Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network • Hacker News Board

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#211

Post by cwoebker » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 2:09 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #188

The other great protest is that any HS senior (or grad student applicant) who has an offer from MIT and from another comparable school (Stanford, CMU, etc.), tell MIT no, and tell them why you're saying no. I suspect if 5-10 people who got MIT "yes" did this, MIT admissions and the MIT President would go batshit. (You can do this even if you were on the fence about MIT, or even if you intended to go somewhere else an…

Given how many applicants MIT gets I do not think that 5-10 people would be enough to seriously upset them. Don't forget they can just get a couple more students with perfect SATs if they want. Furthermore, like the author said, it wasn't MIT as a community that went after Aaron, it was the administration.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#212

Post by j45 » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 2:12 PM UTC

worldsayshi wrote: post #207

Firehed wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I regretfully disagree with you, in regards to the case playing out actually being helpful to the cause. The public, by and large, doesn't give a damn about this kind of thing. His suicide, tragically, appears to have helped the cause - the media loves the wild speculation and gossip that it brought about. So while his end goal may now stand a chance of coming to fruition, he won't be around to witness it. The number…

I fear that this martyrization of him sends a weird message. His struggle wasn't very appreciated before his death and first now it "seems that people listen to him".

That's an interesting reflection. Time will tell.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#213

Post by noonespecial1 » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 4:52 PM UTC

still cant believe this school pushed for jail time

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#214

Post by MrScruff » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 5:05 PM UTC

Confusion wrote: post #194

ryguytilidie wrote: post #98

I feel like this guy could not miss the point by much more distance. How much of a shell do you have to live in to think "well sure, someone died after fighting for the rights of millions of people, but jesus, you people are going to inconvenience us for a few hours? this is just ridiculous!"

So after someone important to me dies, I can come over to your place and annoy you for a few hours? What exactly does that accomplish? Lumping everything connected to 'MIT' together as the same evil thing is shortsighted and counterproductive.

I'm beginning to wonder if all the people preaching this 'Aaron died for your benefit so now you must suffer' line are Catholics.

Taken to the extreme, this line of reasoning is what makes certain terrorist groups think killing random civilians is acceptable. After all, if you're a citizen of a country then you should be held personally accountable for all the perceived crimes perpetrated by your government, right?

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#215

Post by canttestthis » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 5:09 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #188

The other great protest is that any HS senior (or grad student applicant) who has an offer from MIT and from another comparable school (Stanford, CMU, etc.), tell MIT no, and tell them why you're saying no. I suspect if 5-10 people who got MIT "yes" did this, MIT admissions and the MIT President would go batshit. (You can do this even if you were on the fence about MIT, or even if you intended to go somewhere else an…

Unless you were planning to not attend MIT in the first place, I would absolutely not recommend this. Its not worth compromising your future to send a message.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#216

Post by WalterSear » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 5:36 PM UTC

gojomo wrote: post #45

As I'd mentioned on an earlier submission about W3C's site being inaccessible: A cool thing about Aaron's activism was that it involved building things, circumventing censorship, and spreading information, rather than sabotage and denial-of-service.

And look how well that worked out.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#217

Post by snowwrestler » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 6:01 PM UTC

analog wrote: post #89

gee_totes wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why protest student blogs and class websites? Why not target the prosecutor's office? Blockading a key port that is shipping war supplies or preforming a DDOS attack against government websites can be legitimate form of protest, but those actions are very hard to plan and pull off. This attack (if it is an attack) just seems like someone is going after the low-hanging fruit of MIT's network.

This is a common argument against activism and it's a classic logical fallacy. You're doing X, but Y would be more effective, therefore X is pointless. In reality what happens is that someone does X and someone else does Y, and it's not uncommon for the same group to do both. Fwiw, I don't have any view on whether this attack (if it is one) is justified. I haven't read enough on what MIT have/haven't done so I can't…

The converse fallacy would be that "anything X that is easy for me to do is therefore an effective form of activism."

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#218

Post by rdl » Wed, Jan 16, 2013, 9:41 PM UTC

cwoebker wrote: post #211

rdl wrote: post #188

The other great protest is that any HS senior (or grad student applicant) who has an offer from MIT and from another comparable school (Stanford, CMU, etc.), tell MIT no, and tell them why you're saying no. I suspect if 5-10 people who got MIT "yes" did this, MIT admissions and the MIT President would go batshit. (You can do this even if you were on the fence about MIT, or even if you intended to go somewhere else an…

Given how many applicants MIT gets I do not think that 5-10 people would be enough to seriously upset them. Don't forget they can just get a couple more students with perfect SATs if they want. Furthermore, like the author said, it wasn't MIT as a community that went after Aaron, it was the administration.

5-10 who write means hundreds more who feel the same but didn't write

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#219

Post by qu4z-2 » Thu, Jan 17, 2013, 2:10 AM UTC

gosub wrote: post #195

lkbm wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, if DDoS is "destructive" then copying a file is stealing. How does that follow?

"destruction" and "stealing" are both words with a physical connotation, that is misleading when used in a computational/digital context.

I'd argue "destroy" means simply "cause to no longer be". "Stealing" means simply "Remove from someone else's possession and put into your own".

The reason we don't refer to copying as stealing is not because it's "not physical" but more because only the second part of the definition holds.

Re: Please Stop Attacking MIT's Network

#220

Post by gojomo » Thu, Jan 17, 2013, 4:03 AM UTC

Firehed wrote: post #142

gojomo wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did it work out for him? For Aaron's causes, his constructive rather than destructive approach worked fairly well, creating change and earning wide awareness and respect. I wish he'd stuck it out; had there been a trial (and possibly sentencing), the public would have learned many of the same lessons about overzealous prosecution, the JSTOR project, the CFAA, the obsolescence of copyright, and importance of open…

I regretfully disagree with you, in regards to the case playing out actually being helpful to the cause. The public, by and large, doesn't give a damn about this kind of thing. His suicide, tragically, appears to have helped the cause - the media loves the wild speculation and gossip that it brought about. So while his end goal may now stand a chance of coming to fruition, he won't be around to witness it. The number…

Yes, of course death brings more attention and a wider audience. If it bleeds, it leads, on the net as well as TV.

But within the tech community that is already familiar with open access, copyright reform, and anti-SOPA efforts, a trial, ending in either acquittal or conviction, would have focused a lot of attention. The same defenses of Aaron's actions, and attacks on prosecutorial overreach, would have been aired. And any sentence beyond community service or perhaps a few weeks' jail time would have triggered enduring protests and similar petitions for pardon/redress.