17 ms·
Aaron Swartz, Asking For Help, 119 Days Ago
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Irishsteve 14y agoWhy would it be a surprise that people change their opinion or become more vocal after something serious occurs to the people involved.
- rhizome 14y agoThis is Techcrunch, all they're doing is combing back through his public postings to find something they can inappropriately hype as significant.
- Irishsteve 14y agoI suppose everyone needs a living.
- Jun8 14y agoSometime, like in this case, the change in opinion unfortunately comes too late to make any impact.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- thorum 14y agoWhy does it matter who submits an interesting story?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jeremysmyth 14y agoInteresting is only one criterion for hacker news.
- Pr0 14y agoI actually tried to submit it before "martinoma" but was told that I was submitting too often. It's hard to say if TC really did submit its own story - throwaway accounts are quite common nowadays.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- martinoma 14y agoI'm not affiliated with TC. Admittedly, I did decide to submit quickly so that I (might) reap the upvotes--HN has been transfixed by Aaron Swartz, and reasonably so, and I thought that people might like a reminder of how the community reacted a few months ago.
- waterlesscloud 14y agoI wonder if it might not be better to not award karma for submissions which are upvoted. It's possible/probable that most stories of value would get submitted anyway, and it would discourage the mad rush to submit.
- ameen 14y agoI think it's petty to think as such. Aaron Swartz has been a major topic of discussion on the HN Front Page for a couple of days now, hence it could very well have been instantly submitted to HN by some over-zealous HN reader as well. (Do remember that a sizable number of new users have joined since the initial news about Aaron's death.) Just in this case, I'd suggest giving them the benefit of doubt.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- mrkmcknz 14y agoI can't believe that you "flagged" the post because you believe an account was created specifically for this submission. If the community doesn't feel the story is anything worth reading I'm sure it will slip from the face of HN before you have time to blink.
- kyro 14y agoI think the takeaway here is to stop assuming you know entirely what is going on and give people the benefit of the doubt. There may be more factors involved than the ones you see; in fact, there always are -- something HN is notorious for not doing (read: AirBnB, Dropbox, etc, etc, etc, etc).
- specialist 14y agoWord. I have been refuted, disproven, turned around 180, subsequently enlightened when more is revealed so many times on so many issues... It's embarrassing. I'm trying very hard to be less of an outspoken opinionated blowhard. And to admit whenever I've been wrong.
- joeco 14y agoIt seems significant to me. There are a lot of users on HN whose default move is to criticize whatever story just made the main page. Maybe that's not the best default position.
- _delirium 14y agoHere's a long discussion thread from mid-2012 sort of on that subject: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4396747 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4396747 Paul Graham also mentioned somewhere that he's been collecting examples of "middlebrow dismissal" as a common kind of default response, in an attempt to understand/combat the phenomenon.
- mnicole 14y agoLike a commenter upthread mentioned, I think it's a combination of that and people upvoting names they recognize or that the community knows as/sees as "voices of" the community. They just take their word for it given past posts, rather than having it occur to them that maybe this topic isn't actually their forte. Additionally, someone taking the time to write out rebuttals just to be downvoted and "told off" with pointless and degrading one-sentence rebuttals is pretty pathetic.
- supercanuck 14y agoMy interpretation is that a lot of users are willing to cast a judgement with only a small percentage of the information available. This is why so many opinions on this topic, in hindsight look, shall we say, awkward ... to say the least. The real value, for me in HN, is on topics where real discussions take place and other users are able to produce more information on topics, not so much where highly rated, articulate power users grace us with their opinions.
- jacquesm 14y agoHere is the HN thread from back then. Some of it makes for pretty uncomfortable reading right now. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484
- danso 14y agoIt is an interesting thread...I had wondered why Aaron hadn't beat the drum for support but clearly he hadn't yet won the support of the community...I didn't post in that thread but I could see myself thinking, "He's a successful startup guy, why does he need our money?"...which apparently fueled some of the skepticism back then. I guess it's worth keeping in mind when assessing MIT's soul-searching: how many of the people involved then also thought, "This privileged bratty kid can take his lumps?" and let the issue roll as it did?
- vy8vWJlco 14y agoI view HN as a community/forum of mostly "business hackers" (for obvious reasons: startups, duh). By analogy, I wonder: would a "business hippie" be more or less sympathetic to the original "hippie" goals? In either case, while I don't consider business and hippie/hacking to be a contradiction, I do think it's a tenuous combination that can easily re-frame one's original values unsympathetically.
- ameen 14y agoI wondered the same and checked out the submissions & comments of AaronSw. He had stopped commenting 140 days ago. And some of the comments on that submission are just downright acerbic. I'm sure Aaron would've checked them and decided HN wasn't going to help him (honestly after such reaction, why would anyone think otherwise).
- NZ_Matt 14y agoGod dam I hate the term "man up", it really is a hugely degrading phrase. If someone is having a hard time and asks for the help the worst thing you can do is tell them to "man up" or "get over it".
- ISL 14y agoBummed to see this thing dropping like a rock off the main page. 24 points in 26 minutes should have this article in the #2 slot, not #26. Is HN downmodding because it doesn't like the mirror? #pts hr min 130 2 0 382 6 0 146 3 0 24 1 0 20 0 56 120 4 0 165 5 0 57 2 0 82 4 0 52 3 0 165 6 0 15 1 0 65 3 0 93 5 0 26 2 0 232 10 0 35 3 0 171 8 0 26 3 0 73 6 0 24 3 0 20 2 0 68 6 0 24 0 26 194 11 0 28 4 0 115 9 0 edit: something changed - now it's at #3... sufficiently many upvotes?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jacquesm 14y agoYou can unflag it if you want to.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- imgabe 14y agoBecause it doesn't violate any of the HN guidelines and is pretty clearly of interest to HN readers?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jacquesm 14y ago> Why would I want to? Because you're flagging something for all the wrong reasons. You're assuming that this was submitted by someone just for pageviews but I see no evidence of that. TC articles hit HN with some regularity, sometimes within seconds of being posted there. Also, there is such a thing as the bookmarklet which makes such submissions as easy as clicking two buttons. Anything on TC mentioning Aaron Swartz is pretty much guaranteed to be submitted, and only the very first of those upvotes was the submitter. The 50+ following it were others and your 'flag' counts as heavy as 10 upvotes. So you're hitting 9 people for all the wrong reasons.
- sethbannon 14y agoAs the OP of the HN thread in question, the response then saddened me. But that pales in comparison to the grief I feel now. I hope HN takes this as an opportunity to reflect and introspect.
- jacquesm 14y agoI completely missed it at the time and I feel that I'm a complete fool because of that.
- danso 14y agoSo this is on the OP, which quotes the Lessig post: > For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April — his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. I never understood this assertion. Under what procedural grounds would a judge punish someone raising funds for their defense? Or is referring to more of a "the judge will be annoyed at you" kind of sanction?
- jacquesm 14y agoThis question, along with the question why the EFF didn't fund Aarons' defense are close to the heart of all this. I've sent dr. Lessig an email asking for some enlightenment, I don't expect an answer (he's got other stuff on his plate right now) but I really would like to know what that was all about. It seems important.
- mark-r 14y agoPresumably the problem wasn't in asking for funds, the problem was in explaining why the funds were necessary. I read a recent story, probably linked here on HN, about how standard procedure for the Justice dept. is to freeze all your funds so you can't afford adequate representation, then dump so much paperwork on you that you have no chance to defend yourself. All of this would have been facts related to the case which the judge could easily gag.
- darkarmani 14y agoHow can a judge gag the defendant from speaking out? I don't really understand this.
- jacquesm 14y agoMy best guess is that it may be to avoid polluting a future jury.
- colin_jack 14y ago
- jbail 14y agoIt's pretty hard to read that thread. This is a good lesson in giving people the benefit of the doubt. Always.
- andrewtbham 14y ago"unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge." Considering the outcome... Does anyone know an example of what judges do when defendants appeal openly for financial help? Was this really good legal advice?
- jacquesm 14y agoI suspect - but this pure conjecture on my part, IADNAL and so on - that this may have something to do with prejudicing a potential jury. Any jury member that knows about a case before being sworn in is automatically disqualified. Giving potentially nationwide attention to your case by running a funding drive in your name would pollute any potential jury. Again, please don't put too much weight on this, it is purely speculative but it is the best I've been able to come up with so far. A quote on this subject: "One of the most important reasons for not selecting a member of the panel to sit on the jury is prior knowledge of the case." Source: http://www.therightjury.com/publications_real_purpose.html http://www.therightjury.com/publications_real_purpose.html
- wavesounds 14y agoI think he should have risked pissing off the judge and getting the word out, but hindsight is 20/20. Its sad this is the way our justice system works, feels like a modern day witch trial.
- danso 14y ago...unless you're on the other end of it, facing a media-friendly opponent who uses the public spotlight to demonize you before you face off in court...
- andrewtbham 14y agoYeh, That may be it. Seems like I have heard that judges don't want cases "tried in the media" like Rodney King, or OJ Simpson.
- ameen 14y agoIf only most knew then, what they know now. It's saddening that a positive response to that appeal might've actually helped him - both mentally and financially.
- JohnFromBuffalo 14y agoThis shows the night and day personalities of Aaron Swartz and Julian Paul Assange.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- austenallred 14y agoI think this speaks a bit to the mentality of technical people. Your job is to find things that suck and call them on it/make them better. Unfortunately this tends to carry over into all aspects of life, that we can be/are overly critical of everything. Look at almost any great tech/design mind - they can be overly cynical at times. One of the skills I respect most in a technical person is when they can say, "I hate this, but I love this" at the same time. Or better yet, "You're good at what you do, but this isn't your best work. X is good, but Y really sucks, fix the Y." Honestly we have a long way to go regarding dealing with people.
- BryantD 14y agoIt strikes me that another relevant comparison would be the Hacker News reaction to weev's conviction: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4808676 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4808676
- d0m 14y agoI'm convinced there has to be something bigger than that trial. Trying to rationally explain a suicide by pointing fingers at prosecutor might relief a bit of guilt for some but it's IMO naive. As far as I'm concerned, Aaron committed suicide because he didn't want to live on this planet anymore. He tried so hard to change things, to make the world better. And he actually succeeded, but that probably wasn't enough for a brilliant mind like his. Could it be that he was disgusted at how indifferent people were? By people, I mean most people, not just the governments or some particular entities.
- addlepate 14y agoPeople here think they are smarter than everyone else, and immune to the travails that others go through. Most wouldn't agree with that statement outright, but you can see it in the lack of empathy comments often have, like the one highlighted in the article.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Jagat 14y agoOn the other hand, the comments on this post (120 days ago) is quite supportive of Aaron and criticizes the govt for its harsh indictment. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4528083 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4528083
- lancefisher 14y agoI distinctly remember that thread, and not commenting. I was disappointed at the responses. I had given a small amount towards his defense fund since I thought his goals were worthwhile. I consider it a privilege to have contributed. Now, I wish I had given more, and I wish I had commented on that thread. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." - Edmund Burke
- graue 14y agoThat Edmund Burke quote just spurred me to donate $X (where X=a substantial amount relative to my income) to Demand Progress in Aaron's memory. Thanks.
- Jagat 14y agoIn retrospect, this comment by "mibbitier" is particularly saddening. "I agree. He was extremely foolish and arrogant at best. I don't think this belongs on HN. Also didn't he make a ton of money selling Reddit?! :/"
- MrScruff 14y agoAnd the witch hunt continues. This is all very reminiscent of the furore around the prank call nurse who committed suicide in the UK, with people calling for the unfortunate DJs to be charged with murder. I would have expected a more rational, dispassionate response from this crowd.
- caf 14y ago"...judges hate it when parties talk publicly about their cases." This seems very unjust, when the prosecutors love to hold a media circus where the handcuffed "perp walk" is the star attraction.
- h2s 14y agoIt must be quite easy to generate cheap melodrama such as this when you can use the front page of TechCrunch as a glorified "retweet" button.
- meric 14y agoI remember wanting to contribute, but didn't after finding out he was the co-founder of a successful startup. I also remember, half a year ago, looking at his comment history that seemingly appeared as if he was fine, thinking "How is this guy taking it? If it was me I am not sure I'll be able to handle the pressure". I realise now he was only human, like us, and everyone needs other's support in their darkest times, but it's too late.
- CyberDroiD 14y agoIt's an accurate reflection of a subset of visitors of Hacker News. That subset are those that post here. I don't think they like what the reflection shows, so it might be a good learning experience.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jacquesm 14y agoSeconded.
- rhokstar 14y agoThirded.
- MichaelApproved 14y agoThere's a button to express that feeling.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jacquesm 14y agoHow could I miss that after all these years. Thank you.
- pbhjpbhj 14y agoIt doesn't _show_ the same thing as the post. * We can't see votes so to make ascent of an opinion visible adding a "me too" is actually different to an upvote. * We can't see who has upvoted. * The commenters standing - recognised by name, work and reputation by many here I'd warrant - makes a difference too IMO. Whilst "me too" comments get annoying they carry info here that is otherwise not available.
- jacquesm 14y agoI figured the fact that Thomas and I are usually found on opposite sides of any argument and that we agree on this one might carry some weight.
- MichaelApproved 14y ago
- grandalf 14y agoThis is TechCrunch playing the role of Jerry Springer. In spite of the way many interest groups are trying to make Aaron's suicide into a symbol, the fact is that suicide is simply a symptom of mental illness, and nothing else. Unless we have reason to believe otherwise, most of us assume that those whose actions/views we discuss on HN are of normal (average) mental health. So while Aaron's death is jarring, it's the mental illness that is jarring and not the nuanced view expressed by edw519. TC must be hurting for clicks/readership these days. I think that story (sadly the current top story on HN) is a new low.
- Mz 14y agoI attempted suicide at age 17. I am very clear it was due to social and physical factors, not mental illness. I blogged about that yesterday. I doubt you care, but this accusation of "he was merely mentally ill, the way he was being treated by people doesn't matter" is something I think is pure evil and merely an excuse to say "not my problem" and cover your ass.
- grandalf 14y agoNot merely mentally ill. Mental health in general should be taken more seriously. Many of our institutional systems (schools, prisons, etc.) are not conducive to habits that promote good mental health. Please be assured I am not dismissive of the importance of it. Also, people can have lapses in their mental health and then recover. There are also most certainly lots of factors that can push people to their limits. I do note that you were not successful in committing suicide, and in the name of discussion I might ask (if it weren't inappropriate to do so) why you were not successful in committing suicide. I have done a few thought experiments about suicide and it seems that some methods routinely fail while others never do. Thanks for sharing your story, and I apologize if my comment came off as insensitive or as an attempt to washy my hands of the key issues. I'm strongly opposed to the kind of stuff that was being done to Aaron fwiw.
- Mz 14y agoI have a genetic disorder. At the time I attempted suicide, I was undiagnosed. In part for that reason, I ended up with severe low blood sugar while also under severe social duress. The short version is that relatives who knew the man I was arguing with had molested me as a child were telling me to "behave" instead of telling him to stfu. The severe low blood sugar interfered with my plans to slash my wrists. Had I been clearer-headed, I likely would have succeeded. I had a scar from an old accident marking exactly where to cut myself to successfully bleed out. Instead, I ended up with a really insignificant flesh wound. You can read the blog post if you want more details. I still find your remarks objectionable. Severe duress often cannot be clearly distinguished from "mental illness". I have seen too many stories where someone was dismissed as paranoid, a drama queen, mentally ill, making shit up, etc where it later turned out their "dramatics" were 100% true.
- ChristianMarks 14y agoThe principle of free information transmission must extend to its advocates: if you advocate that information must be free and you engage in civil disobedience, then you ought to expose your finances to the world when requesting support for a legal defense fund. Exposing one's finances at such a time demonstrates adherence to principle, and it blunts skepticism.
- herbart 14y agoThere is a big difference between public and private information. Aaron does not need to give up his privacy to be justified in asking for help.
- AndrewWarner 14y agoedw519 is a good member of this community. Let's not turn on each other. After researching founders for my interviews I can tell you that it's easy to make anyone look bad based on old posts. It's much harder to stay focused on what's important.
- mrtron 14y agoIt is rather unfair to single one person out too - the sentiment of the initial thread was in line with edw519's comments.
- param 14y agoThis is BS. edw519, and most of us, are not politicians. We should be free to believe in something to the best of our knowledge at any time. I have changed my perspective on almost everything I have ever believed in based on what information I come across. To hold him, or anyone else for that matter, hostage to what he said 120 days ago is dishonest.
- staunch 14y agoIt must have been hard on him to see his peers throwing him to the wolves. I think he could have tried harder to appeal to the hacker community, or maybe he couldn't for legal reasons, and that's yet another travesty revealed here. His case was muddy. He did a few things that most of us would never do without expecting to be punished. He deserved a slap on the wrist, not to be robbed of his assets and locked up for years. I think HN would have rallied to his cause after we realized how disproportionate the punishment was. I remember personally thinking things seemed weird, but was naively optimistic that it would turn out fine. Lesson learned, the very hard way: it can't hurt to rally around someone even if they're not 100% in the right, if it looks like they're being bullied.
- spinlocked 14y agoWell said.
- rhokstar 14y agoLeave it to TechCrunch to try to get more views on their website...
- iskander 14y agoI don't think this post should be here-- it's turning a tragedy into a witch hunt. I don't think this level of negativity and mob mentality is appropriate for HN.
- unreal37 14y agoI agree. What an ugly turn of events after a tragedy already.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- thaumaturgy 14y agoOn the one hand, it is probably unlikely that HN could have done much to prevent Aaron's death. He was facing a terrible situation, one that he could not bear to face, and I doubt anyone here could have substantially changed his situation. On the other, I can think of few things worse than facing a terrible situation, and feeling like you're doing so completely alone. The amount of speculation and analysis of Aaron's case here on HN was absurd (at one point prompting my only comments on the matter, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4544693 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4544693), and yet for all that analysis and speculation, there were ever so few comments that came out fully in Aaron's support. Then he takes his own life, and suddenly it's torches-and-pitchforks for the prosecuting team, it's "why didn't he ask for help", it's "this was unjust", it's "this was unfair", it's "why didn't he have more support". I felt saddened by the news, but I also felt a rising amount of bile for the HN community, and I'm glad that nikcub and Arrington have shone a light on this.
- danso 14y agoI dunno...as you say, having a community behind you, especially one you count yourself a respected member of, feels much better than going at it alone. I don't know if I had read his defense fund thread and didn't care enough to register a comment or just missed it...either way, I feel a little guilty of not inquiring more about how his case was actually going. I didn't know him personally but was absolutely crushed to hear the news, more than I had imagined I would be.
- drivingmenuts 14y agoAsking that someone own up to their responsibilities or shoulder their own problems is ABSOLUTELY NOT the same as wishing them dead.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Skywing 14y agoIt does kind of suck to look back and realize that his own people turned their back on him, though. Not very hacker of us, sadly. I remember reading that article originally, and obviously looking back I wish I had taken some kind of action. Didn't have to be money, I'm sure, but something would have been better than basically rejecting his plea for help in a condescending tone.
- AlexMuir 14y agoSo people told it as they saw it. That's the way hackers work and speak - and that sort of frankness is one of the major reasons that HN remains outstanding in terms of signal vs noise. We don't escape everything with weasel words and second-guess the way it's going to be interpreted. Commenters say what they think. Voters agree or disagree. Yes, it comes back to haunt people. Yes, people are wrong on here every single day. But that's the nature of the discourse, and it will be a sad day if HNers start to worry about voicing their opinion because it could be taken the wrong way. And, to pre-empt what I know will come, NO-ONE ever has all the facts. Ever. If we needed all the facts before we formed an opinion then we would have none.
- ricardobeat 14y agoWhat a sorry post. This is the kind of thing I expect to be banned from the front page.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- intenex 14y agoThe primary thing that stands out to me here, and what I believe is the main point of the TC post, is that edw and others clearly have very interesting 'before' and 'after' posts. Before: "Aaron should man up, take responsibility for his actions, and pay his own bills." Then: Aaron can't pay his bills, decides to take one form of responsibility and kills himself. Now: "OH NO! Stunned & heartbroken." "Thank you, Cory. This wonderful post will bring understanding (and maybe even comfort) to many of us who are sad and confused today. It will also probably save some lives." It's not that Ed is to blame for Aaron killing himself, it's that there's a marked change in sentiment and sympathy after his death. Did it really have to take Aaron killing himself for us to change our sympathies towards him? It seems not many of us really cared that much until he hung himself - and now we can't stop talking about him. So the point I'd like to make is there's something wrong with a world that only cares after you kill yourself. Maybe Aaron even made the right choice is this is really how it works. Otherwise he might have quietly lived out his 50 years in prison and died later and no one would have given a shit the entire time. At least now this is getting some attention.
- Mz 14y agoIn most cases, people simply don't know how bad it is or can't imagine it could be that bad or have no idea how to help, etc. It makes me crazy and I wish the world were better about such things. Yes, it took his death for people to "care", because his death was clear information about how very bad it was. People are still talking in part to try to figure out how to see it more clearly beforehand next time and not have to wait for such a clear signal. At least I hope that is part of the motive, for some people.
- rdl 14y agoUgh. I wish I'd seen that thread originally, but I was on my first vacation in years, and not reading HN for some reason. I couldn't give him much money, but it sounds like just talking to him about the case would have helped, and I doubt even people who thought he did the wrong thing or should have gone to jail to continue his protest would have begrudged him that. Sorry, Aaron. :(
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- chernevik 14y agoI see zero inconsistency between on one day saying that someone should take personal responsibility for their activism, and on another day regretting that this same person took their own life. The notion that Aaron's legal position caused his suicide is an opinion of many people on this board. Despite the numbers of those holding this opinion, it is still only an opinion, and needn't be read as fact for any other analysis or opinion. The insistence that everyone hold _your_ opinions for all of _their_ opinions and moral calculations is, at very best, deeply problematic.
- spinlocked 14y agoYou could perhaps see the consistency also between rallying round a cause and making a difference to the status quo. These "opinions" are shared by his family, read the statement. _You_ are problematic.
- chernevik 14y agoYou are advocating for your beliefs (here, ironically, freedom of information) by insisting that others surrender their freedom of thought. I don't mind causing problems for people doing that. I am terribly sorry for the family and their loss. But that loss does not make them arbiters of responsibility. Neither do the needs of any cause give anyone the right to dictate what others think or conclude or hold as fact. I could agree with your "cause" 100% and I would still, I hope, oppose this sort of demand for mindless conformity with "correct" opinion.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- diego 14y agoMichael Arrington has written his share of trollish articles, but this is just mean spirited. I have a hard time remembering anything so hypocritical and hindsight-biased written after someone's death. I will do my best to avoid reading anything written by Arrington from now on.
- thoughtcriminal 14y agoLets face it, HN and similar discussion sites bring out the worst in some people, including me. I'm not going to comment on Ed's unfortunate statements because I've been an asshat to people in the past too. It's a terrible thing when you don't have the opportunity to apologise later. I'm sorry for all parties involved.
- Tycho 14y agoIs that the best Arrington could come up with?
- wildmXranat 14y agoThis is sick. I'm at a loss for words.
- richardlblair 14y agoThis is dumb... A person can disagree with an individual's actions and still be sad when that person passes away. There was no need for this by techchrunch. In fact this article is useless, and complete bullshit. This article does nothing productive, it adds no value to anything, but only takes away from the whole situation.
- fdeeee12212 14y agoPlease downvote edw519 and jonmc12, don't let these assholes win.
- jordanb 14y agoAllow me to make a confession: I didn't think much of Aaron Swartz while he was alive. Most of his writings seemed self-absorbed to me. I had difficulty understanding how someone with his politics could be a mac fanboy. People I think highly of (Chris Webber, John Sullivan) thought highly of him so I was induced to give him some benefit of the doubt on those grounds, but I certainly couldn't understand what they saw in him. I assumed he was a millionaire with enormous resources that he was using to thumb his nose at powerful people. I felt that if I had the resources (I assumed that) Aaron had, I would use them differently. I saw the thread about Aaron's campaign fund and I didn't post, but I did read it. And I read Edward's comment and I agreed with it. I knew very little about Aaron's case. But the way that fund was being put together seemed underhanded to me, like he wanted to take people's money without really acknowledging it. Is he a millionaire or not? I wondered, and if not, why doesn't he come out with it and explain what happened? Of course now I know of the existence, from Lawence Lessig, of the bizarre Kafkaesque muzzle the judge had on Aaron, but how could anyone who wasn't very closely familiar with Aaron and his case know about that? There's a sort of sick serendipity in this for me. Just last week I read Kafka's The Trial. The word "Kafkaesque" keeps getting thrown around but it's stunning---stupefying to me, how many parallels there are between that book and Aaron's case. In Kafka, after the protagonist is arrested he's immediately released. The police even escort him to work and tell him to go about his life. At first he thinks that's an great thing that he wasn't hauled off in custody, but as the trial grinds on he comes to realize that being forced to live every day as the facsimile of a free man being required to do what free men are inclined to do while carrying the additional burden of dealing with his trial, is itself torture. If anyone remembers the bruhaha around Dmitry Sklyarov, or before that DVD John or Kevin Mitnick knows that this community rallies around men sitting in jail while the authorities try to come up with a crime to charge them with. There's no doubt in my mind that if the prosecution had hauled Aaron off to jail "for downloading some PDFs" the reaction would have been swift and boisterous. I've learned a great deal about this country's "justice" system over the past two days, and mostly I've learned about the special sort of hell it put Aaron in, and I've come to realize that I was complicit in its work through my ignorance and indifference. And all I can say about that is I feel a little bit sick. And that it won't ever happen again.
- mscarborough 14y agoTo the HN elite (edw519 and tptacek): good on you for commenting on almost every thread, it's gotten you the most 'karma' possible. Unfortunately, it means that when you jump into a new thread and contravene your other clearly-stated positions, it's a rather transparent attempt to get more attention. You're not part of Aaron's family, you're not related, and your own words were pretty clear as to what you thought about the guy: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484. For the love of all things good, can people who didn't care in the first place about Aaron or his cause stop their fake sympathy now that he is dead? I didn't do anything for him either, but not going to cry any crocodile tears to show everyone how politically aware and smart I am.
- jimmytucson 14y agoWhen you say that a person who committed suicide "asked for help", it makes it sound like he reached out for emotional support in a time of desperation. While that might have been partially what Aaron was doing, I think the headline leads you to picture a horrifying scenario in which the young man's death might have been avoided, if only the community had been more encouraging or sympathetic. Instead, you find that he was asking for financial support, and there's of course no reason to believe that sending him money could have altered the tortured course that ended with him taking his own life. It may seem like a trivial point but in my opinion it completely warps this whole conversation. For example, suppose someone shares with you that they have been terribly depressed and contemplating suicide. In this case, I agree, telling them to "man up" is pretty bad form. But that is not exactly what happened here.
- InclinedPlane 14y agoI'm not sure why I'm commenting here, I expect it'll just be shouting into the void given the nature of this thread. However, there are some things that rub me the wrong way about all this, so maybe I'll try to make a few points. One thing that's been bugging me is how, to be blunt, intellectually lazy so many people seem to have been about this whole thing, especially the case against Aaron. Everyone is looking for the easy answer, the soundbite that wraps the whole thing in a bow. I thought that HN was a bit smarter than that, that's a sucker's game, it's a game for tabloids and cable news, not a way for smart people to approach complex problems. And this is a complex problem with no easy answer. The case against Aaron was complex. The law involved was complex. And the application of the law was also complex. It's not as easy as "he was innocent!" or "he was guilty!", because even if either one were easily established in the "court of public opinion" then that's really only the starting point of several much more difficult questions. I think it's probably fair to say that guilty or not the prosecution was overzealous, as the sorts of punishments he faced was all out of proportion to what one would expect for a white collar crime, even one potentially involving thousands of dollars of losses. In the same vein people have been reacting to this tragedy by trying to find scapegoats. Whether that's the prosecutor, or edw519, or MIT, or whomever. I don't think I need to spend time addressing why that sort of behavior is a bad idea. Going back and looking at the comments in the older thread about Aaron's legal troubles I've spotted a few instances of several trouble behaviors that I've noticed have become more and more common. One, the idea that "rich" people are less deserving of sympathy because of their wealth. I've seen this in the rise of the "99%" mentality and other phenomena. Personally I don't think there is any amount of wealth that renders an individual's pain and suffering unworthy of caring about. Two, the idea that punishment is reasonable after being charged but before being sentenced, or infliction of pain and suffering in general as a response to crimes. You see this sort of thing in support for torture, support for poor conditions in jail, sympathetic depictions of police brutality in fiction, public approval of widespread sexual assault in prisons, etc. And you also see it in the idea that there's nothing wrong with a trial being a punishing, life-altering, resource draining experience. I think these sorts of things are antithetical to the ideals of liberty, equality, justice, rehabilitation, etc. that we should desire our societies rest upon, rather than base instincts like jealousy, revenge, punishment, retribution, schadenfreude, etc. I don't think this saga bears much, if any, similarity to a fight between absolute heroes and absolute villains. I think that even in as much as the prosecutor was overzealous it's as much a systemic problem of the way that computer and IP related "crimes" are perceived and handled by the criminal justice system as it is to be due to any ill-will or villainy on her part. I'd much rather we, HN and the tech community in general, were taking the time to talk through the details of the case more carefully, discussing the details of the relevant law (and whether it's well grounded, meaningful, useful, and generally well applied), and bigger issues such as IP issues, computer security issues, problems with our criminal justice system in general, etc. than looked for quick-fix easy answers and tried to fit this story into a simplistic mold. I wonder what sort of discussion Aaron would have preferred take place.
- eranation 14y agoCan we be a little nicer? There were nasty comments about Aaron in that HN post, which got nasty replies. There were nasty comments about Ed in this thread, which got nasty replies. There were nasty comments about Michael in the linked post, which got nasty replies. We can say the most criticizing things in a way that is not nasty, how? but putting question marks instead of exclamation points. By talking about facts and not opinions. By being aware that the persona we are taking about is also a person, by always thinking what if I was on the other end of that comment. Is there any drawback in being nicer? I can't think of any. Is there any benefit for being nasty? I can't think of any either.
- edanm 14y agoA few months ago, edw519 made a comment that many here feel was inappropriate given that we now know more facts, and given that Aaron committed suicide. So the lesson people take away is: "Be careful about what you say to people, even on HN: your words may have a real effect, and being dismissive or mean to people may just haunt you later". This is a good lesson, in general. But what I love is the irony - the way people are sending out this message is by being dismissive and mean to edw519! If (God forbid) something ever happened to edw519, and someone in 4 months posted this thread, the same people condemning edw519 will b IN EXACTLY THE SAME SHOES as they think he is now. How are the people posting so blind to this? Note: edw519 is a great person and member of this community. Despite the lesson that I believe can be learned from this post, I absolutely DO NOT think he did anything wrong, and thinking otherwise is clearly because things look different in hindsight, especially given more information. Seriously edw519 - consider this another person who is sure you did absolutely nothing wrong.
- scriptdude 14y agoHN is the big brother you worship, your hero, the coolest guy you know. Then one night you find him drunk and coked up sleeping in the backyard in a pool of piss and vomit. This topic is the backyard.
- klepra 14y agoWrong or not, Ed's comment was very cold-hearted, uncompassionate, pretentious, egoistic even sexist. That said, I see a lot of this in IT/tech word in general and it makes me sad to work in this field.
- klepra 14y agoWhy is this thread not showing among first results? It is heavily up-voted.
- ramblerman 14y agoIf anything "Tech Crunch" is the troll of the day. Is it really such a shock people might inhibit their opinions after someone has just killed himself. No one expected it to get to this, Aaron probably wasn't completely innocent, And Our judicial system seems to have failed him. Trying to polarize it into some "You're either with Aaron" or "you're against him" just means falling deeper into this cesspool of a thread.