Live data from Hacker News

Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

blog.curiousquail.com

221–230 of 427 posts

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#221
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Maybe the real issue is selective outrage about legal injustice." The real issue is selective enforcement of the law. If it applied equally to everyone, then more people would be outraged as it affected them.

> If it applied equally to everyone, then more people would be outraged as it affected them. In order to do this you need to have laws that are designed to be reasonable for people to actually follow instead of laws that are designed to allow prosecutors to find a violation whenever they want to. Actually enforcing them would create pressure to do that, but it would also create pressure to go back to selective enforc…

In fact most people are okay with selectively stretching time limits and elevating a low class misdemeanor into a felony in order to prosecute someone where the party who would be the injured party said there was no injury.

And lest people think this is a one way street, each side thinks the other deserves interpreting the law to “get the real baddies.”

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#222
I think it's self-evident that that every legal system is both imperfect and unevenly-applied, being a finite resource. It's also a self-evidence truth that money & power buy resistance to the the legal system.

It's hard to put a definition on "unfair", but we all recognise it when we see it. That's why the case of Aaron Swartz is so very visceral for most of us.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't arbitrage, it's looking for loopholes. Presumably your "feast or famine" business owner did the responsible thing with leveling their income, no? They didn't? Oh, why would that be the public's concern. That would level out in their feasting years, after all (assuming you're using the previous year's taxable income, or an average income over the previous three years or so). The chauffeur is subject to the…

"John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." Not quite how he phrased it, but close. Original is here: https://wist.info/steinbeck-john/46582/

Ok, how did it work our for countries where it did took root?

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were those hackers MIT students? Was Aaron?

Both Aaron and "those hackers" were MIT community members .

That's an interesting spin that means precisely nothing. I'm not authorized to enter facilities or building maintenance spaces in buildings in my town because I'm a "community member".

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#226
post #183
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Maybe the real issue is selective outrage about legal injustice." The real issue is selective enforcement of the law. If it applied equally to everyone, then more people would be outraged as it affected them.

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#227
post #183
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Maybe the real issue is selective outrage about legal injustice." The real issue is selective enforcement of the law. If it applied equally to everyone, then more people would be outraged as it affected them.

[flagged]

How would it help the world for Aaron Swartz to download 3.5 million research and primary source PDFs?

Example 1: antibiotic and antiviral production technology for developing countries. Even if we limit ourselves to out-of-patent molecules, the primary literature describing the discovery, production, modification and testing of life-saving antibiotics was, at the time of Aaron Swartz, largely hidden behind strict paywalls that typically were accessed through a university library subscription. Access to all that information allows countries and institutions with very limited resources to set up generic medical production pipelines for life-saving medications they couldn’t afford to import - or to become international market competitors to established interests.

Again, that’s just restricting the argument to out-of-patent products that can be generically manufactured with no legal issues. What about life-saving but patented products that are too expensive for poor countries and regions to buy on the open market? Does that added-value IP charge justify unnecessary deaths in such cases?

And about that IP - the vast majority of paywalled research literature was produced with taxpayer funds delivered via government funding agencies, and there’s a very good legal argument that this alone puts it into the public domain. If private companies want to set up Bell Labs 2.0 with no government funding and patent everything they discover, that’s their own capex risk, but just hovering around and scooping up publicly funded discoveries via exclusive licensing deals with universities and researchers makes no sense - instead, patents should be available to any citizen of the government that put up the funds, and research papers should be available to anyone.

As far as the argument that widespread distribution of the knowledge to produce antibiotic, antiviral, and other complex biomolecular products represents a biological weapons risk? Notably that’s why no LLM provider service will help develop technical protocols for antibiotics production, or insulin, or anything similar - claimed dual-use risk fears. This conveniently slows the rise of legitimate independent competition in the pharmaceutical sector, which helps if the goal is maximizing profit margins via monopoly power. Bioweapons production realistically requires nation-state or large-corporation scale resources, and the solution is not obfuscation of basic knowledge but rather international treaties, select agent rules, laboratory operation and equipment purchase licensing requirements, etc.

That’s just one sector - there are at least a dozen other examples besides biomolecular drugs of ‘how it would help the world’ to make all published research literature available to anyone with a network connection, ask any LLM to enumerate them.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#228
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Doesn't matter if the public funded it. The public didn't mandate or pay for the publication rights or access. So when your tax dollars pay for a scientist to do research, you don't think the papers that document that research should be public property? If scientists want to keep their research private, they should find private funding. Note that, as in my previous post, I said "should". If you mean there isn't exp…

It seems like you are jumping between the reality you would like and the reality that exists. It is fine to want for something to be different, but that doesn't change the facts of how they are. It's fine to advocate future papers be made public. I think it is antisocial and delusional to say past papers belong to the public just because that's what you would have wanted. The word for this is expostfacto recontractin…

> It seems like you are jumping between the reality you would like and the reality that exists.

No, you did that, by responding to my post where I said "should" as though I were trying to describe how things are instead of how they ought to be.

> I think it is antisocial and delusional to say past papers belong to the public just because that's what you would have wanted.

I didn't say that. You need to work on your reading comprehension.

> The word for this is expostfacto recontracting

No, the word for what you're doing is putting words in my mouth and attacking a straw man.

> there are lots of reasons to pay for research even if it is not made public.

Can you give some?

> Especially so when 99% of researchers whom might make meaningful use of the publication already have access through a journal system.

Which they then have to pay fees to, using more of our tax dollars, because of the sweetheart deals the government has given the journals.

Not only that, but researchers nowadays share copies of papers over the Internet routinely (for example, using sites like arxiv.org), so they don't even need journals to know what other researchers are doing. So even that rationale for paying the journals is now out of date.

> consider private drug patents coming from Public Funding

A patent requires revealing the information that the invention is based on, in exchange for the exclusive right to produce the item for some period of time. So I don't see how this is an argument for keeping publicly funded research behind a paywall.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#229

I don't like talking about this, but first hand knowledge is rarer by the day, and there are entire organizations profiting off this mythology. It's pissing me off. Aaron is not a data point to build stupid metaphors around. He was a bright and broken child. Aaron attracted influential and creepy people and was ill-equipped to handle it. He was also working through a period of sexual awakening while being used by old…

> He was a bright and broken child i wasn't there and i didn't know him, but talking about a 26 year old man like this makes it seem like you're just taking away his autonomy

Aaron was a figure in the community for a long time, beginning when he was a child

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both Aaron and "those hackers" were MIT community members .

That's an interesting spin that means precisely nothing. I'm not authorized to enter facilities or building maintenance spaces in buildings in my town because I'm a "community member".

The general public was authorized to enter the facilities 24/7. The exterior doors were unlocked and it was considered an "open campus". The access controls you see today have only existed since COVID. Whether he was a student at the time also means "precisely nothing".
Post reply on HN