Skip to main content

View Diary: In Aaron's Name, Change This Law (81 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  yeah, let programmers write hacking laws. ?!? (6+ / 0-)

    before i say anything else, i am a professional programmer.  video games.  

    so, that said.  there is absolutely no excuse for hacking, period.  and the ONLY difference between hacking and breaking into a home or business is that you can steal and destroy more and get away with it easier.  

    and the little brats who claim they are just curious... they don't get to break into homes and businesses if they are curious either, so, they can cry me a river when they get caught and the book is thrown at them.

    i love programming in part because of the power i wield.  you think crazy people with guns are scary.  you have no fucking idea.  

    after all the damage done to the world economy by smart people using complex derivatives you would think that people would realize that you can't trust someone just because they are smart.  no more than you can trust someone because they are strong.  but humans just love to put their faith in the powerful.  even though it's always the powerful who fuck them over.

    with great power comes great responsibility.  something every programmer worth his salt knows (cause we are all comic geeks).  hacking is using abusing power, period.  and it's wrong.  

    •  i was a victim of hacking. they stole money. (4+ / 0-)

      i watched as money disappeared in real time from 2 bank accounts.  lucky for me i knew how to stop them quickly and i got my money back.  but they got away with it scott free.  cause it wasn't worth it to the banks to go after them.  but how many other people have they hacked and stolen from?  how many more will they steal from?

      even though i got my money back, it was still a completely violating experience.  and it's pure chance that i happen to know how to deal with things.  i am sure that almost all of their victims are just fucked over.  

      you don't get into people's shit without their permission.  you don't do it.  you simply don't do it.  

      listening to people whine about how tough laws are and how the hacker who stole is a victim is nothing but bullshit.  they aren't victims.  they are fucking white collar criminals.  

      •  accessing and downloading academic papers (25+ / 0-)

        that should have been freely available anyway is NOT just like stealing money from your bank account Anton.

        This is about the allowable amount of punishment available to prosecutors that is way out of proportion to the committed act. No one is proposing a free for all for hackers.

      •  Do you seriously think it is a worse crime than (10+ / 0-)

        rape or even murder?  Because had Aaron just walked up to that prosecutor and put a bullet in his/her brain he could easily have been out in less than 30 years (35 year sentence of which 85% must be served) as the normal sentence for (second degree) murder is 25 to life and often on the low side.  Also if he had made a molotov cocktail and firebombed the courthouse and/or prosecutor's office he would have only gotten 10 years.

        You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

        by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 03:14:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  a million counts of any crime will get (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib

          more time than any single crime.

          that doesn't tell us whether the sentence for a single count is fair.

          •  The problem isn't the sentence for a single count, (8+ / 0-)

            the issue is if the sentence for a single count times the number of counts is fair especially when it leads to insane results like a 300 year sentence for downloading 20 music CDs off of bittorrent.  If I was in his position I would have either ran (if I was still in my right mind) or tried to kill the prosecutor (if I totally snapped) as in neither case would I have had anything to lose.  After all what's the worst that could happen, a life sentence (which was going to happen anyway) or the death penalty (which would be an act of mercy)?

            You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

            by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 05:51:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  This prosecution was intended to destroy Swartz (5+ / 0-)

              as an example to other would-be Internet activists. It's the same strategy as the brutal treatment of Manning and the hounding of Assange. They are trying to put fear into the hearts of anyone who dreams that the Internet could change the world for the better.

              Their message is: the Internet is there for the 1% to sell you stuff, and for the government to spy on you -- nothing else. It will be used only to expand the security state and the property rights of the 1%, not to increase your freedom -- nor even your knowledge, unless you belong to the wealthy elite who are permitted that knowledge.

      •  WAAAAA Call the Wambulance. (12+ / 0-)

        I was violently raped and you know what? The guy that did that to me would get less than half the fucking time they were threatening Aaron with and no million dollar fine. You know jack fucking shit about a "violating experience" let me be clear.

        ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

        by Kristina40 on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 04:30:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  fucking white collar criminals? (12+ / 0-)

        Yeah, those "fucking white collar criminals" on Wall Street who destroyed our economy, those guys, like Blankfein, who gets invited to the WH for his advice on fiscal negotiations, that white collar criminal, who should be facing criminal charges.

        Those of us not on Wall Street care a lot that none of those fucking white collar criminals are being prosecuted by this DOJ, after we watched "our money" disappear.

        If we had only known how to stop those guys.......

        "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

        by allenjo on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 05:40:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  But this guy didn't steal money. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JohnnyBoston, tahoebasha2, nota bene

        He didn't even steal anything of value.

      •  What do you think the penalty... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TheMomCat, triv33, nota bene

        ...should be for what happened to you?

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 08:39:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Whatever you get for bank theft and fraud. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          emelyn
          •  That would have been far less (9+ / 0-)

            than the plea bargain of 35 yrs in prison & over a million dollars in fines. Since Aaron technically didn't steal anything or hack into JSTOR. There was no fraud involved in what Aaron did.  This could have been handles without law enforcement getting involved at all, except that MIT had a hissy fit over an intentionally built in loop whole to their computer system. JSTOR had already dropped the complaint after Aaron returned the files he had borrowed. Yes, borrowed, like a library. He didn't steal money, he borrowed too many "books" and intended to share them with the rest of the world for free.

            BTW, the person who hacked into your bank account wouldn't have been prosecuted under this law but under 18 U.S.C. § 2113 : US Code - Section 2113: Bank robbery and incidental crimes which the courts have ruled covers you situation.


            "There is but one evil party with two names, and it will be elected despite all I can do or say." W.E.B. Dubois, 1956
            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

            by TheMomCat on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 10:30:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Here you go: (7+ / 0-)
            Subsection (b) outlines the penalties for anyone who takes and carries away, with the intent to steal or purloin, any property or money or any thing of value in the care, custody, control, management, or possession of any bank, credit union, or savings and loan. The maximum penalty for violation of this subsection is a fine and ten years imprisonment if the value of the property exceeds $100. The maximum penalty is a fine and one year imprisonment if the property's value is $100 or less. [My bold]

            Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

            by Meteor Blades on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 11:26:56 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  sigh (0+ / 0-)

              clearly i have no ability to communicate, since what i am saying is ignored and everyone is responding to what they think what i said must be 'saying'.  which i gather is something along the lines of: this aaron fellow got what he deserved.  sigh.  whatever.

              •  I think people understand you quite well actually (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                TheMomCat, SpecialKinFlag

                On the other  hand, I think often you lack self-awareness in the way you conduct yourself on this site.

                Self-described political "centrists" believe the best policy is halfway between right and wrong. — @RBReich via web

                by BentLiberal on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 04:13:26 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  what did Boehner say to Reid the other day? (0+ / 0-)
                  •  was that passive aggresive enough for you, BL? (0+ / 0-)

                    i was trying my darn-est to conduct myself exactly like you.

                  •  OK I'll be direct: (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    TheMomCat, SpecialKinFlag, nota bene

                    Your response to MB was very puzzling

                    He asked what you thought the sentence would be. You answered you didn't know, but offered up "Whatever you get for bank theft and fraud."  He supplied that information to you as to how long that sentence would be. For reasons I can't understand, that caused you to claim no one understands you.

                    What's not being understood? It was a very straightforward exchange. I can only assume that when you found out the factual information, you didn't like it -- and rather than deal with it, you claimed no one understands you and everyone is ignoring you.

                    THAT is what I would call passive-aggressive. He supplies information that you didn't know, and rather than dealing with it -- you throw up a victimization routine.

                    Hope that my second attempt expressed my thoughts in your preferred method.

                    Self-described political "centrists" believe the best policy is halfway between right and wrong. — @RBReich via web

                    by BentLiberal on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 05:01:01 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  This is AB's MO (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      tahoebasha2

                      If it isn't about him, it's not important. Thanks for trying to drill this home to him. Others have tried, to no avail.


                      "There is but one evil party with two names, and it will be elected despite all I can do or say." W.E.B. Dubois, 1956
                      TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                      by TheMomCat on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 05:11:13 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  oh, mama kitty. you silly cat. (0+ / 0-)

                        look, i don't know what you want to accomplish by accusing me of playing a victim card, but whatever it is, you have to do it in front of people who's opinion of me i care about.  

                        here's a hint: none of them are on daily kos

                        that's what is so darned frustrating about me, right?

                    •  you dont have to convince me of thing, BentLiberal (0+ / 0-)

                      and you don't have to worry that i am preventing you from convincing other people, because everyone here thinks what they think irregardless of whatever the fuck you think.  okay?  so, stop fighting with me.  you're wasting your time.  unless you enjoy fucking with me to get a rise out of me, then by all means, feel free to continue.  i enjoy a spirited cock fight.  

              •  Everyone knows what you said (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                tahoebasha2

                Perhaps you should have just said it more succinctly and left. I suggest you not comment further.

                And, please in the future, stay out of my diaries.


                "There is but one evil party with two names, and it will be elected despite all I can do or say." W.E.B. Dubois, 1956
                TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                by TheMomCat on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 05:07:46 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  as a member of the democratic party, i am evil (0+ / 0-)

                  so, i am going to go ahead and keep commenting, cause i enjoy being evil, and i am going to possible read and even comment on one of your diaries in the future, to keep the evil spreading.  that's just how us evil people in the democratic party roll, momma kitty!  

                  hey!  i just realized that you may be the one person who gets my tag quote below!  how sweet is that!

              •  I focused on this: (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                nota bene, TheMomCat, SpecialKinFlag

                "listening to people whine about how tough laws" for hacking.

                You raised this issue. Since the so-calling whining came about because of draconian treatment being meted out to someone whose alleged crime did not actually harm anyone while some people on this site, including one of your tippers, think banksters should get off scott-free for the harm they caused millions of Americans because prosecuting is supposedly so hard, I was seeking get you to explain what you think would be fair treatment.

                How exactly did I misread you?

                Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

                by Meteor Blades on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 06:00:14 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  "clearly i have no ability to communicate" (0+ / 0-)

                  that was a literal statement.  it wasn't being sarcastic.  i said one thing and everyone thought i was saying something else.  

                  i wrote a one line comment title scoffing at the idea that programmers should write hacking laws.  

                  then i went on in the comment to make an angry rant about hackers.  hackers make me angry.  so sue me.  

                  i have listened to hackers whining for years about how unfair it is that they face such hard punishments for hacking.  god forbid they just stop hacking.

                  this kid, aaron, he killed himself.  he's dead.  and everyone can point the finger at the prosecution, but the kid is dead because he was a fucking idiot.  what he did was as stupid as chaining one's self to train track.  maybe the train stops and you made your point.  or maybe your body is torn to pieces and you die needlessly because you couldn't stop and THINK about a way to do what you want to do that isn't fucking stupid.  

                  who's talking about that right now?  if what this kid did wasn't morally wrong, even if it was legally wrong, who's having a discussion about how to get from A to D without someone having to face prison or suicide.  nobody.  instead, everyone's talking about the terrible injustice and turning the kid into a martyr.  

                  and even though you all KNOW that the laws aren't going to get easier for hackers, you are still lionized this kid.  so, now, there will be other kids inspired by this kid and they will get themselves into trouble and maybe go to prison or kill themselves or even get killed (depending on who they hack).  

                  do you know which comment you should have focused on that i wrote instead of the whine comment?  the one where i said that hacking is more dangerous that guns.  this kid aaron was like a kid playing with a gun.  his hacking ended up getting him killed.  while you all have great comments about gun laws here on daily kos, you all are totally missing the bigger issue on hacking.  programming is vastly more dangerous than a gun.  to everyone, including the programmers.  

    •  AntonBursch- You asked/stated (14+ / 0-)
      yeah, let programmers write hacking laws. ?!?
      Why the hell not?
      Oil companies get a big fat seat at the table when energy laws and industry regulations are being forged, and guess what?
      We don't even get standing room in the fucking corner.

      Fossil fuel energy executives frack with abandon because they were the ones who got to write the 'regulations' (ha ha ha) and people whose tap water is now flammable are told to go pound sand.

      Why the hell shouldn't programmers and hackers and IT professionals who actually understand that the internet isn't just a bunch of t00bs that trucks drive through dumping emails into your aol inbox.

      It's past time for the laws to be changed, and WE need representation and a voice in how those laws are crafted, because they sure as fuck don't have a clue.


      "When the powerless are shut out of the media, we will make the media irrelevant" ~♥~ Anonymous ~♥~

      by Lisa Lockwood on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 05:25:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  they shouldn't for the same reason oil shouldn't (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eyesbright, emelyn

        since when did we carve out exceptions to standing against industry people writing the laws for themselves?

        •  We (as in WE the People) (5+ / 0-)

          should always have a seat at the table. That was what our 'representatives' were supposed to be, once upon a time.
          Sadly, once big business was given free rein to 'assist' in writing their own regulatory legislation, we the people got pretty much sent down the rabbit hole.
          I'm suggesting that we be included in crafting legislation that meets criteria established by a broad base of experts and interested parties, NOT talking about carving out exceptions to standing against industry people writing their own laws. Just including 'us' in the process. Fair is fair.


          "When the powerless are shut out of the media, we will make the media irrelevant" ~♥~ Anonymous ~♥~

          by Lisa Lockwood on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 01:54:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site