them goodbye.
Post reply on HN