3 ms·

Well sure. You'll notice that this award is being given out for a socially acceptable and academically approved form of disobedience that does not actually req

Well sure. You'll notice that this award is being given out for a socially acceptable and academically approved form of disobedience that does not actually require disobeying anything. Aaron broke the academic status quo and generated bad press. That's pretty unacceptable in the quest to make the world a better place for an organization that is primarily about image.

commandlinefan 8y ago
> does not actually require disobeying anything Or risking anything. You want courageous disobedience? Let's talk James Damore.
- jancsika 8y ago
  Schwartz faced massively disproportionate criminal charges for copying publicly funded research. Criminal charges which still exist today, which no reasonable person would take on for fear of doing serious time in a federal prison. Those disproportionate risks make it very difficult to do any kind of civil disobedience to protest these federal laws and the prosecutorial overreach associated with them. Also, finding some way to protect the right to publish publicly funded research actually makes it possible for many people to read and redistribute the primary research related to Damore's memo. That is something most people can't currently do without risking criminal charges. Given those difficulties and risks, I'd strongly suggest thinking a little more about the Schwartz object lesson rather than shifting to a different topic. (Esp. given we're also discussing MIT.)
rdtsc 8y ago
> approved form of disobedience that does not actually require disobeying anything. Would you say they are constraining the window of acceptable discourse here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window) by claiming "This is what disobedience looks like, don't disobey more than this or you'd be labeled a crazy fringe fanatic"? I like what they are doing in general. All those are good awards and issues to talk about. Not sure MIT is necessarily the place that these ideas would seem controversial and require a "disobedience" label associated with them. I can think of other countries and places where creating a #MeToo movement would be very controversial.

commandlinefan 8y ago

> does not actually require disobeying anything Or risking anything. You want courageous disobedience? Let's talk James Damore.

jancsika 8y ago
Schwartz faced massively disproportionate criminal charges for copying publicly funded research. Criminal charges which still exist today, which no reasonable person would take on for fear of doing serious time in a federal prison. Those disproportionate risks make it very difficult to do any kind of civil disobedience to protest these federal laws and the prosecutorial overreach associated with them. Also, finding some way to protect the right to publish publicly funded research actually makes it possible for many people to read and redistribute the primary research related to Damore's memo. That is something most people can't currently do without risking criminal charges. Given those difficulties and risks, I'd strongly suggest thinking a little more about the Schwartz object lesson rather than shifting to a different topic. (Esp. given we're also discussing MIT.)

rdtsc 8y ago

> approved form of disobedience that does not actually require disobeying anything. Would you say they are constraining the window of acceptable discourse here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window) by claiming "This is what disobedience looks like, don't disobey more than this or you'd be labeled a crazy fringe fanatic"? I like what they are doing in general. All those are good awards and issues to talk about. Not sure MIT is necessarily the place that these ideas would seem controversial and require a "disobedience" label associated with them. I can think of other countries and places where creating a #MeToo movement would be very controversial.