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

Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 530 posts

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#461

Post by oinksoft »

pygy_ wrote: post #436
jspthrowaway2 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some users get upvoted fairly quickly by username alone, too. Think pg, edw519, patio11, tptacek; I've noticed comments from them will have upvotes in seconds, regardless of content. It's just name recognition, for better or worse. pg could probably leave a comment saying only "This is a comment." and get a hundred points of karma off it. (I'd pay him to try.) So, to an outside observer, you might suggest that these…

Not only they get free upvotes, but the people who disagree with them sometimes get free downvotes. See here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5033743

What you are arguing for there is quite common-sense. Who would advocate the "throw up your hands, you're screwed if they're in the DB" approach?

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#462

Post by desireco42 »

jonmc12 wrote: post #421
edw519 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may or may not have something to say about this, but not here, and not now. Can we please just let the family grieve? We are the family.

To all those replying to edw519 - please stop witch-hunting. First prosecutor, then MIT, then.. edw519? Its possible any of these parties made a mistake.. now that they can look back and reflect. But, even after reflection its very possible that each party made the best decision they could with the information at hand. Maybe I'm lucky, but I find 99%+ of people I meet in this world are well intentioned, and if I inve…

He doesn't need a lawyer, he can write response himself. It just seems it is hard to apologize, much harder then being a witty soundbite commenter.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#463

Post by illuminate »

derleth wrote: post #453
illuminate wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"And this is an example. It states that gender equality from the female perspective is automatically equivalent to "Destroying systems of entrenched privilege", which is a courtesy not given to the male perspective on the same concepts." As I stated, it does by lessening strict gender roles.

> As I stated, it does by lessening strict gender roles. But that's also true of looking at gender equality from the male perspective, yet whenever someone attempts that the old MRA strawman stereotypes get thrown around.

"But that's also true of looking at gender equality from the male perspective, yet whenever someone attempts that the old MRA strawman stereotypes get thrown around."

Generally, it's because MRAs tend to find gains for women zero-sum. There are issues with regards to divorce, child support, and custody that can be discussed, but all these can be addressed as a feminist and do not require "masculinism" as some sort of a counter. There is a difference between discussion of gender and the movement's adherents.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/br...

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#464

Post by dennisgorelik »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #375
dennisgorelik wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Not commenting" means no discussion. No discussion mean no learning.

I'm sure you're smarter than to argue that all comments lead to learning, so I'm not sure what you mean here.

Assertive and risky comments are more likely to lead to learning than watered down versions.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#465

Post by lotharbot »

Caligula wrote: post #205
[deleted] wrote: post #104

[deleted]

Tptacek, I always know exactly which threads you will post your combative, confrontational, annoying posts before I click on them. You are the drama queen of hackernews.

"Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face to face conversation."

via http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#466

Post by lotharbot »

tptacek wrote: post #92
raganwald wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not an observation, it's a conjecture, and one that is fairly baseless. many things operate according to a power law. If karma is like that, a small number of users will end up with a shitload of karma points even if they aren't attempting to game the system. There are many factors that could contribute to a power law for karma distribution. One conjecture is that other users tend to "trust" high-karma users a…

Both conjectures bear out in my experience. A third one: High-karma users have followers. I've left comments on very old stories in out-of-the-way places and found them voted up. So we accumulate karma faster in part because people are simply more likely to see our posts, because they go out of their way to do so.

Your own profile provides an excellent example of this phenomenon -- you have a "must-read list". Valuable contributions from the past mean certain people get noticed more in the present.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#467

Post by mpyne »

jacquesm wrote: post #418
mpyne wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

6-8 months is not "major" prison time by any reasonable definition of that term. Using upper limits only for theoretically possible court sentences is the same tactic the RIAA/MPAA uses to characterize copyright infringement damages, and it's just as much of a propaganda tactic in support of aaronsw as it is in support of those clowns.

> 6-8 months is not "major" prison time by any reasonable definition of that term. That sounds like plenty 'major' for me. Have you been in prison? I have been in 'lock-up' for about 6 hours for the terrible crime of driving a foreign car in the Netherlands. I can tell you I did not enjoy it one little bit and the prospect of doing that 6 to 8 months would change me in ways that I would prefer not to think about. Jai…

> Have you been in prison?

I've been in a submerged metal tube for some number of months. In many respects it's a worse environment than prison (though I can at least vouch for my fellow "inmates").

No email, no internet, no sleep, the stupid periscope watch with hydraulic oil dripping on your face.

Of course, I chose to do that. I would think that aaronsw knew that some nominal prison term would be a possibility of the choices he made, but I can only speak for myself.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#468

Post by Mz »

grandalf wrote: post #441
Mz wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among other things, I think you are seriously underestimating the chronic stress that a "prodigy" typically lives with. I walked away from a national merit scholarship and homeschooled my very gifted but also learning disabled sons. Issues like OCD are incredibly common at very high IQs. So are serious social issues. For an introvert, being a social outcast for being too smart may be merely annoying. For an extrovert…

I'd define having an extremely high IQ has having abnormal brain chemistry :) Surely living among people who are cognitively dissimilar would be very stressful, and living in stressful conditions can be bad for a person's mental health (mental health viewed as something that is fluid and that can change over time and in response to environmental changes).

Unfortunately, you are treading extremely close to saying "high IQ = mental illness". I don't think it has to be that way or should be that way. If I live another fifty years, hopefully I can make some headway on changing that general status quo (edit: I mean the very common view of "there is a fine line between genius and insanity" and the high social stress so many intelligent people routinely endure, yes, at a cost to their mental health).

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#469

Post by mindslight »

MrScruff wrote: post #448
sethbc wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never post and I never comment, but I had to login to say something. HN needs to "man up" and accept that the majority of the attitudes in the original post are exactly why things ended the way they did. People bitching about the styling of payment buttons? Telling someone to "man up" or exclaiming (with plenty of IANAL disclaimers) that no one would get jail time for something like this is typical for your average…

HN needs to "man up" and accept that the majority of the attitudes in the original post are exactly why things ended the way they did. What exactly do you mean by this?

I think it's some sort of postmodern Gödel sentence formally demonstrating the inability of brogrammer culture to reason about anything.

Re: Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago

#470

Post by mpyne »

analog wrote: post #400
mpyne wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

:quote: In the abstract he had very valid points, but in the context of that specific thread I think he did a pretty effective job at convincing people that * Aaron did something wrong * JSTOR backing out doesn't really mean anything * the prosecution is justified in trying to make an example of him * Aaron probably won't serve serious time, this is just a scare tactic :/quote: All but one of those are correct though…

I don't see any of those as being correct tbh. Wrong - morally not, legally maybe. JSTOR backing out - MIT didn't back out. An example is justified - absolutely not, given that the act is not morally wrong. Aaron won't serve serious time - well, we're seeing the time he's serving now. He's lost his life and he isn't the first under these circumstances.

Well for a legal prosecutor "legally wrong" is the point that matters (and it's this way for a very important reason).

Likewise the state prosecutes in some situations even if the "victim" doesn't want to press charges, as the responsibility of the state extends far beyond just the party that was allegedly wronged.

I've mentioned it elsewhere but it's well enough to reiterate: Even know we know that there was a plea offer actually on the table for a 6-8 month prison sentence, even with the failure of the legal fund drive for Aaron. That is not "serious time", is well in line with first-time offenders where the offender doesn't cause major damage, etc. Aaron didn't want to accept the offer because he would still be a "Felon", but that was his choice to make.

And also, as I've mentioned elsewhere, many, many people have faced Federal charges and not killed themselves. It was only 50 years ago that poor sharecroppers were having fire hoses turned on them, flaming crosses, and being strung up and killed for simply trying to be judged on their actions.

So I would like to think we can maintain perspective on what types of government abuse might reasonably lead to someone taking their own life, and then look at what was going on here, and honestly compare.

Post reply on HN