I find it interesting that people always talk who killed X, but never why, the latter almost always being far more important. In this case, I believe Swartz was killed to complete the takeover of Reddit.
Reddit had already been sold to Conde Nast, so your belief isn't based on factual evidence.
I find it more interesting when handshake accounts pop onto threads and try to steer the conversation from MIT Satanic Child Porn Rings to the takeover of Reddit.
You can be a problematic co founder even after the sale. There's also the angle of what he knew versus what he was interfering with. Reddit was the lone survivor in a lucrative space. I think those questions are valid even if you disagree with his hypothesis.
I find it interesting that people always talk who killed X, but never why, the latter almost always being far more important.
In this case, I believe Swartz was killed to complete the takeover of Reddit.
Reddit had already been sold to Conde Nast, so your belief isn't based on factual evidence.
I find it more interesting when handshake accounts pop onto threads and try to steer the conversation from MIT Satanic Child Porn Rings to the takeover of Reddit.
You can be a problematic co founder even after the sale. There's also the angle of what he knew versus what he was interfering with. Reddit was the lone survivor in a lucrative space. I think those questions are valid even if you disagree with his hypothesis.
So was it the MIT Satanic Child Porn Ring that took over Reddit?