2 Up 2 Down
Veteran
Didn't read, but did he kill himself before he got judged by a jury?
Im getting flashbacks of my ethnics classHow, exactly? Getting dragged through the dirt in a way that delegitimizes your entire position with distortions of it is meaningless. If you're being dragged through the dirt as nothing more than a plaything of circumstance and contingency, where's the courage or free will in that? It's nothing more than submission. In fact, if any type of will, it's the will to submission rather than any type of free will to be valorized.
The bolded is akin to a dog (Self) taking a shyt(death) during a walk (life). Yeah you have but you're still under the mercy of the inevitable (natural bowel movements), Fido has little to no control. We has little to no control. Taking a shyt on the front porch as opposed to down the street makes no difference. Holding it out until we can't resist external forces is the only meaningful choice. Hell, taking in as much of the walk as possible can even make the shyt worth having.And your second paragraph indirectly supports my position. If entropy and an agglomeration of circumstance is killing us anyway (which is a depressing way of thinking. Yes, we'll eventually die, but can't we have some joie de vivre about it? Even in thinking about death...), how can it not be the ultimate act of free will to rip away the control over your progression into that state of life from random circumstance for yourself, to take control of it and say, "I decide how I enter the state of death, and no one else." You are the one who allows yourself to slide into nullity, not the flow of life, or a random bullet or anything else.
As finite, material, powerless beings we can't ever hope to match the normal function of existence. I'd say choosing when/how you die is more of a submission (to death) than resisting is. In the former, not only do you make your final choice, you force yourself to accept the inevitable. Life is not inevitable so it's best to cling to it.What you state is a strong expression of will in and of itself, but that can go one of two ways: It can either be an expression of resistance toward an odious formulation or context (though the word "resistance" in and of itself denies the inevitable, and the dominion of unfavorable circumstance certainly does not equal any type of inevitably awful situation in my thought) or it is as I say above, a will to submission.
Didn't read, but did he kill himself before he got judged by a jury?
Yup.
So he could've been found innocent or go a much lighter punishment.
Sad that he killed himself, but no need to be saying the DOJ killed him.
they didn't led him plead out to a non-felony... for downloading too many academic articles. the vender of the article database said they didn't want to get involved in a case against him. then they added even more charges. complete prosecutorial overreach.
Regardless, if this goes to court, and I don't know how far deep in the process any of this was. I can't see him getting anywhere near that amount of time and he would have the entire academic legal community writing amicus briefs on his behalf. I also don't see that federal court going through with. Sure, there was overreach but the DOJ didn't kill him. They probably wanted to get him convicted to serve as an example but for nothing more than declaratory relief. I just refuse to believe Ortiz would actually recommend giving the guy that much time. If that did happen, she could kiss that gubernatorial run goodbye.
The federal prosecutor who reportedly insisted on jail time for the late Aaron Swartz was "very, very difficult to deal with," Swartz's lawyer told The Huffington Post.
In a phone interview Monday, Swartz's attorney Elliot Peters accused Massachusetts assistant U.S. attorney Stephen Heymann of pursuing federal charges against Swartz to gain publicity.
Heymann was looking for "some juicy looking computer crime cases and Aaron's case, sadly for Aaron, fit the bill," Peters said. Heymann, Peters believes, thought the Swartz case "was going to receive press and he was going to be a tough guy and read his name in the newspaper."
The case you're talking about is different, I know that case. It's a staple of first year property law. No one was facing criminal charges then (not in the version I read). Giving this guy 50 for this would border on cruel and unusual punishment.breh he already lost a case his mentor was deeply involved in that had loads of amicus briefs
Eldred v. Ashcroft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I know we can't say that the "DOJ killed him", this is what the DOJ does to people who dare go to trial.. Aaron was just one guy being chewed up by the system
btw the guy really going after him was Stephen Heymann
Aaron Swartz's Lawyer: Prosecutor Stephen Heymann Wanted 'Juicy' Case For Publicity
Aaron Swartz's Lawyer: Prosecutor Stephen Heymann Wanted 'Juicy' Case For Publicity
no one else thought my quote from cloud atlas was cool
people watched cloud atlas?
Jewish Excellence.
at all of you fakkits talking about how he took the coward's way out. I'd love to see how your bytch-asses react when you're facing 35-50 years, federal time.