[glomek]

MIT needs to be shamed publicly, regularly and continuously until they publicly apologize for their shameful behavior.

Giving this award to Swartz, and giving the money to his parents, along with a public statement of remorse and a public commitment to behaving more honorably in the future, would be an excellent way for them to do this.

[ptero]

If MIT were a person, sure. But it is a large organization with members holding multiple competing views. If one group is trying to do something good, do not shame them for another groups deeds, use them.

I'm not saying that this prize corrects the injustice done. It's an orthogonal option to do good. My 2c.

[throwaway743824]

Those good people would hopefully want people to hold MIT to a standard when it comes to things like admissions, community involvement, support of students and researchers etc. rather than formal prizes. But maybe (hopefully) this is important for internal politics at MIT and not the best they can do.

[codewiz]

Joi Ito, the current director of the Media Lab, highly praised Aaron during the memorial held at the Media Lab in 2013:

http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N12/swartz.html

The rest of MIT might deserve shaming, but please don't punish the Media Lab.

[kyledrake]

It's not my intention to "punish" Media Lab, I like the work they do. But from the article you just posted:

> The mood changed later in the memorial when speakers began criticizing MIT’s involvement in the Swartz case. Swartz’ partner, Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, asked MIT to consider whether it considered itself a “scientist” or “bureaucracy” and expressed skepticism about the Abelson report.

It's clear from the dialogue in here that this was not a sufficient response for the wider community, and that more reform and response was (and still is) expected. The perception is that there was a largely neutral response from a part of MIT that should have been one of the loudest.

I just spent a month in Cambridge, and while I met some great people working on important things, I have to say, there's definitely some ossification over there and it's a real problem. We need some very loud advocates for online and software freedom in the academic world right now, perhaps more than we've ever needed them. And yes, we still need the right to read research produced with public funding.

I agree with many of the people in here that this should have been named the Aaron Swartz Disobedience Award, in his honor. Or keep the name, but say that it being awarded in his memory. It would have sent a powerful message, both to future Aarons and to the MIT upper admins that have steadfastly refused to own up to what they did.

This award is a great idea, but the silence of not even mentioning his name in it when it's the thing on everyone's mind is deafening.

[dgellow]

> I just spent a month in Cambridge, and while I met some great people working on important things, I have to say, there's definitely some ossification over there and it's a real problem.

What does "ossification" means in this context?