Permit

59 ms·

601.
by Permit 14y ago
Just don't expect sympathy from anyone you've inconvenienced when that right is infringed upon.
602.
by Permit 14y ago
>Quit whining. What an excellent way to win the hearts and minds of the MIT student body. Congratulations you've managed to belittle and alienate the same people you'd want on your side!
603.
by Permit 14y ago
If you're trying to simply "get the attention" of the student body, congratulations you have it. If you're trying to get the student body on your side, you're doing the exact opposite. If I pay $X/year to attend an institution, and someone
604.
by Permit 14y ago
Why is it perfectly acceptable to inconvenience people from their studies? Man, this kind of attitude makes me want to encourage harsher penalties on people who pull this bullshit. You do your movement no favours when you inconvenience the
605.
by Permit 14y ago
>To me this feels a bit like a lunch counter cook complaining all these black people showing up in his restaurant are causing him extra work. Are black people notorious for eating or something? That kind of came out of left field, there
606.
by Permit 14y ago
My point isn't "It can't happen". My point is "Why don't we discuss things as they are, not as they may or may not be some time in the future?".
607.
by Permit 14y ago
Show an example please.
608.
by Permit 14y ago
There's a difference between 'The site may go down and 'This person I don't know will overreact and accuse us of terrorism'. Why don't we discuss the reality of the situation rather than some bizarre scenario you've concocted?
609.
by Permit 14y ago
You can call outside speculation "a statement of probabilities" in an attempt to make it seem legitimate, but that doesn't make you correct. Dressing up speculation doesn't change what it is.
610.
by Permit 14y ago
YOU STILL DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS. There was no suicide note. There was no reason given. The closest thing we have is a suggestion from his family, which caused everyone to instantly jump on one of three different bandwagons getting as many
611.
by Permit 14y ago
>Push anyone far enough and they'll take their own life. This is ridiculous hindsight bias, people have been charged with far more than Aaron and didn't kill themselves. Aaron had been depressed for a long time leading up to all of this
612.
by Permit 14y ago
She said "The e-mail that Defendant Swartz's supplemental memorandum (pdf) cites as paramount to his fifth motion to suppress [evidence against him] is relevant, but not nearly as important as he tries to make it out to be". If the US gov't
613.
by Permit 14y ago
This kind of post pisses me off because of how obvious it that you're talking out of your ass. Aaron was depressed for a considerably long time, as pointed out by his lawyer. His previous coworkers had sent the police to his house six years
614.
by Permit 14y ago
He's replying to a comment that said their help line was taken down. That's not a technology problem, and I fail to see how an engineer or computer science grad would have better tackled that issue.
615.
by Permit 14y ago
>I would personally be ready to donate 100$ immediately. Then you should have no problem paying the fee.
616.
by Permit 14y ago
You guys are vastly oversimplifying this whole thing. The only reason JSTOR gets access to these documents in the first place is because of licensing agreements with the publishers. You can try and a start a company that gives it all away f
617.
by Permit 14y ago
>The executives of the institution still get paid... God forbid. I hear they even pay their other employees. >I don't know much about JSTOR, but I know the IEEE (for example) can be a good bunch of sharks. In the past, they forced y
618.
by Permit 14y ago
Many of Google's digital works aren't freely available, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.
619.
by Permit 14y ago
>Their digitization is largely done by a for-profit company. I was unaware of this. What company does the digitization for them?
620.
by Permit 14y ago
>So yes it is possible to allow free, unrestricted access, JSTOR just decides to only do that to certain IP ranges. If they allowed that with everyone, Aaron wouldn't have to jack his laptop into an unused open closet to pull articles.
621.
by Permit 14y ago
Perhaps I was unclear: they're not giving away three articles to the entire world every two weeks, it's three per-person.
622.
by Permit 14y ago
They have operating costs. They're a non-profit but they pay people to digitize the works. It costs a lot of money to access some of these things. It's not prohibitively expensive to access these documents. You can read three articles free
623.
by Permit 14y ago
Especially considering JSTOR is a non-profit that has to employ many people with similar occupations to those of HN. They digitize documents that wouldn't have otherwise been available at all before. It's incredible how if they hadn't digit
624.
by Permit 14y ago
Please keep in mind that JSTOR paid almost $100,000 to digitize these files[1]. I think a lot of people don't realize that they're a non-profit organization with similar goals to many of you. I don't think it's such a bad idea to give them
625.
by Permit 14y ago
>I want a world where the scientific enterprise grows beyond academia. I want a world where the collective intelligence of humanity can be brought to bear on humanity's most important problems. I want a world where the conversation of s
626.
by Permit 14y ago
>They're basically a bunch of BU/small liberal arts college grad professional administrators of colleges running the institute into the ground. Your arrogance is truly breathtaking. I can't believe people shit on other's majors and coll
627.
by Permit 14y ago
They have to be alive.
628.
by Permit 14y ago
This is a massive and largely untrue generalization.
629.
by Permit 14y ago
Do you want them shut down or something? They can't legally do that. They've taken measures to try and get more articles out there in recent years for free: - Alumni are soon going to be able to freely access all articles. - Registered rese
630.
by Permit 14y ago
Are they trying to imply that the non-profit organization JSTOR is comparable in any way to "tyrants and profiteers"? JSTOR is a non-profit organization that allows digital access to articles that were previously inaccessible to anyone rega

More ›