6 ms·

American librarians helped defeat the Nazis

91 points by samclemens 3y ago

rikafurude21 3y ago
good guys won, and the Entire nation helped them succed. So proud of us team.
hollerith 3y ago
"How American Librarians Helped Defeat the Nazis" as explained by a librarian (and teacher).
clumsysmurf 3y ago
[flagged]
- drekipus 3y ago
  [flagged]
- gadders 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - pixl97 3y ago
    [flagged]
- OrvalWintermute 3y ago
  [flagged]
- dang 3y ago
  "Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents." "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
jamesTee49 3y ago
[dead]
immibis 3y ago
[flagged]
- huytersd 3y ago
  [flagged]
- tomcam 3y ago
  Where? Google did not help me with this
  - immibis 3y ago
    https://www.google.com/search?q=republican+book+bans https://www.google.com/search?q=republican+book+bans
redder23 3y ago
[flagged]
smcin 3y ago
I don't understand why mentions of JSTOR's involvement in the massive overcharge of Aaron Swartz that led to his suicide are being removed here (please explain why), and why the matter was ever treated as a (state + federal) criminal matter involving MIT, rather than a private civil matter between Swartz and the alleged rights holders. Here is the NYT's reporting: Slashdot comment, 1/22/2013: "MIT Warned of a JSTOR Death Sentence Due To Swartz" [0] citing NYT "How M.I.T. Ensnared a Hacker, Bucking a Freewheeling Culture" [1]. If JSTOR reputation-washing itself by indirectly claiming a tiny responsibility for the actions of librarians in WWII is on-topic here, half a century before JSTOR existed, then JSTOR's involvement in the Swartz case in 2013 must be. [0]: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/22/0219224/mit-warned-of-a-jstor-death-sentence-due-to-swartz https://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/22/0219224/mit-warned-o... [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/21/technology/how-mit-ensnared-a-hacker-bucking-a-freewheeling-culture.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/21/technology/how-mit-ensnar...
- 0xcde4c3db 3y ago
  > why the matter was ever treated as a criminal matter I'm not any category of credentialed legal expert, and I haven't had the heart to dig into the gory details of this particular disaster, but I'd point at the No Electronic Theft ("NET") Act. This legislation broadened the category of criminal copyright infringement to an almost absurd degree, redefining "commercial advantage" to include the mere expectation of others reciprocating by sharing their own stashes of infringing material. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Electronic_Theft_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Electronic_Theft_Act
  - smcin 3y ago
    But we're talking about JSTOR's behavior and reputation here, not the legalities, which have been discussed many times (although not tested in courts). In particular after state and federal prosecutors went berserk and MIT admin didn't push back in the name of these same freedoms that JSTOR is telling us were so beloved and apple-pie back in WWII. It's not like JSTOR publicly said "This federal criminal indictment is massive overreaction; not in our name". It's a matter of record that JSTOR executives were threatening MIT. Swartz was (criminally) charged with up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution, forfeiture and a fine of up to $1 million(!) [0]. Harsher than many indictments for cases of terrorism or mass murder. For something that may well not even have been a criminal act. By a group of people who may well not even have been the actual rights holders - that claim never saw the inside of a courtroon since the massive overcharge made it unlikely that Swartz would contest; and in fact it caused him to commit suicide. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz#Federal_prosecution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz#Federa...
achates 3y ago
Kind of insane that the Germans were still allowing papers on rocketry and nuclear physics to be published in journals in 1943.
- CaliforniaKarl 3y ago
  When the United States stopped all publications related to nuclear developments, that alarmed Georgy Flyorov[0]: He took it as a sign that we were building a bomb. He wrote to Stalin, and that helped start the Soviet Atomic Bomb Project[1]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgy_Flyorov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgy_Flyorov [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project
Obscurity4340 3y ago
But can they do it again (now)?

91 points by samclemens 3y ago

rikafurude21 3y ago

good guys won, and the Entire nation helped them succed. So proud of us team.

hollerith 3y ago

"How American Librarians Helped Defeat the Nazis" as explained by a librarian (and teacher).

clumsysmurf 3y ago

[flagged]

drekipus 3y ago
[flagged]
gadders 3y ago
[flagged]
- pixl97 3y ago
  [flagged]
OrvalWintermute 3y ago
[flagged]
dang 3y ago
"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents." "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

jamesTee49 3y ago

[dead]

immibis 3y ago

[flagged]

huytersd 3y ago
[flagged]
tomcam 3y ago
Where? Google did not help me with this
- immibis 3y ago
  https://www.google.com/search?q=republican+book+bans https://www.google.com/search?q=republican+book+bans

redder23 3y ago

[flagged]

smcin 3y ago

I don't understand why mentions of JSTOR's involvement in the massive overcharge of Aaron Swartz that led to his suicide are being removed here (please explain why), and why the matter was ever treated as a (state + federal) criminal matter involving MIT, rather than a private civil matter between Swartz and the alleged rights holders. Here is the NYT's reporting: Slashdot comment, 1/22/2013: "MIT Warned of a JSTOR Death Sentence Due To Swartz" [0] citing NYT "How M.I.T. Ensnared a Hacker, Bucking a Freewheeling Culture" [1]. If JSTOR reputation-washing itself by indirectly claiming a tiny responsibility for the actions of librarians in WWII is on-topic here, half a century before JSTOR existed, then JSTOR's involvement in the Swartz case in 2013 must be. [0]: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/22/0219224/mit-warned-of-a-jstor-death-sentence-due-to-swartz https://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/22/0219224/mit-warned-o... [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/21/technology/how-mit-ensnared-a-hacker-bucking-a-freewheeling-culture.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/21/technology/how-mit-ensnar...

0xcde4c3db 3y ago
> why the matter was ever treated as a criminal matter I'm not any category of credentialed legal expert, and I haven't had the heart to dig into the gory details of this particular disaster, but I'd point at the No Electronic Theft ("NET") Act. This legislation broadened the category of criminal copyright infringement to an almost absurd degree, redefining "commercial advantage" to include the mere expectation of others reciprocating by sharing their own stashes of infringing material. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Electronic_Theft_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Electronic_Theft_Act
- smcin 3y ago
  But we're talking about JSTOR's behavior and reputation here, not the legalities, which have been discussed many times (although not tested in courts). In particular after state and federal prosecutors went berserk and MIT admin didn't push back in the name of these same freedoms that JSTOR is telling us were so beloved and apple-pie back in WWII. It's not like JSTOR publicly said "This federal criminal indictment is massive overreaction; not in our name". It's a matter of record that JSTOR executives were threatening MIT. Swartz was (criminally) charged with up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution, forfeiture and a fine of up to $1 million(!) [0]. Harsher than many indictments for cases of terrorism or mass murder. For something that may well not even have been a criminal act. By a group of people who may well not even have been the actual rights holders - that claim never saw the inside of a courtroon since the massive overcharge made it unlikely that Swartz would contest; and in fact it caused him to commit suicide. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz#Federal_prosecution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz#Federa...

achates 3y ago

Kind of insane that the Germans were still allowing papers on rocketry and nuclear physics to be published in journals in 1943.

CaliforniaKarl 3y ago
When the United States stopped all publications related to nuclear developments, that alarmed Georgy Flyorov[0]: He took it as a sign that we were building a bomb. He wrote to Stalin, and that helped start the Soviet Atomic Bomb Project[1]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgy_Flyorov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgy_Flyorov [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project

Obscurity4340 3y ago

But can they do it again (now)?