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

Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

esquire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 70 posts

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#51

Post by jacquesm »

eli wrote: post #31
rhizome wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Willie Horton is an inapt comparison for every scenario in which Ortiz would try to capitalize on her record that I can think of. Willie Horton was a spoiler, not a feather.

I recognize that, but I think it's wholly beside my point, which is that it would be very hard to make Aaron Swartz and his crimes sound threatening. I don't think MIT computer hackers are what keep voters up at night. It might be true that politics played a role in the case, but it's silly to think this case would have been an important part of anyone's gubernatorial campaign.

Hacker does sound threatening to plenty of folks, thanks to the media. We're not talking graybeards elegant solutions to intricate problems here, we're talking about guys out trying to steal your credit card and to empty your bank account.

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#52

Post by jacquesm »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #39

One sad aspect of this event, that I see rarely mentioned, is that Swartz knowingly taunted the legal system to test its response, which he sadly was inadquately patient in using to his own advantage. Had he really intended to make a lasting point, perhaps he'd have more effectively done so by risking prosecution, refusing to spend any money on legal fees, as he was obviously eloquent himself. The public awareness of…

Thank you for this very insightful comment. Food for thought.

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#53

Post by [deleted] »

gruseom wrote: post #24
sociotech wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. I've been trying not to say petty things out of respect for recently departed people and his family, with whom I sympathize for this terrible, terrible thing. But the radical loss of perspective here is just jarring, and the case is big enough now that it's hard to refrain from trying to put things into perspective. I am aware of the full history, having been a programmer with significant open-source and other…

I've read many of your comments and am glad you've been posting them. They're well-written and well-reasoned, and I hope you stick around in the future and continue to speak your mind with the freedom that your current format seems to be providing. The combination of legal and technical expertise is valuable and rare. That being said, your comments seem to me to pooh-pooh the impact of what the prosecutors/system did…

[deleted]

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#54

Post by paulsutter »

sociotech wrote: post #8
dasht wrote: post #6

A focus on the prosecutor helps distract attention from the question of whether and how Swartz was mistreated by being made a (somewhat artificial) "tech celebrity" at a very young age only to become a kind of semi-outcast in some tech circles just a few years later.

Bingo. I've been trying not to say petty things out of respect for recently departed people and his family, with whom I sympathize for this terrible, terrible thing. But the radical loss of perspective here is just jarring, and the case is big enough now that it's hard to refrain from trying to put things into perspective. I am aware of the full history, having been a programmer with significant open-source and other…

Since you're so blasé about plea bargaining, maybe you can help us out with this one:

Why was it necessary for Aaron to plead guilty to 13 felonies in order to get a short sentence? If it were me, I'd be more concerned by the 13 felonies than the time, and I get the impression he was too.

How does it work? Do the prosecutors get to count it as 13 kills, which buffs up their own record as badass prosecutors? Can you explain the logic that pleading guilty to _more_ felonies than would be convicted at trial should lead to a shorter sentence?

You're really just changing the subject here. The issue isn't whether or not Aaron was a superman. We're shocked and offended by the plea bargaining process (even more surprised that its commonplace, forgive our naiveté) and the draconian vagueness of the CFAA (for example, what does "unauthorized" mean?)

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#55

Post by graue »

Cl4rity wrote: post #46

I really have no stance on this (in that I don't side with Aaron or the prosecutors in the case), because I don't have all the facts. Some of you may say that that is a stance, but I just don't see it that way. I am aware, however, that what I'm about to say may be considered controversial given the nature of how this case is being reported--and how it's being responded to. Whenever we have shootings like the one in…

It's true. We should talk more about mental health.

At the same time, the current top comment, by 'cbs, is an excellent explanation of why we are looking for someone to blame.

Also, many details on the case against Aaron and his legal situation have now been revealed, but unless I missed it, it's not apparent whether, and how, Aaron's depression had been treated. We don't know whether he was on meds, whether he was seeing a therapist, and so on. And if he wasn't, we don't know why not.

Some claim there are stigmas associated with being mentally ill, or with seeking help, and we can certainly talk about that. We have been — a few days ago I participated in a thread on HN where that was discussed.

But, first, with Aaron we really don't know a lot of the specifics, nor is it any of our business.

And second, you may feel differently, but many, including me, are deeply uncomfortable with what we're beginning to see as a clear pattern of prosecutorial overreach. The conversation about mental health should not substitute for asking these very important questions about justice in the United States.

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#56

Post by koide »

MichaelSalib wrote: post #42
gruseom wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That there's "no problem with breaking" the CFAA is the last conclusion anyone will draw from this tragedy.

I see a lot of people writing about how they change their MAC address all the time so what did Aaron do that was so wrong? Granick writes in a well-read post about how Swartz didn't really break any laws -- everyone on MIT's network was legally entitled to download JSTOR as fast as they wanted to and apparently MIT had no right to keep anyone off its network. There's a pervasive social norm that says 'if you can use…

> apparently MIT had no right to keep anyone off its network.

What? How could some institution not have a right to keep somebody else off its own network? That makes no sense at all. Don't forget both JSTOR and MIT (after JSTOR contacted them) tried to block Swartz's massive downloads.

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#57

Post by koide »

Vivtek wrote: post #35
sociotech wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. I've been trying not to say petty things out of respect for recently departed people and his family, with whom I sympathize for this terrible, terrible thing. But the radical loss of perspective here is just jarring, and the case is big enough now that it's hard to refrain from trying to put things into perspective. I am aware of the full history, having been a programmer with significant open-source and other…

Nicely put. I was more aware (marginally) of his political activism and vaguely knew something of his past (I do really like his writing about web.py - and now that I'm reading it, all of his writing). It seems to me he was driven by the need to score a coup, and move fast. To be the hero who liberated an entire database, instead of a contributor to a slower process that would have slipped past their defenses - which…

What I don't understand is his rush. He could have gone for stealth mode: get a few laptops, program them to download at (largish) random intervals. Leave them operating a year or two. Check up on them every once in a while.

He wouldn't have been caught, at all.

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#58

Post by wissler »

gizmo wrote: post #7
hullo wrote: post #2

I don't particularly think there's much to be gained by going against the hivemind on all of this, but I also don't "blame" the prosecutors for Aaron's death. Aaron killed himself. Suicide and depression are tricky things, and not one single person currently living knows what the full story is. If that's enough to get me labeled as "usually reasonable" as well, then so be it.

When you say things like "we don't know the full story" or "suicide is tricky", you aren't taking a reasonable middle-of-the-road position you're effectively endorsing the status quo. By refusing to pick a side when there is a disagreement or struggle between groups of unequal strength you still pick a side: you side with the stronger group. When people are bullied, be it in the schoolyard on by the government, the p…

Thank you for saying that.

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#59

Post by sociotech »

dasht wrote: post #14
sociotech wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. I've been trying not to say petty things out of respect for recently departed people and his family, with whom I sympathize for this terrible, terrible thing. But the radical loss of perspective here is just jarring, and the case is big enough now that it's hard to refrain from trying to put things into perspective. I am aware of the full history, having been a programmer with significant open-source and other…

It's very harsh but I find fault with some of the adults who made him a "celebrity" in the first place. Here's a link to the (yes, harsh) piece I wrote about that. It's significant, in my view, that Swartz "came to fame" right as the first "dot com" bubble was cresting. Hype was ridiculously excessive, back then. Looking back at what his celebrity "friends" were saying about him back then, it's painfully obvious that…

I just read this linked article and think it is excellent and very thoughtful. It is much more human than any of Lessig or Doctorow's self-serving comments, and it fits with my recollection of the history.

I mean, people are right that all of this is separate from calls for plea-bargaining reform. I'm all for that. I'm not sure this kind of offense is the worst example of the lot, but I'm all for it. (Decades for drug possession is worse. Life imprisonment, [in facilities that are not at all, shall we say, minimum-security] for child-porn traded on IRC is probably worse, at least when it doesn't make child abuse more likely.) But it should all be reformed. That's a big task, of course, but that doesn't mean people shouldn't try.

I don't even mind if people use this case to help with that. But it's easy to grow weary of all the manipulation and distortion and hypocrisy by the people that your link discusses.

Re: Still More About The Death Of Aaron Swartz

#60

Post by benatkin »

jlgreco wrote: post #32
mindcrime wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By refusing to pick a side when there is a disagreement or struggle between groups of unequal strength you still pick a side: you side with the stronger group. "Blame" is an interesting concept though. In almost any complicated scenario, there is plenty of "blame" to be spread around and you can reasonably argue that multiple different entities are to "blame" for $WHATEVER. To use a somewhat tangential example... whe…

Basically my thought is that blame is not zero sum. Assigning some blame from one party should not in any way be taken to mean another party is not less to blame. Multiple parties could each be (for lack of better terminology) "100% to blame".

Mathematics isn't failing here. You're mixing contexts. If you look at it from the perspective of the victim, it's less than 100% of the blame. If you look at it from the perspective of a single perpetrator, they're 100% to blame because the other perpetrator doesn't absolve them of any of the blame. If you try to add the 100% of each perpetrator in isolation together, you're making an error.
Post reply on HN