Reddit co-founder Aaron Swartz dies at 26

Jan 13, 2013 by Verena Dobnik

A co-founder of Reddit and activist who fought to make online content free to the public has been found dead, authorities confirmed Saturday, prompting an outpouring of grief from prominent voices on the intersection of free speech and the Web.

Aaron Swartz, 26, hanged himself in his Brooklyn apartment weeks before he was to go on trial on accusations that he stole millions of journal articles from an electronic archive in an attempt to make them freely available. If convicted, he faced decades in prison and a fortune in fines.

He was pronounced dead Friday evening at home in Brooklyn's Crown Heights neighborhood, said Ellen Borakove, spokeswoman for New York's chief medical examiner. Police went to the apartment after receiving an emergency services call from Swartz's girlfriend, who found him.

"Aaron's insatiable curiosity, creativity, and brilliance; his reflexive empathy and capacity for selfless, boundless love; his refusal to accept injustice as inevitable—these gifts made the world, and our lives, far brighter," Swartz's family in Chicago said in a statement Saturday. "We're grateful for our time with him, to those who loved him and stood with him, and to all of those who continue his work for a better world."

Swartz was "an extraordinary hacker and activist," the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an international nonprofit digital rights group based in California wrote in a tribute on its home page.

He "did more than almost anyone to make the Internet a thriving ecosystem for open knowledge, and to keep it that way," the tribute said.

Swartz was a prodigy who as a young teenager helped create RSS, a family of Web feed formats used to gather updates from blogs, news headlines, audio and video for users. He co-founded the social news website Reddit, which was later sold to Conde Nast, as well as the political action group Demand Progress, which campaigns against Internet censorship.

But Swartz struggled with depression.

"Surely there have been times when you've been sad," he wrote in a 2007 blog post. "Perhaps a loved one has abandoned you or a plan has gone horribly awry. Your face falls. Perhaps you cry. You feel worthless."

Swartz wrote that "depressed mood is like that, only it doesn't come for any reason and it doesn't go for any either."

Among Internet gurus, Swartz was considered a pioneer of efforts to make online information freely available.

"Playing Mozart's Requiem in honor of a brave and brilliant man," tweeted Carl Malamud, an Internet public domain advocate who believes in free access to legally obtained files.

Swartz aided Malamud's own effort to post federal court documents for free online, rather than the few cents per page that the government charges through its electronic archive, PACER. In 2008, The New York Times reported, Swartz wrote a program to legally download the files using free access via public libraries. About 20 percent of all the court papers were made available until the government shut down the library access.

The FBI investigated but did not charge Swartz, he wrote on his own website.

Three years later, Swartz was arrested in Boston and charged with stealing millions of articles from a computer archive at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Prosecutors said he broke into a computer wiring closet on campus and used his laptop for the downloads.

Experts puzzled over the arrest and argued that the result of the actions Swartz was accused of was the same as his PACER program: more information publicly available.

The prosecution "makes no sense," Demand Progress Executive Director David Segal said in a statement at the time. "It's like trying to put someone in jail for allegedly checking too many books out of the library."

Swartz pleaded not guilty to charges including wire fraud. His federal trial was to begin next month.

According to a federal indictment, Swartz stole the documents from JSTOR, a subscription service used by MIT that offers digitized copies of articles from academic journals. Prosecutors said he intended to distribute the articles on file-sharing websites.

He faced 13 felony charges, including breaching site terms and intending to share downloaded files through peer-to-peer networks, computer fraud, wire fraud, obtaining information from a protected computer, and criminal forfeiture.

JSTOR did not press charges once it reclaimed the articles from Swartz, and some legal experts considered the case unfounded, saying that MIT allows guests access to the articles and Swartz, a fellow at Harvard's Safra Center for Ethics, was a guest.

Criticizing the government's actions in the pending prosecution, Harvard law professor and Safra Center faculty director Lawrence Lessig called himself a friend of Swartz's and wrote Saturday that "we need a better sense of justice. ... The question this government needs to answer is why it was so necessary that Aaron Swartz be labeled a 'felon.'"

Swartz's family blamed prosecutors for his suicide.

"Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy," the family statement said. "It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death."

JSTOR announced this week that it would make "more than 4.5 million articles" publicly available for free.

Explore further: Japan orders air bag maker to conduct probe

4.7 /5 (3 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Feds: Harvard fellow hacked millions of papers

Jul 19, 2011

(AP) -- A Harvard University fellow who was studying ethics was charged with hacking into the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's computer network to steal nearly 5 million academic articles.

NinjaVideo founder pleads to copyright charges

Sep 23, 2011

A founder of the NinjaVideo website that offered downloads of current movies and television shows pleaded guilty Friday to criminal copyright violations, officials said.

Two Romanians plead guilty in US hacking case

Sep 17, 2012

Two Romanian nationals pleaded guilty Monday to charges stemming from a scheme to hack into and steal payment card data from hundreds of US merchants, officials said.

Recommended for you

Japan orders air bag maker to conduct probe

Nov 21, 2014

Japan's transport ministry said Friday it has ordered air bag maker Takata to conduct an internal investigation after cases of its air bags exploding triggered safety concerns in the United States and other countries.

Senators get no clear answers on air bag safety

Nov 20, 2014

There were apologies and long-winded explanations, but after nearly four hours of testimony about exploding air bags, senators never got a clear answer to the question most people have: whether or not their ...

Winter-like temps can reduce tire pressure

Nov 19, 2014

The polar plunge that has chilled much of the nation does more than bring out ice scrapers and antifreeze. It can trigger vehicles' tire pressure monitoring systems overnight, sending nervous drivers to dealers ...

US: Gov't aircraft regulations apply to drones (Update)

Nov 18, 2014

The U.S. government has the power to hold drone operators accountable when they operate the remote-control aircraft recklessly, a federal safety board ruled Tuesday in a setback to small drone operators chafing ...

Mapping the crisis of displaced peoples

Nov 17, 2014

Population displacement is a global problem, one that historically has been insufficiently quantified and analyzed, especially given its wide-ranging effects. Displacement can result from a number of factors, ...

User comments : 54

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

frajo
3.7 / 5 (6) Jan 13, 2013
The article omitted one special fact:
"JSTOR dropped charges, but the US government pursued the case anyway, demanding fifty years in jail."

From the discussion at osnews:
https://www.youtu...2dFngFsg
"... Explains why the government would want to destroy him: the RIAA/MPAA media probably wanted it and their Federal toadies cheerfully obeyed."
"Aaron Swartz would still be alive - if Obama were president."

My condolences to his family and friends. I can merely quote Thom Holwerda of osnews.com:
We have lost one of the good guys. A person, driven to the edge by what a decent society would only call bullying.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (24) Jan 13, 2013
"It is alleged that on Jan. 6, Swartz went to the wiring closet to remove the laptop, attempting to shield his identity by holding a bike helmet in front of his face and seeing his way through its ventilation holes.

He fled when MIT police tried to question him that day, it is claimed."

"'Aaron was a terrific young man. He contributed a lot to the world in his short life and I regret the loss of all the things he had yet to accomplish.

Read more: http://www.dailym...HrqVxrUJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
"
Too bad he didn't understand right/wrong and property rights.
Noumenon
2.6 / 5 (25) Jan 13, 2013
Too bad he didn't understand right/wrong and property rights.


There is a lot that such self-righteous liberal activist don't understand,.... that's why they are who they are.
All he requied was naiveté and a sense of entitlement. RIP.
FMA
3.3 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2013
I feel very sorry about Swartz, wish him could rest in peace!!

I support open source, and knowledge should be free to everybody in the world, Swarta did the right thing, he is the one that promote human evolution in faster pace. And, obviously, governments (all government in the world) want to make people more stupid or devolution.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (19) Jan 13, 2013
I support open source, and knowledge should be free to everybody in the world,

Really?
Who are you?
FMA
2.9 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2013
citizen of the earth !!
Noumenon
2.7 / 5 (26) Jan 13, 2013
I feel very sorry about Swartz, wish him could rest in peace!!

I support open source, and knowledge should be free to everybody in the world, Swarta did the right thing, he is the one that promote human evolution in faster pace. ...


I agree, please post your checking account number.

The best way, as has been the case, to promote human progress is via free market capitalism which attaches value to information, and protects private property and patent and intellectual rights.
Shootist
3.3 / 5 (16) Jan 13, 2013
citizen of the earth !!


Ridiculous notion (as who would want to be a citizen of the UN?). You'd be better off pushing the Individual is Sovereign line.

Beyond that, and I don't mean to stir up the crazies, but is the community certain it was suicide?
ValeriaT
2.3 / 5 (9) Jan 13, 2013
The results of research payed with taxes should be kept free and accessible for tax payers, not the subject of profit of various private publishing companies, which do parasite on public expenses. What's worse, in the existing society every successful research gets embargoed instead (1, 2). What you can read here at PO and another news servers are just uncontroversial research results, which can only help the occupation of scientists working in the basic research industry. The really interesting and practically important results are censored immediately with government and military industry.
tekram
4.3 / 5 (6) Jan 13, 2013
There was no good reason for the US to prosecute him, not because he hadn't done wrong, but he had 'too much innocence to be prosecuted'. Just as US DOJ decided that some of the large banks were too big to be criminally prosecuted, Swartz should had been allowed to plead to a civil charge and fined and settled. Unfortunately for the world and for the US government and DOJ in particular, the backlash from Swartz's death will be much bigger and harsher in the long term than any attempt at justice in prosecuting him in life.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (20) Jan 13, 2013
citizen of the earth !!

Need more free knowledge.
Put up or shut up!
promote human progress is via free market capitalism which attaches value to information, and protects private property and patent and intellectual rights.


And because of such protection of knowledge, Thomas Edison was able to create millions of jobs around the world because he sold HIS knowledge.
Same for Tesla. Tesla was more like the libertine socialists here and instead of profiting from his knowledge he spent the money he earned on fancy clothes and high living. To each his own, but how many new industries, jobs, profits and taxes were wasted by Tesla's selfishness?
ryggesogn2
3.3 / 5 (14) Jan 13, 2013
subject of profit of various private publishing companies,

Will you work for free to publish the research?
The internet has reduced the cost of collecting and disseminating information, but there is still a cost: people's time, energy to run the servers, capital costs for servers, ....
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (12) Jan 13, 2013
Will you work for free to publish the research?
No I think he wants the govt to pay for all work. And it does doesnt it? I mean, who creates the money to give to the banks to lend out to entrepreneurs to start businesses to pay their workers to generate info? Why, this is the GOVT isnt it?

No seed money, no economy. Thats how it works.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (11) Jan 13, 2013

Thomas Edison was able to create millions of jobs around the world because he sold HIS knowledge.
-And he was able to generate it only because of investment bankers.

"Spencer Trask (September 18, 1844 – December 31, 1909) was an American financier, philanthropist, and venture capitalist. Beginning in the 1870s, Trask began investing and supporting entrepreneurs, including Thomas Edison..."
ryggesogn2
3.2 / 5 (13) Jan 13, 2013

Thomas Edison was able to create millions of jobs around the world because he sold HIS knowledge.
-And he was able to generate it only because of investment bankers.

"Spencer Trask (September 18, 1844 – December 31, 1909) was an American financier, philanthropist, and venture capitalist. Beginning in the 1870s, Trask began investing and supporting entrepreneurs, including Thomas Edison..."

So?
Westinghouse backed Tesla.
ValeriaT
1.6 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2013
Thomas Edison was able to create millions of jobs around the world because he sold HIS knowledge.
He would create even more job places, if he would give this knowledge for free. He just did become rich because of prohibiting this intellectual property in free spreading like the water dam.
how many new industries, jobs, profits and taxes were wasted by Tesla's selfishness
Tesla's intellectual property was ignored with capitalist, just because it enabled the spreading of energy for free (the cold fusion finding is ignored partially from the same reason). Not because he has spent his money for clothes.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (16) Jan 13, 2013
He would create even more job places, if he would give this knowledge for free

HOW?
Why would any jobs be created recording music or making a film if no one could earn a living doing it?
ValeriaT
1.7 / 5 (6) Jan 13, 2013
How the free phonograph could prohibit the people in doing job carriers with music and audio recordings? Instead of it, just the high cost of phonographs prohibited the free business with audio-recordings. Try to imagine the spreading of DVD multimedia business, if the DVD players would be sold for ten-times higher price because of patent fees!
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (16) Jan 13, 2013
How the free phonograph could prohibit the people in doing job carriers with music and audio recordings? Instead of it, just the high cost of phonographs prohibited the free business with audio-recordings. Try to imagine the spreading of DVD multimedia business, if the DVD players would be sold for ten-times higher price because of patent fees!

There would NEVER have been VHS, DVD or blu ray if no one could earn a profit inventing one or manufacturing one.
And there will be NO films or audio recordings if no one can earn a profit making them.
frajo
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 13, 2013
There would NEVER have been VHS, DVD or blu ray if no one could earn a profit inventing one or manufacturing one.

You are no scientist - you still can't tell a non-falsifiable belief from a falsifiable statement.
ryggesogn2
2.9 / 5 (15) Jan 13, 2013
There would NEVER have been VHS, DVD or blu ray if no one could earn a profit inventing one or manufacturing one.

You are no scientist - you still can't tell a non-falsifiable belief from a falsifiable statement.

What can be said is that selling knowledge, via licensing, has been demonstrated to very effective at making profits. JVC licensed VHS while Sony refused to license Beta.
DOS was licensed while Apple did not. While Beta and Apple may have been better quality, they did not satisfice the market.
If no one can profit from the innovation or technology, it won't disseminate.
RitchieGuy01
1 / 5 (6) Jan 14, 2013
Will you work for free to publish the research?


No seed money, no economy. Thats how it works.
GhostofOtto

SEE THAT. That proves how much smarter my GhostofOtto is than all the rest of U retards. Y'all need to consider to stop commenting in Otto's physorg because y'all are just to retarded to give your dumbass opinions.

My lover man GhostofOtto runs rings around all the rest of U. Otto, I sold my sorghum farm to my brother in Sicily and he will grow sorghum when he comes back to Florida. I did that so that U and I can be married. Same sex marriage is so right for us All the rest of U tards who keep on voting down my GhostofOtto and his sockpuppets such as FrankHerbert. . . .please stop doing it. Don't U understand yet that Otto then has to give himself all fives so he can get up to 5/5? I just love that man.

kiss kiss and suck suck Otto
antialias_physorg
4.4 / 5 (7) Jan 14, 2013
While it may not have been the smartest thing to do I completely agree with Swartz: Research papers should be free.

There is nothing that hinders research more than when papers you need are hidden behind paywalls. The number of papers you read in order to get up to speed on the state-of-the-art and aid your research is enormous (several hundred per project, easily). And it's hard to know whether a paper will be what you need from the abstract alone. Buying everything on the off chance that it may be helpful isn't in anyone's budget. So you mostly make do with what you can get for free.

Something else most people don't realize: The money for articles behind paywalls goes 100% to the publishers (Springer, Elsevier, et. al.).
Researchers (or their institutions) do NOT see one cent of that money.
antialias_physorg
4 / 5 (4) Jan 14, 2013
If you want a paper for free you have to mail the author direct. They will usually provide you with a copy if you ask nicely (I actually haven't ever heard of a researcher NOT giving out their work if you ask them).
The bizarre thing is: This is illegal.

Here's why: When you go to a conference or publish in a journal you have to sign away the property rights to your article to the publisher. Otherwise the article will not get published in the conference proceedings/journal.
The publisher does NOTHING but print it. All the editing and formatting has to be done by the author. And the author has to PAY EXTRA if he wants color graphs or similar 'luxury items'. The auther gets no money whatsoever out of this (only several weeks worth of busy work).
Then you are 'kindly' provided with a free copy of the proceedings/journal
(non-authors attending a conference have to pay extra to get the proceedings - on top of the several hundred dollars entrance fee, natch)

How does this help science?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (7) Jan 14, 2013
Westinghouse backed Tesla.
Westinghouse made his money in an industry wholly funded by foreign banking interests. This money was generated by govts for the Purpose of producing tech which would not otherwise have been produced. Robber barons spent govt money to standardize railroads, not their own.
Why would any jobs be created recording music or making a film if no one could earn a living doing it?
Again, it is govt which provides funding for tech which is not immediately profitable. Media is propaganda. This is a govt commodity.

Noumenon
2.5 / 5 (16) Jan 14, 2013
While it may not have been the smartest thing to do I completely agree with Swartz: Research papers should be free.


In your opinion. The reality is that it is not free, so apparently others DON'T agree or there are circumstances not understood or taken into account by such irresponsible and mindless activists. Who's going to pay for it?

It's a common theme amongst such clueless activists, that they think THEY'RE in a unique position of understanding while others are not,.. so that they feel entitled to disrespect others opinion or property,.. which is usually a worse offense than what they were originally protesting.

Such arrogance can only manifest from profound naiveté.
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 14, 2013
Who's going to pay for it?

If it were at least the case that either
a) those producing the research
or
b) those paying for the research
or
c) those benefitting from the research

would benefit from the current practice of having to pay for access to it - then you would have a (very marginal) point.

Currently the only people benefitting are publishers of journals/conference papers - and they fall neither in the a), b) or c) group.

It's a common theme amongst such clueless activists, that they think THEY'RE in a unique position of understanding while others are not

Having been a scientist for over a decade I think I am far from 'clueless' on the subject. I've seen what the paywalls do to research.

Now there's nothing wrong if a company does research for their own benefit and doesn't want that published. Fine.
But if it was taxpayer money then other researchers who are funded by taxpayer money should have access to it for free.
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 14, 2013
..because it really makes no sense that taxpayer money goes to research - and then MORE taxpayer money has to be spent so that other researchers can get at the first researchers' papers.
That is just idiotic.

One might also call it simply governement subsidized publishers. But from what I read you're all for government subsidies, right?

It also leaves the occasional maverick scientist or small research company out in the cold - because they can't afford the outrageous subscripton prices at all (some journals go into the tens of thousands of dollars per year. For ONE journal. And there are many journals out there in each specialty)

Research has a good track record of benefitting the economy down the line. Anything that artificially hinders it while providing no real benefit is not a good idea.
Noumenon
2.8 / 5 (16) Jan 14, 2013
Westinghouse made his money in an industry wholly funded by foreign banking interests. This money was generated by govts for the Purpose of producing tech which would not otherwise have been produced. Robber barons spent govt money to standardize railroads, not their own.


The government does not 'generate money', they print paper to facilitate the transfer of value from one party to another. The value that that paper represents is created through the marketing of VALUE in the form of products and services.

The government can print as much money as they want, and employ as many doing research and inventions as they want,.... it is all meaningless until that paper has value, and this can only come about if there is profit potential to be had in marketing research and inventions.

Most research and inventions do not come from the governmemt, as they are patented and copyrighted,
Noumenon
2.6 / 5 (15) Jan 14, 2013
Who's going to pay for it?
If it were at least the case that either a) those producing the research or b) those paying for the research or c) those benefitting from the research would benefit from the current practice of having to pay for access to it - then you would have a [..] point. Currently the only people benefitting are publishers of journals/conference papers ...


If that were true, then it shouldn't be difficult to compete with them. Why do authors and/or MIT continue to seek JSTOR or journals services? Is it that having to pay for them adds prestige and ensures quality standards that otherwise may not exist in the 'public domain'?
Noumenon
2.6 / 5 (16) Jan 14, 2013
One might also call it simply government subsidized publishers.


No, one may not. JSTOR is privately funded. They offer an independent service. They've incurred enormous costs in digitalizing thousands of journals, including "'Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society' back to its beginning in 1665", ...and have actually reduced costs and increased accessibility via their searchable database from any location. Maybe this is why MIT and others do business with them.

Activists ignore the fact that they are free to compete with the status quo, and improve things themselves. For example, it is pointless to protest oil use, if they have no ideas for alternative energy sources that can compete with oil, or can't convinces others not to use it. Inability to compete does not justify an righteous entitlement to sabatoge.

antialias_physorg
4 / 5 (4) Jan 14, 2013
If that were true, then it shouldn't be difficult to compete with them.

arxiv.org and openaccess.org are doing just that.

There is a catch (as so frequently there is): Journals and conferences have invented a system of points and rankings. Publishing in highly ranked journals or conferences gives more points. (Publishing a book also gives points)

To hold some positions (e.g. to have a professorship at some university) require that one have - among other things - enough points.

The standard of these rankings is upheld by the peer review system. Which is something openaccess and arxiv haven't implemented yet. (Note that peer reviewers also get no money at all from the publishers)

Most research and inventions do not come from the governmemt, as they are patented and copyrighted,

Wrong. Most all R&D in ALL companies is at least partially financed with government money via joint research programs.

Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (15) Jan 14, 2013
There is a catch (as so frequently there is): Journals and conferences have invented a system of points and rankings. Publishing in highly ranked journals or conferences gives more points. (Publishing a book also gives points) To hold some positions (e.g. to have a professorship at some university) require that one have - among other things - enough points. The standard of these rankings is upheld by the peer review system. Which is something openaccess and arxiv haven't implemented yet. (Note that peer reviewers also get no money at all from the publishers)


Yes, this is why they in fact have VALUE and by definition, should be paid for. They offer a means of ensuring some measure of quality and prestige that may not exist in the public domain.

Your above comment contradicts your previous one,...

Currently the only people [benefiting] are publishers of journals/conference papers

antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 14, 2013
They offer a means of ensuring some measure of quality and prestige that may not exist in the public domain.

Since they don't pay the reviewers I don't see how they actually are of benefit to anyone. The ratings are self imposed (i.e. the publishers declare which journals/conferences are important - not the scientists). So it's a bit of "printing your own money".

And the catch is: since you sign away your work to them you can't publish AND put your stuff on openaccess - since that would be illegal (you can't even put your own stuff on your own webpage).

So either you make it openly available or you get to go to a conferenec - can't have both (and going to conferences is important. Facetime between researchers is extremely valuable)

It's high time this moves to openaccess (or similar) with an adequate review process - and screw the publishers.
kochevnik
1 / 5 (2) Jan 14, 2013
He would create even more job places, if he would give this knowledge for free
@ryggie Why would any jobs be created recording music or making a film if no one could earn a living doing it?
You didn't respond to the question he asked, but instead begged your own.
Tausch
1 / 5 (2) Jan 14, 2013
@frajo

http://phys.org/n...ist.html

Early on, and to its great credit, JSTOR figured "appropriate" out: They declined to pursue their own action against Aaron, and they asked the government to drop its. MIT, to its great shame, was not as clear, and so the prosecutor had the excuse he needed to continue his war against the "criminal" who we who loved him knew as Aaron. - Aaron's mentor, copyright reform advocate Lawrence Lessig


http://lessig.tum...as-bully
Tausch
1 / 5 (2) Jan 14, 2013
Addressed wrong thread to frajo. Sorry.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (7) Jan 14, 2013
But if it was taxpayer money then other researchers who are funded by taxpayer money should have access to it for free.
Well except for sensitive national security-related research. And research that china spends millions trying to steal in order to ruin us economically. Right?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (8) Jan 14, 2013
The government does not 'generate money', they print paper to facilitate the transfer of value from one party to another. The value that that paper represents is created through the marketing of VALUE in the form of products and services.
Not so. The process has to begin somewhere, and it begins when the govt MAKES the money and GIVES it to the banks to lend out to businessmen for various predetermined Purposes.

Even the most clever and ambitious entrepreneur cannot do a thing without this govt-generated money.

In ages past it was the king who opened the royal coffers to finance business ventures. Why do you think that sort of Control would ever change?

What makes you think that govts would allow the kind of activity that would weaken them or destabilize their economies?

Entrepreneurs also need insurance, permits, zoning approvals, and so forth. They need laws favorable to their interests. More Control of the direction of development from Above.

This will never change.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (8) Jan 14, 2013
"WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve sharply stepped up its efforts to bolster the economy on Wednesday, announcing that it would pump an extra $1 trillion into the financial system by purchasing Treasury bonds and mortgage securities.

"Having already reduced the key interest rate it controls nearly to zero, the central bank has increasingly turned to alternatives like buying securities as a way of getting more dollars into the economy, a tactic that amounts to creating vast new sums of money out of thin air. But the moves on Wednesday were its biggest yet, almost doubling all of the Fed's measures in the last year."

-Pretty simple really. Banks determine who gets what and for what purposes. And banks are controlled by a suprisingly few and very powerful people.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Jan 14, 2013
And research that china spends millions trying to steal in order to ruin us economically. Right?

You think that hiding it behind a paywall makes it safe from the Chinese?

Yeah, I can see that happening : "Ooooh...capitalist dogs want 20$ for paper - those crafty SOBs"

No, I'm not talking about sensitive research. I'm talking your ordinary, everyday, run-of-the-mill university research into nicotine fed hamsters and the like.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (8) Jan 14, 2013
JSTOR is privately funded.
'JSTOR was originally funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.' What makes you think that NGOs dont typically act in the interests of govt?
But if it was taxpayer money then other researchers who are funded by taxpayer money should have access to it for free.
And what is wrong with the govt making a profit, or at least covering operating costs?
No, I'm not talking about sensitive research. I'm talking your ordinary, everyday, run-of-the-mill university research into nicotine fed hamsters and the like.
This particular research produces valuable info on pharmaceutical applications. Why should we just give that to the chinese who will use it to out-compete western pharma companies?
ryggesogn2
2.8 / 5 (11) Jan 14, 2013
"Andrew William Mellon (March 24, 1855 – August 26, 1937) was an American banker, industrialist, philanthropist, art collector, and Secretary of the Treasury"

It was Mellon and Coolidge who quickly ended the Great 1920 Depression.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jan 14, 2013
"Andrew William Mellon (March 24, 1855 – August 26, 1937) was an American banker, industrialist, philanthropist, art collector, and Secretary of the Treasury"

It was Mellon and Coolidge who quickly ended the Great 1920 Depression.
Correct. By making money available to be used in the Proper Way, at the Proper Time. The wealth and tech generated as a result made the 2nd world war possible. No small thanks to loyal Players like Prescott Bush.
http://www.guardi...worldwar
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (1) Jan 14, 2013
This particular research produces valuable info on pharmaceutical applications. Why should we just give that to the chinese who will use it to out-compete western pharma companies?

Erm...you are aware that anyone who wants to (internationally!) can access JSTOR and all the articles thereon - for a price? Nothing on there is secret in any way.

Research should be free, because we all benefit. When you do research you draw from papers that are written by scientists all over the world - not just one country.
There is no "we must keep this from people in China" because researchers are working together,( this means also with people from China or Iran or Russia or wherever...)

For my PhD (which was part sponsored by a pharmaceuticals company in France) we worked together with sites in France, Germany, Belgium and Russia. My coworkers were russian, german, french, czech and chinese.

Science is global. WE don't care about political nitwits (and the nitwits who believe them)
ryggesogn2
2.8 / 5 (11) Jan 14, 2013
Research should be free, because we all benefit.

Are you paid to DO research?
RitchieGuy01
1 / 5 (6) Jan 14, 2013
"Andrew William Mellon (March 24, 1855 – August 26, 1937) was an American banker, industrialist, philanthropist, art collector, and Secretary of the Treasury"

It was Mellon and Coolidge who quickly ended the Great 1920 Depression.
Correct. By making money available to be used in the Proper Way, at the Proper Time. The wealth and tech generated as a result made the 2nd world war possible. No small thanks to loyal Players like Prescott Bush.
http://www.guardi...worldwar
GhostofOtto

Otto. . . .thank U for calling me. . . .finally after all this time. I had been waiting so long for your phone call so that we could start up our suck suck where we left off. I know that U have missed licking my sack and now U will get the chance to do it all U want, darling.

Pirouette is gone. I sent her away once I found out that U and I are both gay. I am so happy that we will be together again soon.
In the meantime, Otto have fun with the tards
RitchieGuy01
1 / 5 (6) Jan 14, 2013
This particular research produces valuable info on pharmaceutical applications. Why should we just give that to the chinese who will use it to out-compete western pharma companies?

Research should be free, because we all benefit. When you do research you draw from papers that are written by scientists all over the world - not just one country.
There is no "we must keep this from people in China" because researchers are working together,( this means also with people from China or Iran or Russia or wherever...)

For my PhD (which was part sponsored by a pharmaceuticals company in France) we worked together with sites in France, Germany, Belgium and Russia. My coworkers were russian, german, french, czech and chinese.
AuntieAlias

Any hairy Sicilians, AuntieAlias? Did U know that Otto loves hairy Sicilian men? The hairier the better. That's why Otto picked ME to be his gay lover. Otto prefers hairy Sicilian men with hairy smelly butts also. Didn't know that, didja?
kochevnik
1 / 5 (2) Jan 15, 2013
Always same crap from libertarians:"All objects have value, while labor may have none"
FrankHerbert
2.3 / 5 (9) Jan 15, 2013
The moderation here is something awful, isn't it? The fact that Pirouette/obama_socks/ritchieguy hasn't been IP banned yet is mind-bending. Maybe the people who own this site are just too damn dumb to use the software they have?
ryggesogn2
2.7 / 5 (12) Jan 15, 2013
Always same crap from libertarians:"All objects have value, while labor may have none"

What?
What INDIVIDUALS produce with physical or mental labor has VALUE to anyone who is willing PAY for it.

Moderation is horrible Frankie as you and most other socialists have not been banned, but NOT for your socialists views, but the socialist tactics of intimidation and insult in response to the inability to defend socialism.
I suspect the 'moderators' share the socialist POV and allow Venereal Disease to drip, drip, drip because they agree with him.
RitchieGuy01
1 / 5 (4) Jan 15, 2013
The moderation here is something awful, isn't it? The fact that Pirouette/obama_socks/ritchieguy hasn't been IP banned yet is mind-bending. Maybe the people who own this site are just too damn dumb to use the software they have?
FrankHerbert

FrankHerbert is a sockpuppet that Otto uses to insult people whenever Otto thinks its necessary. . . .mainly so that nobody will believe that TheGhostofOtto1923 and RitchieGuy are actually gay lovers in reality. That means offline. If Otto doesn't want anyone to know that he is gay AND a racist. . . .he should stop calling other people racist too. . . .and faggots. FrankHerbert is also CardacianNeverid. See Otto's picture on that profile unless he took it down. If Otto/Frank is chasing after that obamasocks guy for sex. . . .I hope he gets him. We might have enough for a daisy chain if some others join Otto, me and that other guy. I was straight even in VietNam until Otto seduced me when we first met when he said he wanted to meet me.
FrankHerbert
2.3 / 5 (9) Jan 15, 2013
Like I said, why hasn't pirouette/obama_socks/ritchieguy/namvet666/et al been banned yet?

I was straight EVEN in VietNam
Emphasis mine. Sounds like you've been battling homosexual feelings your whole life obama_socks. Most homophobes are latent (or not so latent) homosexuals. I'm guessing you match this description.
RitchieGuy01
2 / 5 (4) Jan 15, 2013
Like I said, why hasn't pirouette/obama_socks/ritchieguy/namvet666/et al been banned yet?

I was straight EVEN in VietNam
Emphasis mine. Sounds like you've been battling homosexual feelings your whole life obama_socks. Most homophobes are latent (or not so latent) homosexuals. I'm guessing you match this description.
FrankHerbert

Otto. . . .why do U still pretend that U and I havn't been together in our favorite motel having sex? Why are U setting your sites on this obama guy, and Namvet and Pirouette? U keep on saying those names like some miracle will happen? I told U already that I got rid of Pirouette. She is not my g/f anymore but we are still friendly. I am only RitchieGuy and I have never had any other names except for Pirouette when the woman who had that name gave it to me. U are wrong if U think I have ever had a problem with homosexuals, unlike U. U and I both know that U fear anyone knowing that U are a homosexual, Otto. Have pride in what U are, darling.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.