The Internet world lost a hero. Freedom of information and Internet privacy activist Aaron Swartz was found dead by his girlfriend in his New York apartment on Friday morning.
It is too early for the coroner's report, but family members have said it appears that the young programmer and political organizer committed suicide by hanging himself.
Swartz began making headlines in technology news when he helped create the popular and widely used RSS at the age of 14. Despite many legal troubles for alleged hacking, he won a major victory for his cause recently when one of the companies he had legal dealings with, JSTOR, announced that a portion of its extensive archives are now available to 
the public for free.
The RSS pioneer was facing some serious prison time for his latest crime, which alleged hacking, downloading, and releasing millions of research papers from various scholarly sources stored in the exclusive academic database of JSTOR.
JSTOR is a source that is available as part of many college students tuition and is the main location for accessing information to write academic papers. For anyone who wants to learn, it is a goldmine of information that covers a wide range of subjects.
While the Internet community morns the death of this brilliant programmer, political organizer, and Internet activist, many will ask "why?" Why did this young man, with so much talent, intelligence, and potential take his own life? Did he really fear he was going to prison for the next 35 years?
While that may have weighed on his mind, Swartz admitted in a 2007 blog post that he was depressed; although it should be noted that many people who suffer from depression don't kill themselves.
What put Swartz over the edge may not be known for a while or ever. World history is full of unexplained suicides. Hopefully something good can come from his death and bring more, needed attention to mental health and suicide prevention.
Photo credit: Fred Benenson
©Christine M. Dantz 2013
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 10
Normally, loved ones and friends react by immediately being in denial--if an individual mentions such impulses.
Often, the self-victim won't even talk about it.
Therefore, suicide is difficult to predict and therefore to prevent.
But there are many more suicidal thoughts, per patient, than there are patients who act on those thoughts.
Also, when someone is drunk we still have a hard time taking away the keys.
We have a much, much harder time trying to figure out how to help a potential suicide victim.
We don't want to pry
We don't want to say the wrong thing
And we don't want to intervene when it's a false alarm
Most people (it is my assumption), who want to kill themselves, are going to go ahead and do it and not telegraph it.
The ones who make attempts, but fail, are really seeking help.
If you, or I, or anyone else, really think about it, it is quite easy to commit suicide--without making failed attempts.
"On July 19, 2011, Swartz was charged by U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer, in relation to downloading roughly 4 million academic journal articles from JSTOR.[26] According to the indictment against him, Swartz surreptitiously attached a laptop to MIT's computer network, which allowed him to "rapidly download an extraordinary volume of articles from JSTOR."[27] Prosecutors in the case claim Swartz acted with the intention of making the papers available on P2P file-sharing sites.[28]
Swartz surrendered to authorities, pleading not guilty on all accounts, and was released on US$100,000 unsecured bail.[29][30] Prosecution of the case continued, with charges of wire fraud and computer fraud, carrying a potential prison term of up to 35 years and a fine of up to $1 million.[31][32] After Swartz's arrest, JSTOR put out a statement saying it would not pursue civil litigation against him.[29][33]
Swartz in 2012 protesting against SOPA
Despite JSTOR having dropped all civil charges, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Stephen P. Heymann and Scott L. Garland[34][35][36] pursued the criminal case against Swartz under U.S. attorney Carmen M. Ortiz, who justified the charges by stating "stealing is stealing, whether you use a computer command or a crowbar, and whether you take documents, data or dollars."[29] The case tested the reach of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which was passed in 1984 to enhance the government’s ability to prosecute hackers who accessed computers to steal information or to disrupt or destroy computer functionality.
The government, however, has interpreted the anti-hacking provisions to include activities such as violating a Web site's terms of service or a company's computer usage policy, a position a federal appeals court in April said means "millions of unsuspecting individuals would find that they are engaging in criminal conduct." The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, in limiting reach of the CFAA, said that violations of employee contract agreements and Web sites' terms of service were better left to civil lawsuits.
The rulings by the 9th Circuit cover the West, and not Massachusetts, meaning they are not binding in Swartz's prosecution. The Obama administration declined to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court.[37][38]"
So, really, because he used the computer system at MIT, he was able to steal much more than the average ''thief.'' and it also appears that the DA in MA was trying to make an example out of him, good intention or not.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/13/academics-tweet-tribute-aaron-swartz_n_2468272.html
Does anyone know if Swartz himself ever worked for free?
I'm sorry the guy's dead, esp. for his family. I've contended with depression since I was twelve.