3 ms·

Calling Aaron Swartz "nothing but a petty thief" is a bit too dismissive. This is not a black-and-white issue. For example, many times the millions of dollars u

Calling Aaron Swartz "nothing but a petty thief" is a bit too dismissive. This is not a black-and-white issue. For example, many times the millions of dollars used to fund the research were given by governments and grant organizations: public entities.

pink_dinner 11y ago
"Calling Aaron Swartz "nothing but a petty thief" is a bit too dismissive." He's not a hero. Not even close. He was caught breaking into university computers and taking files that were not his. Most accounts of him were high-strung and when he didn't get his way? A petulant child. He seems like a nightmare to work with at Reddit and pretty much told everyone to fuck off that didn't agree with him. The fascinating thing is that his behavior sounds just like Donald Trump. Only..it's acceptable because his views match with many of the people in the community. "many times" Like I said above, this isn't all. You can't guarantee that not all of the documents in question were not funded by private entities. Research may be funded by the government, but those universities many times outsource it to private companies (and they pay workers to complete it). Everyone gets hurt in the process. It's just sad the dogma and the cult of personality have to be so pervasive on HN.
- bloaf 11y ago
  >Somewhere there are still peoples and herds, but not with us, my brethren: here there are states. A state? What is that? Well! open now your ears unto me, for now will I say unto you my word concerning the death of peoples. A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people." The rule of law is generally good for humanity. Defending it is fine. But you need to remember that the law is a messy human undertaking that is subject to change, not an unassailable universal truth. People can break the law, and still be in the right. What people like Swartz and the folks at Sci-Hub are doing is making the judgement call that free access to scientific information provides a benefit to humanity that outweighs the cost of breaking the laws keeping the information restricted. Scientists-the people generating the content in question-tend to agree. There is no doubt that the publishers will have the lawyers on their side, but I've always thought that to be the weakest of endorsements. >There, where the state ceaseth—there only commenceth the man who is not superfluous: there commenceth the song of the necessary ones, the single and irreplaceable melody. http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/11 http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/11

pink_dinner 11y ago

"Calling Aaron Swartz "nothing but a petty thief" is a bit too dismissive." He's not a hero. Not even close. He was caught breaking into university computers and taking files that were not his. Most accounts of him were high-strung and when he didn't get his way? A petulant child. He seems like a nightmare to work with at Reddit and pretty much told everyone to fuck off that didn't agree with him. The fascinating thing is that his behavior sounds just like Donald Trump. Only..it's acceptable because his views match with many of the people in the community. "many times" Like I said above, this isn't all. You can't guarantee that not all of the documents in question were not funded by private entities. Research may be funded by the government, but those universities many times outsource it to private companies (and they pay workers to complete it). Everyone gets hurt in the process. It's just sad the dogma and the cult of personality have to be so pervasive on HN.

bloaf 11y ago
>Somewhere there are still peoples and herds, but not with us, my brethren: here there are states. A state? What is that? Well! open now your ears unto me, for now will I say unto you my word concerning the death of peoples. A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people." The rule of law is generally good for humanity. Defending it is fine. But you need to remember that the law is a messy human undertaking that is subject to change, not an unassailable universal truth. People can break the law, and still be in the right. What people like Swartz and the folks at Sci-Hub are doing is making the judgement call that free access to scientific information provides a benefit to humanity that outweighs the cost of breaking the laws keeping the information restricted. Scientists-the people generating the content in question-tend to agree. There is no doubt that the publishers will have the lawyers on their side, but I've always thought that to be the weakest of endorsements. >There, where the state ceaseth—there only commenceth the man who is not superfluous: there commenceth the song of the necessary ones, the single and irreplaceable melody. http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/11 http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/11