16 ms·

It is worth noting that this is exactly what Aaron Swartz was bullied to his tragic death 8 years and a day ago. May he rest in peace. And kudos to Alexandra.

It is worth noting that this is exactly what Aaron Swartz was bullied to his tragic death 8 years and a day ago. May he rest in peace. And kudos to Alexandra. P.S. Corrected the date, seems like I still live in 2020. Thank you, lazyant.

calimac 6y ago
RIP Aaron Schwartz. You are a patriot for truth and freedom.
- ainiriand 6y ago
  A true hero that believed in a free internet and died because of his ideals.
- jrimbault 6y ago
  It's not about "patriotism".
alienlid 6y ago
Tweet thread on his death that was illuminating for me https://mobile.twitter.com/hides_minimally/status/1348704670882037760 https://mobile.twitter.com/hides_minimally/status/1348704670...
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  The first Tweet attempts to coopt the memory of him to legitimize an unsubstantive jab in an ideological battle that is adjacent to academic literature. That's sickening.
  - llcoolv 6y ago
    Yes, my interpretation of his actions is also way more moderate.
    - MacsHeadroom 6y ago
      His actions in the JSTOR situation were ultimately deemed lawful. But, without passing judgement one way or the other, Aaron's beliefs about free speech and information freedom which informed his activism cannot be reasonably described as moderate.
      - llcoolv 6y ago
        I meant more moderate than burning a Target store or starting a revolution as in the tweet. And if we stick to objectivism, then they definitely are more moderate than even the status quo - semi-obsolete middlemen holding a rent-seeking/regulatory capture over some of the most important information available to mankind.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - bergstromm466 6y ago
        > without passing judgement > cannot be reasonably described as moderate Are you aware that you’re claiming not to pass judgement, and then do so in the very same sentence? I think it seems immoderate to you because, like many others on this website (including me), we were all on the inside of the knowledge-monopoly walled-garden that Aaron talked about, where most research isn’t accessible to you unless you join the capitalist academia-industrial-complex (that last part is my own description, not Aaron’s), such as attending a university with a huge endowment (Harvard and other Ivy League schools), or living in a tech-cluster that the government has invested in for many years (Stanford&Silicon Valley) - why else does the most ‘exciting’ research happen at private institutions like these?: “The world's entire scientific and cultural heritage, published over centuries in books and journals, is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations. Want to read the papers featuring the most famous results of the sciences? You'll need to send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.” [1] What makes it so one person is allowed to privatize knowledge and charge another a rent to access it? Why have governments allowed this enclosure of the scientific commons (amongst others), which is really an inheritance that belongs to all? Privatization of knowledge is artificial scarcity that does not have to be there. It keeps the majority of society locked out, especially the working class, as well as people who live in the Global South. This beautiful story from a few days ago is just one of many that shows the incredible power of Sci-hub: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25685819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25685819 I think that most intellectual laborers who themselves have conditional access to trade secrets and patents due to their employment with the capitalist/propertied classes (who are the so called 'owners' of this privatized knowledge), underestimate how difficult it is for others to follow in their footsteps, to try to copy what they did (myself included). In other words, we fail to see and acknowledge how much contrived scarcity is created by the US-‘led’ global Intellectual Property system and agreements, which allows capitalist firms to claim ownership of knowledge through trade secrets, patents and copyrights - which are then used to control where scientific research is done and where it is not. It ultimately holds back innovation, and the sharing of all kinds of emancipatory and empowering technologies locked up by capitalists under capitalism. The most violent and advanced form of this capitalist enclosure of knowledge is the criminal enforcement of ‘trade secrets‘. The use of this mechanism, and the state institution that allows it, is the biggest capitalist perversion of science and technological development humanity has ever seen. [2] Instead of contributing to firms and institutions that privatize knowledge, I hope we will continue joining in efforts to liberate science and technology from capitalism, creating an unconditionally available shared commons library that is accessible to all around the globe. As we are currently part of the small group of people who are privileged recipients of this inheritance, I believe we have no excuse to not contribute to this battle for universal access, on all fronts, especially considering the fact that digital technologies have brought with them the possibility for a zero marginal cost of reproduction of knowledge. Sci-hub and similar efforts are a fantastic start to this. For another strategy that helps reclaim technology from capitalism (and which really blew my hair back), check out the work of Bob Haugen, Lynn Foster and Pospi (Mikorizal) on Valueflo.ws / hREA. [3] [1] https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamj... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25447697 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25447697 [3] http://mikorizal.org/Fromprivateownershipaccountingtocommonsaccoun.html http://mikorizal.org/Fromprivateownershipaccountingtocommons...
  - Bukhmanizer 6y ago
    Yes, this bothers me so much about whenever people bring him up. He seemed like a brilliant, kind, and unique person, not just a totem of “our side vs your side”
    - vixen99 6y ago
      He could be both unless someone actually says 'just ...'.
  - jenwkejnwjkef 6y ago
    Yeah, it's pretty weird how he uses him to further left-libertarianism. How do you know Aaron Swartz stood for anarchism? He seems like anti-intellectual property to me, but you know right-libertarians oppose intellectual property too. I find it despicable to use someone to further an ideology without giving them the chance to actually state their own political beliefs.
  - DeafSquid 6y ago
    Who is shimmy and why should I care what they think?
- goodluckchuck 6y ago
  It's ironic that the author is using the tragic and abusive results of authoritarianism as a means of advocating FOR the very authoritarianism that Aaron Schwartz opposed.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    The tweet author? Nah.
- andromeduck 6y ago
  It's a bit weird to blame capitalism when it was the state and not the actual IP holders that wanted to press charges.
  - alasdair_ 6y ago
    Only after the IP holders contacted the state and told them a crime. had been committed.
- LudwigNagasena 6y ago
  Was he an anarcho-communist? Sounds dubious.
ErikVandeWater 6y ago
Reddit has conveniently left him out of their about page, despite being a cofounder: https://www.redditinc.com/ https://www.redditinc.com/ About Aaron: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
- cleansy 6y ago
  Reddit’s founders seem to be pretty spineless for doing so. I didn’t even realise that they removed him..
  - meragrin_ 6y ago
    I don't believe the Reddit founders ever considered him a founder. Tweet from 2011: https://twitter.com/alexisohanian/status/93374221685755904 https://twitter.com/alexisohanian/status/93374221685755904
    - llcoolv 6y ago
      Well, they should not have given him such a job title then.
      - gowld 6y ago
        Suppose you get together with someone to found a company as cofounders, but then your cofounder nearly immediately leaves the company to pursue other projects. Why is it wrong to annul the designation? Swartz contributed technology (web.py) that Reddit used briefly, and deserves as much credit as other technology contributors of the same scale.
        shubb 6y ago
        That doesn't seem to be a fair description - it seems like he originally ran a software house that were paid to build a lot of the original reddit, was acquihired and given the title founder, and then stuck with the company through acquisition before being re-assigned to another of the acquirers properties. Founder, not sure, but your narrative of someone barely involved doesn't stack up either. Also, early on, it seems he brought the technical knowhow, acting as an outside CTO, and also had high PR / name recognition value, so I think they owed him some recognition for sure.
lazyant 6y ago
8 years ago
dr-detroit 6y ago
I read that he committed suicide after trying to steal a good chunk of the content on JSTOR and getting caught.

calimac 6y ago

RIP Aaron Schwartz. You are a patriot for truth and freedom.

ainiriand 6y ago
A true hero that believed in a free internet and died because of his ideals.
jrimbault 6y ago
It's not about "patriotism".

alienlid 6y ago

Tweet thread on his death that was illuminating for me https://mobile.twitter.com/hides_minimally/status/1348704670882037760 https://mobile.twitter.com/hides_minimally/status/1348704670...

happytoexplain 6y ago
The first Tweet attempts to coopt the memory of him to legitimize an unsubstantive jab in an ideological battle that is adjacent to academic literature. That's sickening.
- llcoolv 6y ago
  Yes, my interpretation of his actions is also way more moderate.
  - MacsHeadroom 6y ago
    His actions in the JSTOR situation were ultimately deemed lawful. But, without passing judgement one way or the other, Aaron's beliefs about free speech and information freedom which informed his activism cannot be reasonably described as moderate.
    - llcoolv 6y ago
      I meant more moderate than burning a Target store or starting a revolution as in the tweet. And if we stick to objectivism, then they definitely are more moderate than even the status quo - semi-obsolete middlemen holding a rent-seeking/regulatory capture over some of the most important information available to mankind.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - bergstromm466 6y ago
      > without passing judgement > cannot be reasonably described as moderate Are you aware that you’re claiming not to pass judgement, and then do so in the very same sentence? I think it seems immoderate to you because, like many others on this website (including me), we were all on the inside of the knowledge-monopoly walled-garden that Aaron talked about, where most research isn’t accessible to you unless you join the capitalist academia-industrial-complex (that last part is my own description, not Aaron’s), such as attending a university with a huge endowment (Harvard and other Ivy League schools), or living in a tech-cluster that the government has invested in for many years (Stanford&Silicon Valley) - why else does the most ‘exciting’ research happen at private institutions like these?: “The world's entire scientific and cultural heritage, published over centuries in books and journals, is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations. Want to read the papers featuring the most famous results of the sciences? You'll need to send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.” [1] What makes it so one person is allowed to privatize knowledge and charge another a rent to access it? Why have governments allowed this enclosure of the scientific commons (amongst others), which is really an inheritance that belongs to all? Privatization of knowledge is artificial scarcity that does not have to be there. It keeps the majority of society locked out, especially the working class, as well as people who live in the Global South. This beautiful story from a few days ago is just one of many that shows the incredible power of Sci-hub: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25685819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25685819 I think that most intellectual laborers who themselves have conditional access to trade secrets and patents due to their employment with the capitalist/propertied classes (who are the so called 'owners' of this privatized knowledge), underestimate how difficult it is for others to follow in their footsteps, to try to copy what they did (myself included). In other words, we fail to see and acknowledge how much contrived scarcity is created by the US-‘led’ global Intellectual Property system and agreements, which allows capitalist firms to claim ownership of knowledge through trade secrets, patents and copyrights - which are then used to control where scientific research is done and where it is not. It ultimately holds back innovation, and the sharing of all kinds of emancipatory and empowering technologies locked up by capitalists under capitalism. The most violent and advanced form of this capitalist enclosure of knowledge is the criminal enforcement of ‘trade secrets‘. The use of this mechanism, and the state institution that allows it, is the biggest capitalist perversion of science and technological development humanity has ever seen. [2] Instead of contributing to firms and institutions that privatize knowledge, I hope we will continue joining in efforts to liberate science and technology from capitalism, creating an unconditionally available shared commons library that is accessible to all around the globe. As we are currently part of the small group of people who are privileged recipients of this inheritance, I believe we have no excuse to not contribute to this battle for universal access, on all fronts, especially considering the fact that digital technologies have brought with them the possibility for a zero marginal cost of reproduction of knowledge. Sci-hub and similar efforts are a fantastic start to this. For another strategy that helps reclaim technology from capitalism (and which really blew my hair back), check out the work of Bob Haugen, Lynn Foster and Pospi (Mikorizal) on Valueflo.ws / hREA. [3] [1] https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamj... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25447697 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25447697 [3] http://mikorizal.org/Fromprivateownershipaccountingtocommonsaccoun.html http://mikorizal.org/Fromprivateownershipaccountingtocommons...
- Bukhmanizer 6y ago
  Yes, this bothers me so much about whenever people bring him up. He seemed like a brilliant, kind, and unique person, not just a totem of “our side vs your side”
  - vixen99 6y ago
    He could be both unless someone actually says 'just ...'.
- jenwkejnwjkef 6y ago
  Yeah, it's pretty weird how he uses him to further left-libertarianism. How do you know Aaron Swartz stood for anarchism? He seems like anti-intellectual property to me, but you know right-libertarians oppose intellectual property too. I find it despicable to use someone to further an ideology without giving them the chance to actually state their own political beliefs.
- DeafSquid 6y ago
  Who is shimmy and why should I care what they think?
goodluckchuck 6y ago
It's ironic that the author is using the tragic and abusive results of authoritarianism as a means of advocating FOR the very authoritarianism that Aaron Schwartz opposed.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  The tweet author? Nah.
andromeduck 6y ago
It's a bit weird to blame capitalism when it was the state and not the actual IP holders that wanted to press charges.
- alasdair_ 6y ago
  Only after the IP holders contacted the state and told them a crime. had been committed.
LudwigNagasena 6y ago
Was he an anarcho-communist? Sounds dubious.

ErikVandeWater 6y ago

Reddit has conveniently left him out of their about page, despite being a cofounder: https://www.redditinc.com/ https://www.redditinc.com/ About Aaron: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

cleansy 6y ago
Reddit’s founders seem to be pretty spineless for doing so. I didn’t even realise that they removed him..
- meragrin_ 6y ago
  I don't believe the Reddit founders ever considered him a founder. Tweet from 2011: https://twitter.com/alexisohanian/status/93374221685755904 https://twitter.com/alexisohanian/status/93374221685755904
  - llcoolv 6y ago
    Well, they should not have given him such a job title then.
    - gowld 6y ago
      Suppose you get together with someone to found a company as cofounders, but then your cofounder nearly immediately leaves the company to pursue other projects. Why is it wrong to annul the designation? Swartz contributed technology (web.py) that Reddit used briefly, and deserves as much credit as other technology contributors of the same scale.
      - shubb 6y ago
        That doesn't seem to be a fair description - it seems like he originally ran a software house that were paid to build a lot of the original reddit, was acquihired and given the title founder, and then stuck with the company through acquisition before being re-assigned to another of the acquirers properties. Founder, not sure, but your narrative of someone barely involved doesn't stack up either. Also, early on, it seems he brought the technical knowhow, acting as an outside CTO, and also had high PR / name recognition value, so I think they owed him some recognition for sure.

lazyant 6y ago

8 years ago

dr-detroit 6y ago

I read that he committed suicide after trying to steal a good chunk of the content on JSTOR and getting caught.