For once
|
Author | Content |
---|---|
djohnston Feb 01, 2013 6:32 AM EDT |
I could not find a single thing hairyfeet said that I disagree with. |
caitlyn Feb 01, 2013 10:57 AM EDT |
Funny, I disagree with every word he said. There isn't a single thing there I agree with. Oh, and FWIW, I don't think Mr. Swartz was an innocent victim either. |
CFWhitman Feb 01, 2013 11:34 AM EDT |
It appears to me that the "Civic Hacking" day is actually using the word "hacking" in it's more correct sense, but it's everyone taking it in the classically not so correct sense (what's more correctly referred to as "cracking") that is creating the confusion. Hacking in the lingo of the old Unix gurus was not a bad thing. It has come to mean something in the common vernacular that is not ethical, and this difference seems to be at the heart of the confusion. |
caitlyn Feb 01, 2013 12:21 PM EDT |
I do agree with every word CFWhitman said. |
dinotrac Feb 01, 2013 12:25 PM EDT |
@caitlyn - So do I. And I agree, Swartz was not an innocent victim. The issue with Swartz was not that he should not be dealt with, but the rapacious blood lust with which fedral prosecutors pursued him. |
caitlyn Feb 01, 2013 1:19 PM EDT |
I'm going to repeat the comments I made before when the news of Mr. Swartz's suicide broke. Prosecutors are judged on their conviction rates. If they get a plea bargain where the defendant agrees to some lesser charge that's a win. As a result they go out of their way to scare the defendant into thinking that if they don't make a deal they will 1) be found guilty of some maximum charge and 2) get some horrendous sentence. They will do this even if they know a conviction is unlikely. It's what they are trained to do. I'm not at all sure "rapacious bloodlust" had anything at all to do with it. What happened is tragic in the extreme. I'm just not sure I'm willing to lay it all on the prosecutors. I am sure I don't know all the facts in the case and that I'm not qualified to judge. |
Steven_Rosenber Feb 01, 2013 1:27 PM EDT |
Not everybody has the stomach for throwing themselves in front of a train for a cause. |
Fettoosh Feb 01, 2013 1:50 PM EDT |
Laws are drafted and approved by lawyers and politicians. Both have their own ulterior motives to make laws touch and punishment severe as much as possible. And that is why founding fathers made sure it is up to the jury and/or judges to issue the final verdict. Also, that is why there are negotiations between lawyers and DAs in the presence of a judge (most of the time). Personally, I think if Mr. Swartz had not done what he did, he wouldn't have gotten the maximum sentence and probably might have gotten out with just a slap on the wrist. Or am I dreaming!? |
djohnston Feb 01, 2013 1:54 PM EDT |
Quoting:It appears to me that the "Civic Hacking" day is actually using the word "hacking" in it's more correct sense, but it's everyone taking it in the classically not so correct sense (what's more correctly referred to as "cracking") that is creating the confusion. Well, no, I wasn't confusing the two. I took it to mean the UNIX/creative type of hacking, not the black hat type of cracking. Still, I agree with hairyfeet's assessment ... for once. |
caitlyn Feb 01, 2013 2:03 PM EDT |
Quoting:Laws are drafted and approved by lawyers and politicians. Both have their own ulterior motives to make laws touch and punishment severe as much as possible. And that is why founding fathers made sure it is up to the jury and/or judges to issue the final verdict. Also, that is why there are negotiations between lawyers and DAs in the presence of a judge (most of the time).Today Fettoosh and I are on the same page. I agree with this completely. Quoting:Personally, I think if Mr. Swartz had not done what he did, he wouldn't have gotten the maximum sentence and probably might have gotten out with just a slap on the wrist.We have no way to know. On one hand the government does seem to want to make examples of people in some cases like this. On the other hand, with MIT and JSTOR not interested in pursuing the case what you suggest may well have happened. Sadly, we'll never know, just as we'll never know what contributions to FOSS Mr. Swartz would have made had he gotten past all this. |
Steven_Rosenber Feb 01, 2013 2:39 PM EDT |
Hairyfeet is a uniter, not a divider. |
flufferbeer Feb 01, 2013 2:45 PM EDT |
@ Fettoosh, >> Personally, I think if Mr. Swartz had not done what he did, he wouldn't have gotten the maximum sentence and probably might have gotten out with just a slap on the wrist. I disagree. I think Aaron Swartz CERTAINLY would have gotten as maximum a penalty as the prosecutors were threatening him with. While maybe Aaron really was or was NOT an innocent victim, the prosecutors CERTAINLY threw the book at him!! Apparently, 50K+ plus people have felt the same in signing the Remove United States District Attorney Carmen Ortiz from office for overreach in the case of Aaron Swartz (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-stat... ). Oh and BTW (mindful of this site's TOS), this very petition to put pressure right back where it belongs on the PROSECUTORS of Aaron Swartz's case is among the top-five most popular and UNexpired petitions at Whitehouse.gov. 2c |
Fettoosh Feb 01, 2013 3:16 PM EDT |
Quoting:Apparently, 50K+ plus people have felt the same in signing the Remove United States District Attorney Carmen Ortiz from office for overreach in the case of Aaron Swartz Like Caitlyn said, we'll never know will we? The more than 50K is the reason why I was optimistic about the final outcome. like Caitlyn Also said, it is not of the best interest of MIT nor JSTOR to carry the lawsuit through, a case that goes against FOSS principals and MIT is full of strong FOSS believer and advocates. Remember when Adobe dropped charges against Russian cryptographer programmer Dmitry Sklyarov, and that was a commercial company. |
BernardSwiss Feb 01, 2013 4:30 PM EDT |
Regarding reasonable punishment vs what Aaron Swartz was facing Here's the perspective of a Federal Judge: Quoting: Retired Federal Judge Joins Criticism Over Handling Of Swartz Case And it's clear that Swartz's case was blown beyond all semblance of reason or proportion: Quoting: Swartz didn't face prison until feds took over case, report says Quoting: "Continuance without a finding" was the anticipated disposition of the case were the charge to remain in state court, with the Middlesex County District Attorney to prosecute it. Under such a disposition, the charge is held in abeyance ("continued") without any verdict ("without a finding"). The defendant is on probation for a period of a few months up to maybe a couple of years at the most; if the defendant does not get into further legal trouble, the charge is dismissed, and the defendant has no criminal record. This is what the lawyers expected to happen when Swartz was arrested for "trespassing at MIT." But then the feds took over the case, and the rest is tragic history. Quoting: If Swartz had stolen a $100 hard drive with the JSTOR articles, it would have been a misdemeanor offense that would have yielded probation or community service. Also, there's plenty of references to Ortiz coming under fire for many other egregious abuses of proprietorial power. "Making an example" of Swartz was clearly just grist for other peoples' legal careers and/or political ambitions. This prosecutor is under such scrutiny in large part because the Swartz case is just part of an ongoing pattern of bad behaviour. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!