4 ms·

"Hiding his computer under a box so no one would see it." That's always the part on TV where the defense objects to the prosecution drawing inferences or somet

"Hiding his computer under a box so no one would see it." That's always the part on TV where the defense objects to the prosecution drawing inferences or something like that. Even if we saw him on authentic video placing a box over a computer, it's still something very different to say it was so no one else would see it.

jlgreco 14y ago
Exactly. Even if it was "so no one else would see it", for all we know that "someone else" to Aaron was the homeless person that kept his stuff in that closet.
- tptacek 14y ago
  I wouldn't have thought that hiding his face with a bike helmet would have mattered. After all, I do weird things any time I know I'm being watched by a camera; there's one on the elevator at the garage that I habitually cover. Orin Kerr said that stuff matters at trial.
  - nitrogen 14y ago
    As I posted elsewhere, it seems that "sneaky" and "strange" are equal to "wrong" and "guilty" in most people's eyes.
  - mindslight 14y ago
    Okay, that tears it! Somebody has replaced tptacek.
    - tptacek 14y ago
      What did I say? Did you really think of me as someone who thought it was important to be forthcoming with surveillance cameras?
      - mindslight 14y ago
        No, I hadn't. It's your emphasis and attitude that come across as completely different. I kept trying to tell ya, the legal machine looks a lot different when you examine it as if you're the one at odds with it.
        tptacek 14y ago
        By abusing computer fraud laws to needlessly persecute Aaron Swartz, these Boston prosecutors have done grave damage to the entirely legitimate enterprise of having the state help protect individuals and businesses from criminals who can and do hire out superior security talent. Look at HN over the last two days: anyone who's ever been convicted of a computer crime, even if that crime involved the mass theft and subsequent resale of credit cards, is a newly minted hero of the cause of openness. That's Boston's doing. The law cannot hope to capture every possible nuance of all conceivable offenses. As every lawyer who's ever argued with a Hacker on HN has pointed out, the law is not a programming language and courts aren't computer architectures. We want our rules, laws, and metalaws to provide every protection to the accused that they reasonably can, but at some point it's always going to come down to the discretion of humans appointed to positions of authority. Those authorities need to be equal to the task, or we delegitimize the whole effort. I'm sad about what happened to Aaron. I look at the photos of him in his teens hanging out with Dave Winer and Lawrence Lessig; he was a small kid, and I have a big 13 year old. I exchanged an email or two with him, but my wife didn't know him at all and she's upset, as I would assume any parent reading about this would be. And obviously in light of what happened, I'm a little harsh on how I interacted with Aaron online --- not on the prosecution threads, but you know, on threads about "hollywood launches" and stuff like that. But beyond that, what happened offends me in principle. If they're not the exact same principles that you've had offended, that doesn't matter much, does it? The justice system seems to have achieved a pretty high level of coverage in offended principles.
        jacquesm 14y ago
        > I'm a little harsh on how I interacted with Aaron online --- not on the prosecution threads, but you know, on threads about "hollywood launches" and stuff like that. Those prosecution threads should give you pause just the same, and Aaron is absolutely not the only person that you've acted like that with. I respect you tremendously for your technical knowledge, but for someone who reminds people to 'stay classy' and who claims the moral high ground with some regularity a bit of introspection wouldn't hurt. I'd respect you a lot more still. I'm very happy to see you come around in your way of thinking about this particular case though.
  - rsingel 14y ago
    Yes, it does. Things that make you seem like you are being a criminal hurt. The hard thing is that sometimes either option looks bad. For instance, IIRC, Weev deleted the download script that pulled data from AT&T and the data itself, once publicity had been gotten. That was construed at trial as deleting evidence. But part of the prosecutors' case was that Weev et. al. planned to exploit the data. In that case, keeping the data would have been used against them as well.

jlgreco 14y ago

Exactly. Even if it was "so no one else would see it", for all we know that "someone else" to Aaron was the homeless person that kept his stuff in that closet.

tptacek 14y ago
I wouldn't have thought that hiding his face with a bike helmet would have mattered. After all, I do weird things any time I know I'm being watched by a camera; there's one on the elevator at the garage that I habitually cover. Orin Kerr said that stuff matters at trial.
- nitrogen 14y ago
  As I posted elsewhere, it seems that "sneaky" and "strange" are equal to "wrong" and "guilty" in most people's eyes.
- mindslight 14y ago
  Okay, that tears it! Somebody has replaced tptacek.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    What did I say? Did you really think of me as someone who thought it was important to be forthcoming with surveillance cameras?
    - mindslight 14y ago
      No, I hadn't. It's your emphasis and attitude that come across as completely different. I kept trying to tell ya, the legal machine looks a lot different when you examine it as if you're the one at odds with it.
      - tptacek 14y ago
        By abusing computer fraud laws to needlessly persecute Aaron Swartz, these Boston prosecutors have done grave damage to the entirely legitimate enterprise of having the state help protect individuals and businesses from criminals who can and do hire out superior security talent. Look at HN over the last two days: anyone who's ever been convicted of a computer crime, even if that crime involved the mass theft and subsequent resale of credit cards, is a newly minted hero of the cause of openness. That's Boston's doing. The law cannot hope to capture every possible nuance of all conceivable offenses. As every lawyer who's ever argued with a Hacker on HN has pointed out, the law is not a programming language and courts aren't computer architectures. We want our rules, laws, and metalaws to provide every protection to the accused that they reasonably can, but at some point it's always going to come down to the discretion of humans appointed to positions of authority. Those authorities need to be equal to the task, or we delegitimize the whole effort. I'm sad about what happened to Aaron. I look at the photos of him in his teens hanging out with Dave Winer and Lawrence Lessig; he was a small kid, and I have a big 13 year old. I exchanged an email or two with him, but my wife didn't know him at all and she's upset, as I would assume any parent reading about this would be. And obviously in light of what happened, I'm a little harsh on how I interacted with Aaron online --- not on the prosecution threads, but you know, on threads about "hollywood launches" and stuff like that. But beyond that, what happened offends me in principle. If they're not the exact same principles that you've had offended, that doesn't matter much, does it? The justice system seems to have achieved a pretty high level of coverage in offended principles.
        jacquesm 14y ago
        > I'm a little harsh on how I interacted with Aaron online --- not on the prosecution threads, but you know, on threads about "hollywood launches" and stuff like that. Those prosecution threads should give you pause just the same, and Aaron is absolutely not the only person that you've acted like that with. I respect you tremendously for your technical knowledge, but for someone who reminds people to 'stay classy' and who claims the moral high ground with some regularity a bit of introspection wouldn't hurt. I'd respect you a lot more still. I'm very happy to see you come around in your way of thinking about this particular case though.
- rsingel 14y ago
  Yes, it does. Things that make you seem like you are being a criminal hurt. The hard thing is that sometimes either option looks bad. For instance, IIRC, Weev deleted the download script that pulled data from AT&T and the data itself, once publicity had been gotten. That was construed at trial as deleting evidence. But part of the prosecutors' case was that Weev et. al. planned to exploit the data. In that case, keeping the data would have been used against them as well.