Yes, I did read the article (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and it says that the investigation was closed (not that the charge was dismissed), because the prosecutors determined he had successfully run beyond their ability to prosecute them by claiming asylum for years, and they didn't see a point in keeping the case open. That's basically the opposite of justice.

> In May, 2017, Swedish prosecutors announced they were closing their investigation into the sexual assault allegations due to the futility of proceeding in light of Assange’s asylum and the time that has elapsed.

He is still wanted for what the article calls the "minor bail violation" of crossing multiple international borders to flee trial for those charges.

The investigation was dropped because Sweden gave up:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/may/19/swedish-prosec...

> “In order to proceed with the case, Julian Assange would have to be formally notified of the criminal suspicions against him. We cannot expect to receive assistance from Ecuador regarding this. Therefore the investigation is discontinued.

> “If he, at a later date, makes himself available, I will be able to decide to resume the investigation immediately.”

There are lots of reasons why prosecutors dismiss charges unrelated to whether the accused is guilty. "The defendant is currently enjoying the protection of the government of a foreign country" is high among the list of reasons why a prosecutor might choose to do so.

There is no doubt in my mind that Assange is a rapist (as well as a useful idiot at best in service of Russia's interests).