Aaron Swartz died for JSTOR to be free but what can we learn from JSTOR?

The following is speculation and hypotheses about a public story.  It is not intended to accuse anyone.  Please restate all sentences as questions.    Even if not correct in this case, this type of situation can repeat with variations of course.

My comments cut and paste from Wired.

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/01/aaron-swartz-activism-and-the-two-sided-sword-of-power/

==

Mark Tenney New Math • 2 days ago

“I think this was the moment Aaron joined a “different” side of activism, a side that recognizes that writing or campaigning aren’t going to change anything when it comes to powerful institutions.”

So what is going to? Aaron Swartz dead and John Yoo free would seem to indicate that we have not found out how to change powerful institutions.

Also John Kiriakou is another case. He is to be sentenced January 25, 2013 by Judge Brinkema in the Eastern District of Torture.
1

Reply

Share ›

Avatar
Etaoin Shrdlu Mark Tenney New Math • a day ago

In all seriousness, please go see a psychiatrist.
0

Reply

Share ›

Avatar
Mark Tenney New Math • 2 days ago

Here is something to chew on. This is speculation. What can you do with the JSTOR archive? You could try to prove the following, or help prove it with other information

1) Professors engage in specific cases of plagiarism or similar things, and you can figure it out or come close to with the JSTOR archive.

2) Russia can figure it out from JSTOR as well.

3) In PROLA, you could read Russia actually being very nasty over plagiarism:

http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v72/i8/p737_1

(

Phys. Rev. 72, 737–737 (1947)

A Note on the Paper “Second Quantization and Representation Theory”

Abstract
No Citing Articles
Download: PDF (71 kB) Buy this article Export: BibTeX or EndNote (RIS)

V. Fock
Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R., Moscow, U.S.S.R.

E. M. Corson
The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey, June 26, 1947

Received 10 April 1947; published in the issue dated October 1947

© 1947 The American Physical Society

DOI:
10.1103/PhysRev.72.737)

This is against Corson, a friend of Klaus Fuchs in 1947 3 years before Fuchs was arrested in 1950 for atomic spying.

4) You could show at least partly that in US v. Harvard, Shleifer and Hay from 1997 to 2005, Harvard and MIT concealed information from the USAO Mass investigation.

5) After US v Harvard was settled in 2005, USAO Mass learned of this from the Internet.

6) The expert witnesses on both side and DAAG EAG DOJ in US v. Microsoft might have known of some of this in 1998 to 1999.

7) John Yoo at Berkeley might have learned of this and told Bush. This gave Yoo leverage over the Clinton DOJ for embarrassing info. (There is more)

8) Yoo wrote his torture memos because he knew he had stuff on the Clinton DOJ and that if they got back in power, they couldn’t do anything.

9) Lanny Breuer (Criminal Division), Kagan, and Eric Holder are back in power and did nothing on torture.

10) USAO Mass was stymied to do much. The dad of Heymann the prosecutor is an HLS prof.

11) Lessig was special master in US v. Microsoft, and might have learned some of this too. Interesting angles there. Maybe he told Swartz or someone else did about this or said they would come forward if it went to trial. Maybe Swartz died to protect some other person who told him but might have liability? (Just a possibility)

12) You could guess that the denial of service attack on MIT on Sunday was not Anonymous but was Russia doing that to cover up something else, like removing some sort of spy software virus like Red October from MIT networks.

The above is all speculation and hypotheses.
0

Reply

Share ›

Avatar
Mark Tenney New Math Mark Tenney New Math • 2 days ago

You could also guess that there are people in NSA and Lawrence Livermore who know this and the DOJ wants to make sure they keep quiet. So they used Aaron Swart and John Kiriakou as examples of how hard they can be.
0

Reply

Share ›
Avatar
Mark Tenney New Math Mark Tenney New Math • 2 days ago

More on my blog New Math Done Right on this speculation.

http://newmathdoneright.com/2013/01/16/kaspersy-red-october-virus-and-aaron-swartz-denial-of-service-attack-mit/
0

Reply

Share ›

Avatar
Mark Tenney New Math • 2 days ago

(Following is speculation)

Here are some JSTOR articles that might lead to showing plagiarism.

The victim:

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1912196?uid=3739256&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21101683297737

The possible plagiarist:

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1926559?uid=3739256&uid=2129&uid=2134&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101678449887

Scenario:

Paul Samuelson plagiarized Nils Hakansson in 1969 because Hakansson’s 1966 paper was not published until 1970, even though MIT had it in 1966, also documented in another JSTOR article of the professor who was shown in print to have it then at MIT.

Then Russia applied pressure on Paul Samuelson to nominate Kantorovich of the USSR for the 1975 Nobel Prize in economics. There were 2 econ conferences in Poland in the early1970s where that pressure could have been applied.

Then in the 1990s Russia reused this material to put pressure on Larry Summers the nephew of Paul Samuelson to give them IMF loans, which he did. Stanley Fischer also at MIT got his Ph.D. in 1969 also with material overlapping Hakansson. Fischer claimed he was not aware of it in his thesis until late.

The chairman of the Stanley Fischer thesis in 1969 at MIT was Franklin Fisher who was lead expert witness in US v. Microsoft in 1998/99. The DAAG was Daniel Rubinfeld who was Paul Samuelson’s assistant in 1971. The defense expert witness was Schmalensee at MIT Ph.D. 1970. Rubinfeld and Hakansson became Berkeley profs and John Yoo learned of this history there perhaps.

Lessig special master US v. Microsoft and may have learned of this.

Harvard and MIT concealed it during US v. Harvard, Shleifer and Hay. But Shleifer may have known of this and that is why he is still a prof at Harvard. Just maybe. I don’t know.

The above is speculation and hypotheses.
0

Reply

Share ›

Avatar
Mark Tenney New Math Mark Tenney New Math • 2 days ago

Assistant US attorney Sara Miron Bloom of USAO Mass handled US v. Harvard, Shleifer and Hay. She likely has learned of the above after US v Harvard settled in 2005. It has been on Internet since 2006. She probably asked the FBI to investigate but they said no. Just another hypothesis.
0

Reply

Share ›

Avatar
Mark Tenney New Math • 2 days ago

Speculation:

In the 1990s, Long Term Capital Management and DE Shaw bought Russian government bonds in excess. They knew that the Russians had this info on Summers uncle Samuelson and on Stanley Fischer at IMF. So they thought the loans would keep coming. They accumulated huge positions.

Russia didn’t like being outsmarted by these prof hedge funds, so they defaulted to make them lose money.

After Summers resigned as president of Harvard, he was paid 5 million a year by DE Shaw for one day a week consulting.

The above is speculation and hypothesis.
0

Reply

Share ›

==
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/01/aaron-swartz-activism-and-the-two-sided-sword-of-power/

==

Etaoin Shrdlu to Mark Tenney New Math • a day ago

In all seriousness, please go see a psychiatrist.
0

Reply

Share ›

Avatar
Mark Tenney Etaoin Shrdlu • 4 minutes ago

I am not sure which of my comments you object to most. However, if we have the pair of (USAO Mass, MIT and Harvard) in the Swartz case, it is reasonable to go back and look at the last pair of (USAO Mass, Harvard (and MIT)).

We look back at the last case involving them and ask questions. To do that, we have to know some background. That background has to come from someone familiar with it. That person has to select issues that may be relevant.

The USAO Mass v. Swartz case does some similarities and some differences. Both are relevant.

Why was Swartz charged as a criminal with 30+ years while Shleifer was not charged and is still a professor at Harvard? Why did Summers get hired by the US government in 2009 without this being examined, since info on it was on the Internet and USAO Mass was likely familiar with that.

==

http://janinewedel.info/harvardinvestigative.html

http://janinewedel.info/Forum_Financial_Group_v_Harvard_College.pdf

Advertisements

About New Math Done Right

Author of Pre-Algebra New Math Done Right Peano Axioms. A below college level self study book on the Peano Axioms and proofs of the associative and commutative laws of addition. President of Mathematical Finance Company. Provides economic scenario generators to financial institutions.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s