July 11, 2020 RIP my darling boy

https://twitter.com/beadmomsw/status/1282305932140130304

by constantinum • 6 years ago

420 118 6 years ago

troughway• 6 years ago

Has the prosecutor on his case been brought to light and justice yet? If not, why not?

jupiterboy3• 6 years ago

Using a throwaway in effort to avoid being arbitrarily harassed, but: of course not, almost as a matter of course, the state does not bring justice against itself, especially when you can defer or abstract away the fundamentals as "law enforcement" or "investigations."

A reminder that even with the wave of media attention, approximately zero of the cops involved in the recent unambiguous murder of black people have been brought to justice.

credit_guy• 6 years ago

The idea of "checks and balances" is that the state absolutely can and should bring justice "against itself". Or rather that there are multiple branches in the state, and whenever one commits an abuse some of the other branches will pursue justice on behalf of the victims.

tux19684• 6 years ago

approximately zero of the cops... have been brought to justice.

Is that true though? At least in the recent George Floyd case the 4 cops involved were all fired the next day from their jobs and have all been charged and are awaiting trial.

empath75• 6 years ago

Prosecutors routinely get away with worse every single day. You just don’t hear about most of them because they don’t usually target rich kids.

Kednicma3• 6 years ago

Never forget. We are fighting for our rights.

Also never forget that we're having this discussion on a site that is hostile to us.

pjc50• 6 years ago

HN is not hostile to fans of Swartz.

Kednicma3• 6 years ago

Feel free to let my five downvoters know; I'm sure that that "not hostile" will change their minds.

HN is hostile to people like Swartz who actively work to tear down information silos, shine light on government and corporate secrets, and advocate for intellectual property reform.

It's not an accident that shit_hn_says, n-gate, /r/SneerClub, and other critics of HN, can make most of their commentary simply by quoting HN discussion and juxtaposing it next to basic paraphrases of what was said; so much of what's said here is rude towards the rest of the world that merely quoting the discussion is sufficient to highlight its farcical and close-minded nature.

gitgud• 6 years ago

He was a much loved and frequent [1] user here too... the popularity of him and his impact, before and after his death shows that this site is not hostile to him or his fans...

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=aaronsw

dennis_jeeves3• 6 years ago

Never forget. We are fighting for our rights.
Also never forget that we're having this discussion on a site that is hostile to us.

Poignant words, I say. I see that people have downvoted you. The enemy is not an external entity it's internal.

xvilka• 6 years ago

People who work for JSTOR are complicit in this crime.

nicoburns• 6 years ago

I thought JSTOR wanted not to press charges, but the public prosecutor decided to do so anyway.

ryandrake• 6 years ago

A little off-topic but the idea that a private party can request (or not) to “press charges” is kind of a TV/Hollywood trope, isn’t it? It’s not some button that a victim of a crime can go and “press” to activate a trial. Prosecutors decide whether or not to pursue criminal cases.

jankins• 6 years ago

MIT pushes for charges, not JSTOR, according to the following accounts.

After his arrest, JSTOR released a statement saying that though it considered Swartz's access to be a "significant misuse" committed in an "unauthorized fashion," it would not pursue civil litigation against him;[16][38] MIT did not comment on the proceedings.[39]
Marty Weinberg, who took the case over from Good, said he nearly negotiated a plea bargain in which Swartz would not serve any time. "JSTOR signed off on it," he said, "but MIT would not."[50]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz

jupiterboy3• 6 years ago

Whether we're comfortable calling it as such or not, this should be considered a culpable murder. Suicide is the reasonably foreseeable outcome of being capriciously targeted by the overwhelming violence of the government. I am so sorry for the loss. Aaron was clearly a hugely valuable human being.

annadane• 6 years ago

I agree. I'm not fond of the apologists. Swarz deserved to be treated better

arp2422• 6 years ago

I don't think anyone here really disagrees with that.

oh_sigh• 6 years ago

Aaron committed suicide because he was suicidal, not because of the prosecution. He admitted to thinking about suicide and being depressed multiple times in the past even before the prosecution. At the very least, no reasonable person would commit suicide before the outcome of the trial was even decided(e.g. Slobodan Praljak)

The prosecution against him was unwarranted from an ethical perspective, but that doesn't mean it alone drove him to suicide. Laying the blame solely on external factors for a suicide does an extreme disservice to the understanding of depression and mental illness.

jupiterboy3• 6 years ago

In principle, I agree with your comment, but there is a significant difference in the contributory factor and in your responsibility and duty of care when your job is to participate in the direction of threats, imprisonment and violence towards individuals.

slg5• 6 years ago

I agree that the prosecutors were unnecessarily aggressive in the way they want after Aaron in this case. However it is a dangerous precedent to set that anyone who does something that might be seen as a catalyst for suicide can be found culpable in a murder. If someone gets fired for their job and commits suicide, is their boss liable? If someone is dumped by their significant other and commits suicide, is their former partner liable? This also isn't getting into the problem this presents for the legal system. Does someone fabricating suicidal thoughts force the government's hand into a lighter sentence?

Also suicide is never a "reasonably foreseeable outcome" when someone is faced with a 6 month jail sentence. There are literally millions of people in jail in this country for longer sentences that never consider suicide. Anyone who thinks throwing away the 50 years post jail sentence is worth not having to endure a rough few months is not in a good mental state. This country does a horrible job helping people with mental health issues. That is generally what kills people who die by suicide. It isn't whatever event is ultimately the impetus for the action.

wtallis6• 6 years ago

However it is a dangerous precedent to set that anyone who does something that might be seen as a catalyst for suicide can be found culpable in a murder.

Most people don't have such inescapable power underlying their threats. The government is a good deal more fearsome than most individuals who aren't directly threatening murder in the traditional sense.

Also suicide is never a "reasonably foreseeable outcome" when someone is faced with a 6 month jail sentence.

It's a bit disingenuous to call it a threat of 6 months in jail. That was a plea bargain offer with other strings attached, that came after Swartz was threatened with up to 35 years and then more charges were added bringing the potential up to 50 years. By the time the 6 month offer was made, Swartz had already been subject to more abuse and harassment than his actions could have ever justified. He was deep into a Kafkaesque nightmare before the prosecution offered the first shreds of mercy.

a1369209993• 6 years ago

However it is a dangerous precedent to set that anyone who does something that might be seen as a catalyst for suicide can be found culpable in a murder.

Not "anyone"; a public official who (I assume) willing swore a oath not to abuse the authority they were unwisely trusted with.

rasengan0• 6 years ago

Found this on Reddit? rss?

I just think about all the influence a life can have.

Thank you Aaron

Sorely missed.

ykevinator• 6 years ago

What is this about?

klyrs• 6 years ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

SwiftyBug• 6 years ago

Why did his mother tweet "July 11, 2020 RIP my darling boy"? Wikipedia lists the date of his death as January 11th 2013.

seebetter• 6 years ago

Based on this story with Aaron and experiences in the 1990s with hacker friends, my opinion of federal prosecutors is very low. I see them as highly educated people who excel in relativism and twist ethics and law to achieve narrow goals without regard to principles.

Compounding this, I also got into a dispute with two former federal prosecutors, both of whom did wildly unethical things. One represents the Police Chief and the Sheriff of a major city. I can't even believe that former US Attorneys would act this way, but then I'm reminded by Alexander Acosta who protected Epstein.

doublesCs• 6 years ago

I see them as highly educated people who excel in relativism and twist ethics and law to achieve narrow goals without regard to principles.

That's how I see most lawyers.

coldtea2• 6 years ago

That's great for lawyers, it's part of their job description. Lawyers are not about morals and truth, they're about defending their client, guilty or not.

It's bad for prosecutors, though...

rapind• 6 years ago

I don't think this happens in a bubble. You have to look at the incentives. What's their reward? Political capital? Quotas?

itsnotlupus• 6 years ago

Right. Criminal prosecutors, like many other criminals, are the product of their environment.

VHRanger• 6 years ago

Conviction rates for one.

wutbrodo• 6 years ago

Yea, it always tickles me when people discover that every group with adverse incentives ends up corrupt. Almost _everyone_ is corrupt. It's rare to find a person holding a single damn principle, which is why incentive design is so important.

coldtea2• 6 years ago

Based on this story with Aaron and experiences in the 1990s with hacker friends, my opinion of federal prosecutors is very low.

And that's a high profile white hacker. Wait till you hear the experiences with them of poor/black/latino folk...

99_00• 6 years ago

Or the President of the United States, people who work on his campaign and high profile supporters.

Barrin92• 6 years ago

There's obviously cases where prosecutors or bureaucrats in general go way beyond what they need to do in which case individual responsiblity or morality matters, but in general lawyers and federal employees apply the law, they don't make it. What you identified as relativism I think is actually impartiality, which is a good thing. The problem with principles, like empathy is that they tend to be unevenly applied, often in activist manner. Which is why we demand of officials that they follow procedures, rather than inherently subjective judgement.

I think at the end of the day when it comes to stories such as Aaron's the buck stops with everyone of us, because we're responsible for keeping these people employed and the rules in place.

arp2422• 6 years ago

Not from the US and I lack personal experiences, but reading anecdotes like this[1] it seems to me that the problems extend beyond just federal prosecutors.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/ha9mjv/off_...

op03• 6 years ago

These type of people require networks of equally misguided people to survive. And those networks and their methods grow over time. So you are never fighting a person.

Its a network that is surrounding the fool teaching, reinforcing and promoting the behavior. You will notice they have a high level of confidence no matter what outcomes are produced. That's because the network behind is patting them on the back and saying you got what it takes.

The only counter balance is developing your own network. When I was younger it was just about people I got along with. People who had the same personality, interests, needs etc. But thats a network with only certain strengths. It took a while and lot of blundering about to realize there are lot of people very different from me, who share the same values. And putting in the effort of connecting/nurturing connections over those values, pays off big time in dealing with douchebags esp above you in the food chain.

Nasrudith3• 6 years ago

Reminds me of what happens with the DoJ and their war on encryptiom - the top people often change their views and condemn it only after they left it. This isn't a case of falling in line like the lower totem pole members, it hints of a cultural bubble.

dennis_jeeves3• 6 years ago

The only counter balance is developing your own network.

Interesting, I have reached essentially the same conclusion. Read the link on my profile and contact me if needed.

austinl• 6 years ago

Take some time to read through Aaron's blog if you haven't: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/archive. I'd recommend starting with his series of posts called Raw Nerve (http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/rawnerve).

JCharante• 6 years ago

Once you finish those, there's loads more to find on archive.org of the previous two iterations of his blog. At least those are the ones I know about.

disposekinetics• 6 years ago

Aaron was so many things I aspire to be. He was hero who's contributions to technology so many of use use daily.

gws• 6 years ago

His death was incredibly touching to me, and I’m not a sentimental guy. I asked myself why that was the case and the answer I came up with is that he was a true idealist, what I longed to be but did not have the ____ to

rvense• 6 years ago

"Aaron dead. World wanderers, we have lost a wise elder. Hackers for right, we are one down. Parents all, we have lost a child. Let us weep."

(Tim Berners-Lee)

ionwake2• 6 years ago

Thanks for the quote when did he say this?

austinjp• 6 years ago

https://mobile.twitter.com/timberners_lee/status/29014045421...

fmajid• 6 years ago

His mother's grief is heartbreaking. Prosecutors in the US are almost as lawless as the police.

_bxg13• 6 years ago

For those who don't know who this is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

anonymousiam• 6 years ago

Be sure to also read: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/aaron-swartzs-la...

matsemann• 6 years ago

I learned of him some time after the events, by joining HN. What was the discussion here like at the time? Both the charges and later his death.

radicalriddler• 6 years ago

Searching on hn.algolia.com

Top voted post at the time - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5046845

Five years later - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16141013

charia• 6 years ago

This short story from Aaron Swartz' blog changed my life.

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/handwritingwall

It played a significant role in shaping my understanding of humanity, charity and what impact as a single human being can have. It was a big factor in why I joined the Effective Altruism movement and donate 10+% of my income yearly. I highly recommend reading it.

It saddens me greatly that person who was so forward thinking and was only looking out for the future of humanity was taken away so young.

101008• 6 years ago

The story is very good and I would recommend everyone to read it because it is eye opening. However, I don't agree with the example given.

* Spoilers *

It is not defnitely the same to say "Kill 10 people so I can keep my earnings" than "I will kill 10 people so I can steal theirs". It is definitely not. I am not saying capitalism is fair, but in the first case I (or whoever is that person) earn their stuff working, while in the second case the outcome may be the same but the path isn't.

serniebanders3• 6 years ago

I actually donated all of my income this year, all the money I earned after paying for food and rent. That amounted to about 300k. Saved my ass during taxes yesterday. Owed the government around 80k, but then after I put my charitable donations it looks like I may actually get some money back from the government (which again, I would be donating).

scanny• 6 years ago

Wow, what promped you to give it all away?

drcongo• 6 years ago

That article is what made me quit a well paid job and start an agency working with charities.

_bxg13• 6 years ago

Nobody's life should be ruined over something as banal as copyright infringement. Nobody. Period. Idealist or not. This should be enshrined in law.

akersten• 6 years ago

It's disgusting that we've allowed violation of copyright to be a criminal offense. It should be a civil offense at most, with no possibility of jail time. No wasting money extraditing Kim Dotcom from NZ, no ruining kids' lives for downloading music from the internet.

I'm appalled at Disney, Comcast, and any other media giant that has successfully lobbied for the expansion of the monstrous copyright regime in the USA.

Did you know the FBI wastes time looking into this kind of stuff? Shameful.

ve55• 6 years ago

mindslight• 6 years ago

Meanwhile, "we address the predominant form of theft in the US with civil court cases, not criminal cases" :

https://twitter.com/djmckenna00/status/1269218616861437952

prirun• 6 years ago

Did you know that the Dept of Homeland Security wastes time on copyright violations? Truly shameful.

neurostimulant• 6 years ago

And it's due to copying academic journals, which are mostly funded by public grants money and should really be free to distribute. I feel really sad every time I remember this case.

dennis_jeeves3• 6 years ago

While I completely agree with the sentiment, the horrifying truth is that bureaucrats aside, even common people are perfectly willing to ruin someone's life over a technicality. You and I are surrounded by such people.

rglovejoy• 6 years ago

The way MIT persecuted Aaron is one reason why this alum no longer gives it money.

ta17711771• 6 years ago

Did they?

Or did they just not speak out publicly against the prosecutor?

an-allen• 6 years ago

Everytime I am reminded of this event, I remember the rage... and it cuts just like it did when it happened 7 and a half years ago. It actually makes my stomach wrench and my eyes swell with tears... this is what injustice looks like. this is what a failing society and culture looks like. this is tragedy. this is heartlessness. this is evil.

justanotheranon• 6 years ago

i recently came across some info the implications are shocking.

read this thread:

https://threader.app/thread/1214173689111031808

Aaron had been helping Assange and Wikileaks very early on. In 2009, Wikileaks released files from the Congressional Research Service, apparently obtained by scraping their website using a trivial by-pass to access non-public files.

Aaron had worked on the staff of Congressman Grayson during the same time period.

What if it was Aaron poking around the CRS website as part of his job duties who found that bug and then gave it to Assange?

That would make Aaron the "source" for that 2009 leak--one of the first things published by then young Wikileaks.

what if the reason DOJ so harshly persecuted Aaron was because of his involvement with Wikileaks? This is speculation, as there is no explicit evidence supporting this. Aaron's connection to Wikileaks seems like an important enough coincidence that I cannot rule it out.

But I have always wondered: just how far does the US govt go to suppress and permanently silence people who are Enemies of the State? Especially talented programmers who are digitial natives well equipped to challenge systems of power which are more and more based on technical and information supremacy?

rshnotsecure2• 6 years ago

There have been rumors that people are being permanently held in Corecivic prisons, where all their communications are monitored via Securus Technologies. Of course the guards don't know, they're good people...they are just told so-and-so "is crazy and thinks he discovered a conspiracy".

No comment on this, although I posted to show what the farthest extent postulated is for the question you asked. But Corecivic.com is not a good company certainly and likes to pretend it is the Bureau of Prisons (which has real authority from a legal sovereign state), and lol has previous hosted on Huawei Cloud of all places.

rshnotsecure2• 6 years ago

Contact me? vixie@12security.com. I assume you're in the US. If not best not contact probably not that safe...

July 11, 2020 RIP my darling boy

Related Stories