You're viewing a single thread.
If I remember correctly, it wasn't even illegal since these scientific articles should have been public to begin with because they used public funds.
That may be so, but IIRC he was charged with breaking into MIT's networking room and illegally tapping into their network to get the articles:
Well that's definitely burying the lede from the OP.
It wasn't the sharing part they had a problem with, it was the B&E and hacking.
still... 35 years? obviously there is more missing information.
It wasn't 35 years, it was 6 months with a plea deal
It's not that clear cut and I would recommend listening to the Behind The Bastards episode about him:
Behind the Bastards: Part One: Christmas Hero Episode: Aaron Swartz
https://omny.fm/shows/behind-the-bastards/part-one-christmas-hero-episode-aaron-swartz
Most of these guys they just offer jobs to. This was needless. No wonder China is kicking our ass on the cyber front
The whole criminals getting job offers has never been true and will never be true. For many of such jobs you aren't qualified if you have a criminal record, even small offenses disqualify you.
I mean thousands of war criminals were offered jobs after ww2 so I doubt they would care about a little red tape just hire them into the black no one needs to know
Ah my sweet summer child...how wonderful it must be to live in your world.
That's still a hell of a sentence for a B&E
Mm. Breaking and entering to share publicly funded research is different than B&E with the threat of violence...
That also may be so, but 35 years is fucked up for that. pretty sure child porn first time offenders is like 15 to 30 so hacking MIT for stuff that should have been free gets you more jail time then a first CP offence. OK thats fucked up
He was a defender of child porn though.
https://web.archive.org/web/20031229025933/http:/bits.are.notabug.com/
Assuming this is actually by the guy, here is what the linked article says about child porn:
In the US, it is illegal to possess or distribute child pornography, apparently because doing so will encourage people to sexually abuse children.
This is absurd logic. Child pornography is not necessarily abuse. Even if it was, preventing the distribution or posession of the evidence won't make the abuse go away. We don't arrest everyone with videotapes of murders, or make it illegal for TV stations to show people being killed.
Wired has an article on how these laws destroy honest people's lives.
Child pornography is not necessarily abuse.
Yikes.
OK a reason to not like him but sending him to prison for his views that he didnt act on sounds like fasicm lol I dont agree with his views just saying
I hacked my highschool servers when I was young and shared the upcoming exams, so everyone could prepare for them. Someone told the authorities, all I got was some extra exercise. Sure it wasn't MIT, but still 35 years is ridiculous, even a year of prison would have been ridiculous.
Paradoxically, that's not how science jourals work. There are no difference between public or prívate funds in this regard.