To say that this is insulting is an enormous understatement. Clearly Jeff Atwood thinks that he is imparting some kind of wisdom here- that activists who work for their ideals and devote their lives to them should not give up. I doubt Aaron had thought of that. I'm sure that the person who spent his whole life working to make information better and more widely available probably thought "Well, there's not much worth fighting for here, better give up." Atwood says Fuck off. Shut the fuck up Jeff Atwood. Only a fucking child would think that these were equivalent. I am infuriated. Ragequitting is something people do because they're frustrated at a stupid game. Suicide is something people do because they have no choices, no hope, and the walls are closing in on them. To say that one is equal to the other is just to piss on the memory of a great man. There is a message here that Atwood should be picking up on, that everyone should be picking up on, and it is this: if you get in the way of the patent holders, the US Government will end your life, either with their legal system or with your own hand. This is something that has cost lives before Aaron by making people's lives hell, and it is something which is and will continue to happen. Aaron was not an idiot.
Aaron had been dealing with depression for a long time.
Aaron understood the charges being brought against him, and their implications. As far as I know, Atwood doesn't have depression and openly admits that he's been in one trial and it was nowhere near the severity of Aaron's. And he's already thinking about suicide. But he has the gall to say, "This better person, who I strive to be like, should have tried harder. That was the problem here." That's the most disrespectful shit I've ever heard.I can't even imagine having the full resources of the US Government brought to bear against me, with extreme prejudice, for a year or more.
But he doesn't act like it. He acts like having that pressure on you would be the same as any other pressure. Would be the same as people hating on your site, or "quitting the internet."
I had pretty much the same reaction. He doesn't know (or certainly didn't meaningfully speak to) how possible clinical depression as an illness could have been a factor. Also, as you pointed out, he rhetorically built up the unfathomable enormity of the forces against Aaron, then essentially summarily dismissed them (without even really defining them) by calling Aaron a cop-out and saying he should have lived up to a higher ideal because he chose the 'life of an activist.' Sorry Jeff, that you had to settle for the hero you were given rather than the one that would have gone the extra mile for ya. Don't make 'em like they used to, right?
I don't know if any of you read the comments, but I read this and thought it worth sharing:
Remember the Anthrax attacks and the "person of interest" that lost his job and could not find another? No one remembers the suicide of the other person the FBI suspected and threatened, not even charged but harassed - note they tried to intimidate and coerce his son into saying something, anything, against his father as well as the rest of family, friends and acquaintances. I could go on for pages about the people who you either never heard about and weren't controversial so you might not care either way - so is it only because it was Aaron that you care? - or people you would find odious or obnoxious so you desire to have the jackboots around assuming they will only destroy people you don't like. Every so often the hacker community is attacked about rights it holds dear, and like the NRA it sometimes succeeds in beating back the tyranny. But like the NRA it is UTTERLY INDIFFERENT to liberty itself. There are no "fundamental rights" or you and the NRA would work together to insure the 1st, 4th, 5th, AND 2nd amendments were strictly interpreted and enforced. When most people do not care BECAUSE the tyranny is part the 80% of the constitution they aren't affected by, each overlapping 80% means that NOTHING IS LEFT. You love speech and privacy but hate guns. Some love guns and privacy but hate speech. Some love speech and guns but hate privacy. Deitrich Boenhoffer was the one who said "When they came for the gypsies/communists/jews I did not speak up because I was not one of them... [but] when they came for me there was no one left to speak for me". Last election there was Ron Paul who was against the jackboots. But not enough people wanted him - and I would note that during the GOP primaries and caucuses the tech community was either apolitical or were democrats so didn't care to have a choice, so it was Romney v. Obama. There was rallying about SOPA, but nothing about the FBI and DoJ malicious prosecutions. I had hope for #occupy, but that seems to have fizzled although it did provide a constant witness against the corruption and injustice. Does it matter if the tyrant who kills your liberty has a D or R label any more than the virus that kills you has DNA or RNA?
-tzNote where Julian Assange is and why.
I think comparing depression to being frustrated at a game is ridiculous and I hope he rethinks the analogy. I think it would be more useful to talk about how we as a profession/subculture might better watch out for each other and our common interests so that we do not only start making noise after something awful happens than to present some platitude about never giving up. Atwood carries a lot of influence, though, so what he says is noteworthy whether or not it's useful. But yes, I think it's heartfelt, and I'm still unsure whether it's fair to criticize it. If it was someone less influential I'd be sure it wasn't.
I agree with all of that. I do get a sense, however, that in the 'hacker' community there is an misguided effort to analyze and contextualize some things that elude such efforts by their very nature. Although this essay is sincere, it does not sit well with me. IMHO if Atwood knew Swartz personally, it's probable that he wouldn't feel comfortable with it. A philosophy teacher of mine once said that he believed the highest compliment that could be paid to someone that has been lost is to say: "He was a good person."
"It's just a game" is a phrase used whenever one wishes to diminish the importance of any task. Games have long been some form of simulation or other, regardless of how symbolic they may be, and that simulation is chosen because it mirrors some aspect of our lives. It's an analogy, and a largely relevant one. The primary difference is that you can't un-commit suicide.
It's absolutely fair to criticize it. It's a public work.