This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
AARON SWARTZ: WHaT KiND oF a WoRLD?
.
According to Reuters, tomorrow, JP Morgan's Board will consider releasing an internal report that faults CEO Jamie Dimon's oversight of a division that lost more than $6.2 billion in botched trades.
The office of the Comptroller of Currency may wrist slap the Bank as early as today for lax anti-money laundering controls.
Separately, JP Morgan agreed in a deal announced last week to pay $2 billion on top of $5.29 billion assessed last year, to settle mortgage abuse charges.
A few more stinky bad apples, right Jamie?
.
As is usual in today's Klepto-Crony-Fraudocratic-Ponzi-Plutopian world, no criminal charges are contemplated and the swindling CEO midget at the top of JP Madoff's wonderful magnificent perpetually ponzi klepto crony pyramid has absolutely nothing to be worried about with regard to the safety and security of his fat assed TBTF throne of fraud.
What kind of a world is this you ought justifiable ask?
HERE IS WHAT KIND OF A WORLD...
"For remember, we live in a world where the architects of the financial crisis regularly dine at the White House -- and where even those brought to "justice" never even have to admit any wrongdoing, let alone be labeled "felons."
In that world, the question this government needs to answer is why it was so necessary that Aaron Swartz be labeled a "felon." 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.
And so as wrong and misguided and fucking sad as this is, I get how the prospect of this fight, defenseless, made it make sense to this brilliant but troubled boy to end it."
Lawrence Lessig
.
Swartz was ahead of his time
A victim cut-down in his prime
His criminal deed
To help those in need?
I no longer understand "crime"
The Limerick King
R.I.P. Aaron Swartz...
»
- advertisements -
we like to download songs for free, but we're uncomfortable with china pirating our technology and arts. entertainment is americas biggest and best industry,(entertainment technology). we believe we have rights as americans to all that stuff they are giving away, even if we didn't make it ourselves, because we are the frontline consumer. we are the audience for which this intellectual property is designed. when you sit in a theatre in india and watch an american film, you get to feel what it feels like to be an american. and so giving all this stuff away impoverishes us, on two levels.
corporations now operate as individuals (according to SCOTUS, all members of which will vehemently deny they MAKE law, that they merely interpret law) with property rights, though of course they are unenforceable, (including the military corporation, aka DOD) unless of course Congress chose to tear up the WTO agreement with china by example. corporations as individuals is a bandaid over the problem, it doesn't really connect the role we play as high end consumers who screen the information we present to the rest of the world, the american dream.
so we get really pissed off when POTUS drone attacks tribal leaders who don't want the american dream in their neighborhood, (they want their own) because tolerance is a cornerstone of the creed. but thats our role as audience, and POTUS is the entertainer. (he needs a lot of work too, worse than the stuttering bush)
intellectual property is a bit of a joke, but that's not a moral decision, its what the technology demands. and we're the keeper of that technlogy.
"..but we're uncomfortable with china pirating our technology and arts.."
Let's be a mite accurate here, please --- Micro$oft opened their source code on operating systems to China, the same way Boeing passed on tech specs to them and the Clinton and Bush administration gave/sold them the most sensitive military tech conceivable --- plus ALL those jobs and factories and technology which have been offshored there --- blame Wall Street and Corporate Amerika --- don't blame the people, dood, try to be honest, please, if that doesn't take to much integrity, huh?
You know what I'm tired of? I'm tired of being told I have to keep purchasing the same music over and over.
You are not purchasing music. You are purchasing a listening experience. When the music stops, the listening experience is over. If you want another listening experience, you must pay for it. Think Vienna in the Baroque period. Did the price of admission to the opera enable you to carry the orchestra home? No. The price of admission only paid for that particular listening experience, and when it was over you had to leave the orchestra and go home. If you wanted another listening experience later, you had to pay again to be admitted to the opera.
That's the logic behind the new business model. And it transfers to Aaron's story. Information may be free, but the delivery mechanism isn't. I'll think a thought. It contains information. But can you read my mind? So I'll put that thought on paper. Now it is something more than just a thought - it is a thought plus delivery mechanism. I may let you have my thought for free. But I had to pay for the paper that thought is on, and so I will charge you for the paper. Plus whatever other costs I incur in getting that paper to you. Bottom line - you can have my thought for free. But you have to pay the cost of the delivery mechanism. Why should I have to pay to get my thought to you when you are the one that wants my thought.
So - paying for a listening experience, or paying for the delivery of information - seems to be a given, a necessity. That can't be the basis of the debate, and one who argues that it is the basis is naive. The basis of the debate is how much to charge. There is clearly a fair price, and clearly an exorbitant price. But a price, non-the-less. Not free.
that's an interesting, well thought out rebuttal. will allow bill the opportunity to respond, but one thing that must not be ignored, is not only what is a fair price but what is a fair distribution of the price between the owners of the delivery system and the creators of the original material. don't forget, those delivery systems would not exist if it was not for the content that it is delivering.
Didn't mean for my comments to be a rebuttal so much as an expansion of the discussion to focus on what the real issue is.
It is a well thought further elaboration of my laconic statement ;-) Delivery mechanism is precisely right. They jimmy the game by continuous obsolescence and carving up digital licenses into territories and specified usage.
Now I am all for compensating artists for their work. But that is not what the current system is designed to do. That system is threatened by the direct interface of artists and their audience. Cutting out the rent seeking middlemen who offer zero in terms of creative advancement.
I see that MortimerDuke is against property rights since the research that Adam hacked was infact paid for by the taxpayers and our property to begin with.
JSTOR works like a gas tax paid road that charges a toll for people to use it to pay for "publishing rights". Dude, don't ever manage $5 of anybody else's money but your own. You like to be swindled out of other people's money. I pity anyone who might be your spouse that has to share their savings/checkings/investing with you on a Joint account. DREAD.
Just let us know who you are so we know you're not available for marraige please!
Actually it has more to do with a bright youngster who decided to devote himself to principles rather than ponzi swindling stupid tech deals with Wall Street. Principles like fighting government incursions on our internet liberty such as SOPA and CISPA.
And yes JSTOR is a fucking Ponzi swindle BTW. A publicly subsidized ponzi swindle no less and apparently they know the word is out.
But that is ok, because in our own American gulag it's ok to steal and defraud people out of their savings, its ok to treat publicly funded research as a private monopoly, but it's never ok to make an uncomfortable political point. In the latter case they will always beat the shit out of and make an example of the nail that sticks out.
Zeig heil!
murdered by the state for being cool (either/or, you put someone on a one-way ledge, or shoot em yourself eh?)
the press will coldly sneer and seal the history books on one of our best, a great human we all owe more than we know
and it is to such humans we dedicate this day and every day after until the ending of the world. /drink
MoronimoreDukes are worse than bolsheviks around here. You are seeking to get the down arrow stupid award with those comments. Go troll yourself off in the distance.
I think you misssed the point.....
Lemme see... the point is:
Guess One: that some poor kid, with the misfortune to be born a jew, and thus get a bad rap for the accident of his birth, gets mur-er, suicided for going up against the big boyz re copyrights, when the big boyz all get to commit outlandinsh crimes in which real people die, and nothing happens to them at all. irony point: the big boyz are almost all jews, and they will kill anyone who gets in their way. In this, they are not racists.
Guess 2: Swartz was a horrible thief and wicked criminal because he stole data off of a computer, something no-one else has ever done before, certainly not yours truly, or WB, or anyone else. His naked dead body should be dragged through the streets in order to terrorize anyone else who might dare drag an image from google images onto their desktop and then republish it.
Guess 3. Intellectual property rights are tantamount to chattel slavery. Burn the plantation! Let my people go! I have a dream! Yeah! Copywrong (left, whatever) power....right, go on then....
Do I win a prize?
Carmen Ortiz, like the DOJ, is a giant cunt rag
At 26 years to life, his minimum stretch under California's three strikes law was nearly three times as long as he would have normally gotten for being convicted of drug possession
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_22352028/three-striker-impri...
Wachovia pays $160 million to settle drug money probehttp://www.reuters.com/article/2010/03/17/us-wachovia-settlement-idUSTRE...
....OT, but Jackie Chan's comments on Amerika's corruption get him labeled "anti-American". The reality being his comments are very American.....the corruptors are anti-American.
Excuses, excuses.
Swartz, like Dimon, Corzine and Blankfein are thieves.
Swartz finally recognized his guilt and did the honorable thing (after running out of cash to continue his fight- so just how "honorable" is open to debate.)
sic semper ereptor
That is a fact. A cold, hard one to be sure - but a fact nonetheless. Down votes can't change that fact anymore than they can change the force of gravity.
Its obvious that "Dave's not here"!!
To call this felony Hacking is an overreach. Hacking involves circumventing the security protocols that are in place. It sounds like the only thing Aaron did was access the info with a fraudulent account since he was not an MIT student.
I guess anyone who has logged onto someone else's email account could be just as guilty if we want to follow the letter of the law. BTW how about those little girls selling lemonade without a permit...imprison them...its the only way they're gonna learn.
Furthermore, why is this not a Civil case instead of a criminal one? Do you think that if you or I had downloaded a file from JSTOR without being a paid subscriber we would be facing 35 years in prison and having to bare the full force of our (In)Justice Department?
This is no different than the countless cases of suicide brought to you courtesy of the IRS.
The Justice Department had a vendetta against Aaron because he helped deny them the intrusive power they lusted for should SOPA or PIPA have passed.
Add it all up and draw your own conclusions. Did he break the law? Yes, but so harmless was his offense that none of the affected parties (PACER, MIT, JSTOR) presses charges either criminally or civilly. If his crime was so egregious why didn't the parties at least seek some sort of financial restitution? And didn't one of the victims (JSTOR) come out publicly and state that they felt this was not a criminal matter.
And then you have the Justice Dept. that is the only entity pursuing charges and aggressively seeking maximum penalties for what seems to be minor offenses.
Taking all things into consideration one might think that Aaron appeared to be a thorn in the governments side and needed to be dealt with. Watch out all you Lawless Lemonade Merchants.
Did Aaron have an agenda? Yes, he felt that people should not have to pay for information that was made possible by their tax dollars or that they shouldn't have to pay twice.
Is everyone with an agenda a bad person? I don't know...Gandhi had one.
same old jew bullshit huh dave? do you work for the MPAA that got this guy killed?
crooked jews should get the end of a bayonet
same as old nazis
You stink like shit.
A dull bayonet for you Loser Dave!
A dull bayonet in the belly,then roll it around for a long while.
Death by bayonet is really something that never leave your memory, I know, tried it out on hill 837 in '69, its a hell ofa way to put someone out of their misery! But, Dave needs its!
DAVE
Explain yourself fool. A young kid who works his ass off to preserve our freedoms kills himself (sounds suspicious to me) and you see him as a villian because he was Jewish? Perhaps we'll meet someday in our home town and you can explain your twisted views.
Stealing someone else's work product is theft.
Per your, and most banzai fans views, taxation at 99% would be ok, so long as it went to benefit the public.
swarts was a gonif.
vershte?
Stealing someone else's work product is theft
Uh, what if that 'work product' was paid for by public taxes? Doesn't the public then own it? If I produce work product for my employer, he owns it even if I did the work on weekends and nights. why should these professors and universities be treated any differently? Once again, it's "heads we win, tails you lose" - if the product is crap and no one accesses it, we (the public) still paid for it. If it's useful and people want to look at it, we (the public) don't get any of the money received AND we get charged to look at the stuff we paid for!
There's a gonif here all right, but it wasn't Aaron.
This question of royalties for journal contributions is multi-faceted. There is the aspect you point out, then there is the issue of the function of our educational system as a gatekeeper and means of social inculcation.
The machine as we know it is desperately trying to clingto control via outmoded technological methods.
function of our educational system as a gatekeeper and means of social inculcation.
just like the legal system is a Byzantine keymaster and a means of social control.
this is why the PACER liberation pissed off the Feds so much.
bill, you should really write an essay on this subject.
What was your New Years pledge: triple moron? You sound like a babbling fool today. I know things have not been the same for you since Tamboo disappeared. Please get your act together.
Sorry Bill, just cant get in line with the "free shit, no personal responsability" army.
and tamboo aint gone; he just changed his ID
Listen, I have an productive exercise for you. Go and research where the basic ideas for Disney's original characters and tales originated.
Then come back an explain to us all who is misappropriating what under our antiquated intellectual property laws and who should be entitled to charge toll fees for our cultural heritage.
"Then come back an explain to us all who is misappropriating what under our antiquated intellectual property laws and who should be entitled to charge toll fees for our cultural heritage."
Touche!
He may have other reasons for ingratiating himself to the mainland, but his comments on the corrupt nature of the US system are essentially correct and echo the views of many Asians who are tired of listening to the hypocritical pontifications of our government and it's surrogates such as the IMF.
Right. i am so excited that asian markets are reciprocal.
When you walk through Central Hong Kong, you have no idea what this notion of "Asian market" means.
Public domain is rapidly shrinking.
Fuck intellectual property. Compassion and condolences to all. A tiny gesture for this heinous , unspeakable act of terrorism. His death must be avenged somehow. A gray day for us all.
Certainly, that (the abolition of private property) was the key superstition of communism. Folks seem to forget that it is useful idiots like Swartz who are disposed of as soon as they're of no more use to the marxist vanguard. Don't say you've not been warned.
Aaron Swartz was liberating information that was paid for by the public. JSTOR is a store for academic articles that the public have to pay unnecessarily high charges to view. Academics are trained by the state, their research is, for the most part, funded by the state. Academic publishers are just another example of corporate welfare. Swartz was liberating what, in any just society, belonged to the public.
What gets me is that the people we allow to make our laws and prosecute them are so emeshed in a world view that defies common sense. Their actions epitomize the venal nature of our ruling class. Why on earth are we letting these cold and calculating sociopaths rule us?
articles that the public have to pay unnecessarily high charges to view...
I recall reading an article by Mark Twain about his contemporary, Mary Baker Eddy. He commented on her extraordinary ability to capture US patent / copyright law to sell her supposed original writings to "students". If anyone knew the machinations of writing and delivering information / entertainment and musings to the public, it was Samuel Clemons. His unequivocal conclusion was plagiarism in the first degree. It was his opinion she was inept at constructing a coherent sentence, yet alone compose / assemble divinely inspired writings, much as his derision for Joe Smith’s cogitations of pre-anglo history in the colonies.
Hats off to the US patent office though, you’ve given the people of the US shackles to wear while allowing the rest of the globe to wander free in the NWO.
Jmo.
The fact that "The Public" have to pay anyting other than a token fee (say cents) is pretty immoral.
Trying to publish in any of the Journals "owned" by the JSTOR supporters - Wouters-Kluwyer, Churchill-Livingstone, Springer-Verlag et al, is often a difficult process, and I can assure you that not ONE of the very many academic papers I have published has been accepted without some modification - and the degree of modification can be quite extreme (Nature - I'm looking at you!!), which means extra work paid for by someone - but definitely NOT paid for by the Journal Publishers or their Editorial Boards.
The Publishers hold all the cards - they do NOT do any of the already paid-for work and they accept publications from the entire World - not just from the USA, so literally EVERYONE contributes. The Publishers, via JSTOR, simply act as a data handling , retrieval and presentation service.
Maybe things wouldn't be quite so bad if there was an agreed time limit for "paid access" - say 5 years or less, during which the Publishers could receive "fair return" on their "investment", after which all journal articles would have to be provided free of charge to any inquirer. Currently this is not the case for many mainstream (and even not-so-mainstream) Journals - and the 12 hour access charges can be high - for many Medical journals you're looking around $25 per article, unless the article is hosted by the Library Of Congress, where access and download is free.
Yet another good example of "Privatisation" - Society pays for the research, but Private Organisations are able to use this as an income stream via pretty monopolistic practices. No "risk" to the Publishers, but under the current model, an almost indefinite "return potential"!
Not necessarily. MIT is a private university.
Now, there is almost certainly taxpayer funded research that occurs there, as within various government agencies, and that information should, in an ideal world, be available for review by those who've paid for it.
Your lingo, the state this, the state that, is very, very primitive totalitarian collectivist lingo. And you don't even seem to realize it.
MIT would cease to exist as a "private" university if it weren't for this "taxpayer funded research", just like TBTF would have ceased to exist as "private" entities if it were not for "taxpayer funded bailouts".
what you don't seem to realize is that the most vile aspects of both ideologies (using your terms "collectivism" & "individualism") have been mashed together for the sole use & benefit of supporting & maintaining a pyramidical power structure. as such, you seem to be focused on the branches of this wing vs. that wing instead of striking the root.
This will probably get me a visit from the FBI, but, fuckit, here goes anyway: Citizens in this country are being assassinated, murdered and "suicided" by the agents of TPTB right and left. And it is escalating. It's high time that the citizenry started playing by the same rules.
For posting such nonsense, what you deserve is a visit to the looney bin. Have you ever dealt with employees of the despot's regime? They're not exactly the brightest bulbs in the boxes. Most of them are affirmative-action hires and you're giving them way too much credit.
They are, however, effective because they've certainly intimidated you.
if anyone is new to this subject and think it was about the merits of the federal case and not about prosucutorial revenge for his sopa/pipa activism would be best served by listenning to the kid himself speak- at democracynow.com today.
download at your own risk
http://tech.mit.edu/V105/PDF/N41.pdf
The face of the CIA http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/14/article-2262045-16EBB146000005...
http://www.theworld.org/2013/01/cia-hollywood/
and
Who Killed Aaron Swartz?http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/13/who-killed-aaron-swartz/