On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Vijay Anand <vijay@vijayanand.name> wrote:

So, did someone say that we dont use this forum to have debates on what goes on in the world anymore? I know there are some authors here and some folks from the Academic world.

What is your take on Aaron? It looks like with Julian, and now Aaron (liberating data is the new form of activism) - and not the long route of creating an organization and lobbying for years and opening it up, but bruteforce opening

This is a rather naive and uninformed summary. Aaron had been involved with, and has founded, multiple organizations (including the Sunlight Foundation, and running watchdog.net and founding the online advocacy platform Demand Progress) that work on transparency-related lobbying. His posts on the difference between democracy, accountability and transparency are worth[1] reading[2], and [1]: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/transparencybunk [2]: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/usefultransparency Why is using technology to 'liberate' data in any way a lesser route than using laws? This also seems to presume that the tech route and the 'lobbying' route of changing policy are not complementary, and that the tech route involves short cuts if not actual breaking of laws. And what of those cases where the law holds that information *is* public (case law, for instance) but are independent of the law behind a paywall like PACER? What law was broken by that? Further, what law (as opposed to a unilaterally-imposed non-negotiable 'Terms of Service') was broken by downloading those millions of articles from JSTOR? The Open Access movements have a long history, and a history of more than a decade in their modern form. Various organizations around the world are involved in seeking changes in public policy (including the Centre for Internet and Society, the organization I work for) and when it comes to open access to scholarly literature, in the practices of academics and non-governmental research funders as well. Aaron was a part of the open access to law movement (see his work with Carl Malamud), as well as the open access to scholarly literature movement. And further, it is incredibly short-sighted to see Julian Assange as some sort of start of 'data liberation'.

(and facing the brutality of it when it backfires) is what the masses are backing after. It somehow brings me mental images of public execution of the old powers during the French Revolution - a bit hasty and bloody for my taste.

I've completely lost you here. What exactly conjures up images of public execution? The anger of people at the wrongful hounding of Aaron Swartz looks like baying for blood? Do you condone such flagrant misuse of laws by state prosecutors?, and would you rather that people not get angered by it?

What are your thoughts?

PS: No intents to smear the living or the dead. But it looks like that we are on the crossroads of information, access to it and ethics here. And this issue is only going to grow, not go away.

I'm sorry if I come across as being rude, but Aaron is someone I admired and looked up to for many years, and his suicide is something I feel very strongly about. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE