I've already wrote about that on HN, but I believe it's worth reiterating.
Alexandra Elbakyan is not an example of disobedience. In fact, she is very obedient to the rules of society she lives in (she is an avid Putin's supporter), it's just those rules are different from the West. Her risks over SciHub project is negligible while she lives in Russia, and given her views, I think it's unlikely she want to live somewhere else. In her early interviews/posts in Russian, she considers the project as a Russian crusade over the West of some sorts, so I don't believe this is in any way similar to the Aaron's case. Aaron was a political activist and a champion of human rights, and Alexandra is neither.
To be honest, the way in which Western media frame her baffles me: they used a common western narrative and slotted her into it instead of telling the true story.
Alexandra Elbakyan is staying in Russia, yes. That's why she's still alive while Aaron Swartz unfortunately isn't and given that the award has to go to a live political activist and champion of human rights, that's why I've nominated her. Demanding our heroes die to prove their sincerity is, let's just say, not a helpful position to take.
You are over-dramatizing things. EFF members or the judge who overturned Trump's travel ban are alive. It's not like people are routinely killed in US over copyright infringement or political protest as your comment implies.
>a live political activist and champion of human rights
You emphasized "live" there, but I would rather emphasize
> political activist
> champion of human rights
Alexandra Elbakyan is neither. It's just an opportunistical breaking of rules that are not enforced in Russia, and nothing I've read from her (except her interviews to Western media) implies her "political activism" or "championship of human rights".
However, if you still thing that she is worthy of the prize, I would also suggest nominating the owners of pornolab.net. It's one of the largest porn trackers out there, and it's online for a dozen years at least. It's in Russian, which I believe is one of the main reasons it's still online.
On the more general note: the enemy of your enemy is not your friend, it's a tactical ally.
The award is clearly for people who are being disobedient for the benefit of society.
Breaking rules for the sake of breaking rules is just anarchy or trolling. You're just inconveniencing people who set out to recognise real contributions to society.
Unless there is an Aaron Schwartz foundation or something, nominate people who are still doing work.
This isn't about Aaron. It's about the next person who downloads too much free stuff doing it emboldened by the thought that MIT will have their back when the feds come knocking. If only because not doing so costs MIT 250 thousand dollars.
That would be a much bigger contribution to society than any one person walking away with this award.
> This isn't about Aaron. It's about the next person who downloads too much free stuff doing it emboldened by the thought that MIT will have their back when the feds come knocking. If only because not doing so costs MIT 250 thousand dollars.
The next person? There are people CURRENTLY downloading free stuff and sharing it.
Nominate an appropriate person. Vote for someone who really deserves it NOW. Show these people that we support civil disobedience when it benefits society. Take the fucking money.
At this point, I have to believe that the people who want to flood them with ineligible nominees are simply trolling HN and trolling the MIT Media Lab. You guys are potentially throwing away 250K for no real reason.
Also from the page
> Both individuals and groups are eligible to win the prize.
While we are on this topic, let's not forget the real culprits: cfaa and widespread abuse of discretionary power by prosecution.
We must repeal (and not replace) the cfaa. Of course, we should name and shame MIT at every junction (shame on you, MIT!) However, we shouldn't lose sight of the bigger picture. CFAA is evil.
> It's about the next person who downloads too much free stuff doing it emboldened by the thought that MIT will have their back when the feds come knocking.
Aaron Swartz was not an MIT affiliate, alum, faculty, or student. MIT had no obligation to "have [his] back" for violating MIT network policy and federal law.
> Aaron Swartz was not an MIT affiliate, alum, faculty, or student. MIT had no obligation to "have [his] back" for violating MIT network policy and federal law.
Having "no obligation" to do something is never an excuse for any behavior.
Aaron Swartz was literally my first thought too. I'm submitting him anyway, he should win and the money should go to like-minded worth individuals and causes.
Alexandra Elbakyan is not an example of disobedience. In fact, she is very obedient to the rules of society she lives in (she is an avid Putin's supporter), it's just those rules are different from the West. Her risks over SciHub project is negligible while she lives in Russia, and given her views, I think it's unlikely she want to live somewhere else. In her early interviews/posts in Russian, she considers the project as a Russian crusade over the West of some sorts, so I don't believe this is in any way similar to the Aaron's case. Aaron was a political activist and a champion of human rights, and Alexandra is neither.
To be honest, the way in which Western media frame her baffles me: they used a common western narrative and slotted her into it instead of telling the true story.