this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2026
1183 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

87680 readers
2578 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 172 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Because Swartz didn't have a legion of expensive lawyers at his disposal. ☹️

[–] bacon_pdp@lemmy.world 78 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

And was murdered by the US government.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 72 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because Swartz was merely a natural person, while Meta is an almighty corporation. Everybody knows only corporations deserve rights, duh!

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 49 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 week ago

Goddamn, that's good

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because Swartz wanted a free and open web and the powers that be wanted control over every major social media website. This was around the same that moot showed up in Epstein's emails and would later sell his site. All in the run up to the 2016 election. Now think about how /r/thedonald stayed on the site for so long.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

r/donald was a py-op posing as social media. I doubt it did much other than get liberals mad on reddit but it was clearly a sign of things to come.

Fox is the true evil.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Lol, doesn't matter if you have expensive lawyers. What matters is that you have counsel that goes to church with the judge or plays golf at the country club with them, or knows people that do. Or you're a Zionists genocide supporter and pedophile like Alan Dershowitz.

[–] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 week ago

expensive lawyers

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 109 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Obligatory FUCK SPEZ

RIP Aaron.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago

Fuck Congress and the DoJ as well. How the fuck can Reddit still have Section 230 protections after what spez did?

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 63 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Fuck what they did to that guy. We should have revolted then.

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 41 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Moral of the story never do anything as an individual by your name. Do it as a multi-billion dollar company with a battalion of lawyers and have fall guys. At minimum have an LLC controlled by a trust in someone else's name doing anything actionable in court.

Remember companies are people even though they can't get arrested and giving large sums of money to politicians is free speech, not bribery or corruption.

[–] UsoSaito@feddit.uk 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And do it in a large enough quantity that it makes financially insensitive to do it at a large scale vs small

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In short just add lots of people and many steps in the way. Killing someone is bad, releasing a product / service you know will kill lots of people is just a rounding error in business.

[–] busted_Anoose@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

one only has to look at the health insurance industry to see how deadly that is both for claimants and ceo's alike.

[–] helvetpuli@sopuli.xyz 36 points 1 week ago (2 children)

So scraping means any harvesting of data now?

We need a new name for the fairly painful process of trying to tease meaning out of people's unstructured HTML.

In any case downloading a bunch of stuff from JSTOR was not scraping. And he absolutely had authorised access to that data. They took exception to the quantity, mainly.

[–] tiramichu@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Scraping has multiple meanings.

Web scraping is a specific type of scraping, but data via APIs or even torrents could be considered a scrape, even if that data is nicely structured.

The commonality between them is they all have the implication that:

  • the data harvesting is automated
  • the data you harvest is not owned by you, and you don't have explicit permission to use it
  • the scope of what you harvest is broad and not targeted at retrieving specific limited pieces of data

Any access patterns that broadly correspond to this could be considered scraping.

[–] helvetpuli@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sure. Fine. It means all of that now.

But what are we going to call the difficult thing that we have to do to coax, say, unstructured event listings into reasonably structured data?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nugscree@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Also that he was planning, or already was, sharing the data for free. They made an example out of him because he believed such data should be for everybody.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 35 points 1 week ago

Aaron is definately on my wall of heroes. I think much of our leadership does not understand how despite there being billions of people on the planet they are not just fungible commodities. That we lose every time and stunt our growth. I by no means mean we should have more populationa as what we have is to much for the biosphere. Its about smartly using what we have than thinking you can just replace a person with another.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 1 week ago

The anti-piracy efforts of the RIAA and MPAA (and the publishing houses and...) are still pretty robust, but that didn't stop any of the big AI companies from using gigatons of copyrighted material as datasets to train their LLMs. It's why when you ask them to generate an image featuring Winnie The Pooh, they all know what you're talking about.

But the big companies absolutely did not get permission to do this. Nor did anyone give permission to allow for the recent jailbreaks by AI task systems to hack into other companies. If that were any singular human (not of the owner class) they'd face charges under the CFAA. But since it's a massive company with an army of blue-haired lawyers, nothing was done about it, and the companies actually bragged about their AIs escaping containment.

Extinction by AI takeover is far more interesting than extinction by global drought.

[–] kesslerpartyatmyplace@anarchist.nexus 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

If only we could figure out the difference between these two things, we could learn so much! Alas, it is unknowable.

[–] busted_Anoose@aussie.zone 17 points 1 week ago

Yes but Aaron made the rookie mistake of not being a multibillionaire with a whole building of lawyers to fight on his behalf.

[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

When a regular person murders someone - life in prison.

When We Love Genocide LLC murders 12 families - $3.43 fine.

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Did he pay a fee to the king and visit his inauguration like Zucker?

[–] Regna@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

He (who founded and stood behind the original concept of Reddit) was so forcefully charged that he decided to commit suicide because he believed that information deserves to be free.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 week ago

Aaron Swartz was ~~prosecuted~~ murdered for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

[–] chrislowles@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

About a year ago I saw coverage on IA getting reamed for the cases they were dealing with, there were many takes during then and it turned out the way it did (and continues to) but my take on it basically extends from what the govt did to Swartz, in that IA had to deal with all of that almost entirely on their own and take on the mental turmoil, meanwhile Meta et al not only got away and continues to get away with it but in fact are now partnering up with other mega corps doing the same shit, for profit. It dead set almost feels like they're mocking us by going this far with these ventures, they're like "Yeah the govt moralized and killed someone for the same shit we're getting govt contracts for and ADVERTISING ON OUR OWN PLATFORMS, gonna do something about it? Mad?".

All of this amounts to the most open and shut case of "if you have enough money, you can get away with anything"

[–] Unglue1857@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

When you're famous they let you do it

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

Yeah, but he wasn't a billionaire.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not sure if we're saying harvesting data is good or bad...

[–] Forester@pawb.social 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Stealing is bad but we celebrate Robin Hood because he stole from the corrupt and gave to the needy

load more comments
view more: next ›