I very much agree here. The problem isn't that there's a law against accessing a computer system without authorization or how it's defined. The problem is that the law treats unauthorized access to a computer system so much more harshly than the equivalent trespasses on physical property. If he'd been charged with a misdemeanor resulting in "a fine of not more than $100 and up to 30 days in jail" I could see that as being a just law. Decades in prison and a felony record? Not so much.

It wasn't just that he made unauthorized access to the network; it was so that he could download millions documents that JSTOR sells a subscription to for tens of thousands of dollars a year.

You can't ignore that. If he had trespassed into JSTOR's offices to grab the same information, it wouldn't be a $100 fine.

(Ob: I'm not saying justice would have been Aaron sitting in jail for 7 years.)

Yes, but the current civil remedies we have in copyright and trade secret laws would work fine in this case.

He only did this because the majority of them are publicly funded and should be available for free. The only reason they are not available to the public is JSTOR's grasp on journals and monopoly over archiving.

Maybe we should be blaming the journals for being greedy instead, but the point stands.

That's something that would need to be decided in court. You don't get to declare someone else's property to be worthless when you are taking it.

> ignoring these sorts of things doesn't make them less real.

I don't get how not posting this stuff to HN equates to ignoring it. I have a life outside of HN, and so can all kinds of extremely important issues!

Saying, "I don't want to see this on HN" when it clearly fits the criteria for submission and aids in making the audience of HN more aware[1] does suggest that you are ignoring these sorts of issues elsewhere in your life.

[1] Though this post wasn't particularly informative, it did stir debate.

"Stirring debate" is nowhere to be found in the criteria for submission.

The following sounds a bit rude, but mostly I just like the sound of it, and I'm writing it with a smile, rather than actually being worked up.

You know two things about my life and political involvement outside of HN: jack, and shit:-)

Debate raises awareness and challenges opinions. It's not related to the criteria, but it is related to why you would be inclined to discuss this on HN if you were inclined to discuss it outside of HN.

I don't need to know anything about your political involvement to draw conclusions about your involvement on this particular cause.

Edit for clarity:

When I mentioned the criteria, I wasn't referring to debate; I was referring to awareness.

HN is not a vehicle for "political awareness", either.

> I don't need to know anything about your political involvement to draw conclusions about your involvement on this particular cause.

No, you just jump to conclusions because I don't like to see politics on HN?

These politics fit the criteria for HN, so I draw conclusions about your political opinions, yes.

I can see how tempting that would be, but David is a special case. With his many years of complaining about politics on HN he has covered the entire ideological spectrum. :)

Edit: I mean that to sound good-humored, not snarky. I agree with davidw on this more than I used to.

It's difficult to reply to this because there are lots of moving, intertwining parts. I'll label them, I guess

  1) I didn't assume political apathy, but I did assume apathy about this particular case.
  2) His responses suggested that he was somewhat concerned with politics outside of HN.
  3) My use of "these sorts of issues" did suggest that I meant politics in general, but I meant *this* brand.
  4) I did not suggest that HN was a vehicle for political awareness in general, but rather than this brand of politics is well-placed on HN.
  5) I also suggested that this particular brand of politics do belong on HN given its criteria.

I realize this isn't my best writing, but I'm running on very little sleep and I don't have the energy for the dozen proofreadings and rewordings that I normally give my posts. I hope that my meaning can be accurately discerned.