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

521–530 of 530 posts

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

#521

Post by astrodust »

detst wrote: post #126
jacquesm wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The disconnect here is a simple one: how big a peril Aaron was in was not communicated clearly or effectively on the page asking for help. Apparently this was because of some legal constraints. I think that's what threw a lot of people on the wrong track entirely. Had they been in the possession of the full set of facts I'm pretty sure they would have reacted differently. See the page for yourself: https://free.aaron…

> Even so, these careless and unfounded words must have hurt tremendously, much more so than had nothing been said at all. It angers me to think that HN could have contributed in any way to the dark place Aaron ended up reaching. More so because many of those comments bothered me at the time and I neither knew Aaron nor the severity of the situation. They were unwarranted even in absence of the full story.

If you're depressed, the last thing you should do is read comments directed at you. The internet is a bad place at the best of times.

Anyone who's suffering should avoid negative sentiment or you'll just find more reasons to be depressed.

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

#522

Post by mcantelon »

niggler wrote: post #512
mcantelon wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's clear even back then that the core facts were known. The "core facts", about whether or not it would be "seriously wrong" for Swarz to ask the community for financial assistance, would be knowledge of Swarz's financials. Was edw519 privy to this information? Probably not.

From Lessig's response it sounded like the information was common knowledge ...

Ah... so edw519 knew Aaron was worried about being financially able to see his case through, but thought he should "man up" and be financially decimated (or financially unable due to frozen assets). Makes sense.

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

#523

Post by djt »

davorak wrote: post #519
djt wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If his opinions have changed then he is free to express that. People say and do things relying on the information they have at that time. I didn't write anything because it was just a gut thought, which is why I didn't donate. I'm sure that if Aaron had told his side of the story then it would have hurt him in court, but it may have garnered him public interest and funds. For his immense abilities, Aaron made a lot o…

Thanks for give detail and frank answer. > Witch hunts only create a quick fix to our need to rationalise our anger and pain. They are, at least sometimes, more then just that though. They can arise out of desire to make the world different so the same problem does not happen again, or to change community standards, and/or ones own judgment heuristics. Ultimately ineffective and undesired nonetheless. It is hard to c…

Very true

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

#524

Post by pygy_ »

encoderer wrote: post #516
pygy_ wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ridiculous? Eat it! Hindsight bias, not really either, a plain old fact. Some people are more resistant than others, but at some point anyone will snap (for the toughest it may require severe sleep deprivation and torture, but most people have a much lower threshold). I didn't know Aaron Swartz, and I am thus not familiar with the details of his alleged depressive past. There are usually a lot of factors that bring p…

> FWIW I hold a MD It's not worth much in this discussion. Your logic here is fuzzy man. Asserting that everyone has a point at which they will kill themselves? Maybe you're basing this on knowing that YOU have a point at which you'd take your own life. But what in the thousands of years of human suffering gives you this certainty that "everybody" has this suicidal breaking point? You can't make an assertion into a "…

The MD is relevant regarding my knowledge about depression.

I know you can't prove the threshold thing, short of trying to break each and every person on earth. That being said, there are various ways to weaken people (including, for the die hards, prolonged isolation, sleep and sensory deprivation, manipulation, mental and physical torture, destroying their social status, friendships and families... I never practiced this, BTW), and I believe that you can drive anyone to suicide using them.

For example, put someone in a situation where he has the choice between killing himself or killing someone he loves. 5 seconds to decide, after which, if he didn't act, the other person is killed.

This is becoming really gloomy. I balk out.

Edit, actually the bargain I set up above is not a good example of what I meant exactly, but a good example of the level of cruelty you can use.

Edit2: I didn't downvote you, BTW (AFAIK, you can't downvote the answers to your comments).

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

#525

Post by niggler »

mcantelon wrote: post #522
niggler wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Lessig's response it sounded like the information was common knowledge ...

Ah... so edw519 knew Aaron was worried about being financially able to see his case through, but thought he should "man up" and be financially decimated (or financially unable due to frozen assets). Makes sense.

You are merely pointing to the fact that some people shouldn't opine until they bother to look into the facts. Having a half-understanding about what's going on and making a proclamation always seemed foolhardy to me ...

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

#526

Post by mcantelon »

niggler wrote: post #525
mcantelon wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah... so edw519 knew Aaron was worried about being financially able to see his case through, but thought he should "man up" and be financially decimated (or financially unable due to frozen assets). Makes sense.

You are merely pointing to the fact that some people shouldn't opine until they bother to look into the facts. Having a half-understanding about what's going on and making a proclamation always seemed foolhardy to me ...

Exactly. edw519 more or less said Aaron's privileged and made money in the past so he doesn't need help from the community now. He rallied the community against supporting Aaron making an assumption that Aaron didn't need the support.

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

#527

Post by pbhjpbhj »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #446
jacquesm wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I figured the fact that Thomas and I are usually found on opposite sides of any argument and that we agree on this one might carry some weight.

Yes, if "me too" posts are only added in rare cases by accounts which have a lot of influence, such as yours, it would follow the point you're both making but that's not the case. You post a "me too" and it sets an example for others to follow. Case in point https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5056927 Further more, "to make ascent of an opinion visible" isn't necessary because an ascent is visible by it's very natur…

>The best posts rise to the top. //

There's nothing in the UI to show this; presumably the highest top-level comments are those with the most upvotes (!== best, yeah, nitpicking) but the algo is hidden. There is no identification of who is assenting either.

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

#528

Post by ramblerman »

herbart wrote: post #417
DannyBee wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edw519 is allowed to have an opinion, and his opinion does not, at least to me, seem unreasonable. Not everyone is going to agree with your civil disobedience actions, or you asking for help with the consequences. That doesn't make them bad people, or wrong people, for saying they don't like your approach, think you should accept consequences, or whatever else. For example, MLK didn't hate the clergymen that disagree…

>Not everyone is going to agree with your civil disobedience actions No, but those who don't support, say, MLK Jr., deserve to be shamed for their regressive attitude. Practically speaking, the forces of regression are always louder and stronger than the voices for progress. But if we don't denounce and shame those regressive voices, then the voices for progress end up feeling so alone and unloved. The truth about HN…

did you confuse the words "civil disobedience" with "the civil rights movement"?

Otherwise I have no idea how you would make this jump in your mind.

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

#529

Post by [deleted] »

chernevik wrote: post #295

I see zero inconsistency between on one day saying that someone should take personal responsibility for their activism, and on another day regretting that this same person took their own life. The notion that Aaron's legal position caused his suicide is an opinion of many people on this board. Despite the numbers of those holding this opinion, it is still only an opinion, and needn't be read as fact for any other ana…

[deleted]

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

#530

Post by ramblerman »

If anything "Tech Crunch" is the troll of the day.

Is it really such a shock people might inhibit their opinions after someone has just killed himself. No one expected it to get to this, Aaron probably wasn't completely innocent, And Our judicial system seems to have failed him.

Trying to polarize it into some "You're either with Aaron" or "you're against him" just means falling deeper into this cesspool of a thread.

Post reply on HN