

The Death of a Prodigy and the Limitations of Talent - wallflower
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/booming/the-death-of-a-prodigy-and-the-limitations-of-talent.html

======
zainny
Forgive me if this seems inappropriate to ask, but I'm actually somewhat
curious. In this article and others I've read about Swartz, he is described
using terms like "prodigy" and "genius".

Are these descriptions accurate or is the press somewhat guilty of puffing up
the stature of Aaron in order to pull you inevitably towards the cliché story
of the 'tragically passed genius'?

If he were not a "prodigy" or "genius", would his actions and ideals be any
less worthy of recognition, or his passing any less tragic?

~~~
wglb
Those close to him think so. Larry Lessig called him his mentor (not mentee).
Tim Berners-Lee said "we have lost an elder".

------
smadaan
"I was changed. Until then, I’d felt my talent was a shield, that I could
break the rules without consequence, because there was something special and
even righteous about me."

The analogy he tries to draw is stretched too far, and too thin. There is a
difference between brandishing your talent on one hand, and simply standing up
for righteousness on another.

Aaron put all he had in to a cause much bigger than himself, and even in his
death, put a spotlight on the lopsided legal system.

The author, on the other hand, considers his becoming the establishment as
"right of passage" in to some higher level of maturity. While it may be fair
for the author to characterize his youth experiences as plain basking in
talent, he could not be more far off in describing Aaron the same way.

------
Recher_she
How did this get published? He did not release the JSTOR downloads and "make
them available to the public". The writer draws a weak connection between
Aaron Swartz and himself and seems to miss the point at so many levels.

------
rdouble
This is the worst article I've read about this topic.

