Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: aldo_14 on July 11, 2005, 07:08:46 am
-
This (http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/usmck1102vaind.pdf) is an inditement against a bloke who tried to break into a number of Us government websites.
anyways, it's censored.
Unless you select all and paste into a word document :o (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/11/mckinnon_indictment_snafu/)
What amuses me, is that this is the second time this has happened.... you could do the exact same on a classified US Army report - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/03/military_report_secrets/
-
I heard about the first case. You really think they'd have learned from that one :)
-
Oh. My. God.
Come on! That's too ridicioulous to believe.....
-
Shh, keep it down. Do you want them to catch on or something? If people can just keep their mouth shut, we could be reading classified reports for years!
-
[color=66ff00]Who wants to put money on his extradition happening due to Tony and the boys yet again bowing to the Yanks?
[/color]
-
Bah. If he was hacking in to find proof of UFOs I say let them have him. He'll fit right in over there. :D
-
Maeg, I do hope you are not implying he should get off. I really hope what you mean is that he should be tried there in London.
-
I can't see how he could be though even if that's what he did mean. All the computers that were hacked were in the USA.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Maeg, I do hope you are not implying he should get off. I really hope what you mean is that he should be tried there in London.
[color=66ff00]Of course he should be tried but he's a British citizen so he should be tried in the UK according to UK laws.
america has a way of treating other nationalities as 'lesser beings'.
Just as an interesting thought: What would everyone have said had he actually found the evidence that he had been seeking. I'm sure he would have got off. Massive speculation on my part though. :)
[/color]
-
seems stinky to me for some reason :doubt:
-
Originally posted by Nico
seems stinky to me for some reason :doubt:
[color=66ff00]It's the american mentality that 'our justice system is best' when it's widely accepted that it's an utter disgusting joke.
Rich people rule, laws are made by inept old men (particularly in reference to computing and the internet) and it's a simple case of a large company keeping a small company in the courts long enough for the smaller company to run out of cash and lose by proxy.
[/color]
-
I don't know Maeg. I prefer the American criminal justice system to every other one to which I've been exposed. I've lived everywhere from the Middle East to Japan, Australia, Germany, etc. The British have the most entertaining court system, but I'll take the american Justice system any day.
The joke you're referring to is the American CIVIL justice system, which is not about justice OR truth, but about proving who wins.
As for the evidence the guy is looking for: it doesn't matter if he found it or not. He still broke the law. There's no protection for someone who breaks the law to prove someone else did something wrong. Vigilanteism is the exact opposite of justice.
-
[color=66ff00]It's not about protection. It's about the rights of a person to be tried in a fair and just manner according to their citizenship.
Have I missed something or will this guy not be tried under the civil american justice system? If not which system will he be tried under?
I'm also not trying to back this guy's behaviour but irrespective of his crimes was the outcome not an attempt to serve the greater good? In the UK this will aid in his defence (as it should), in america it will be entirely ignored.
[/color]
-
He'll be tried as a criminal in the US if he's extradited. If he's not extradited, he will be tried as a criminal in the UK. Its pretty simple.
I don't care if he gets extradited, just so long as he goes to trial.
-
I can't help but think of the Kenny Richie case.
Not that the UK hasn't had it's odd one miscarriage of justice. We're just somewhat lucky in that people rarely die as a result of one.
-
Acrobat sucks. Why won't anyone listen to me? :p
And when it comes to government and computers, I don't trust them worth a damn. Know why? Because they've been validating ever more intrusive methods of poking around people's computers by private companies. Because they've constantly villainized end-users and upheld the companies that are trashing the end-users' computers with spyware.
Further, there's been repeated labelling of the government as all sorts of people as 'terrorists'. But there's no clear definition of what a terrorist is. But if you're labelled a terrorist, then you're most certainly a bad person, no two ways about it.
I can't bring myself to trust a government that runs on fear and anecdotal evidence and the sort of shallow labelling I'd expect to find among a group of freshmen in High School.
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
And when it comes to government and computers, I don't trust them worth a damn. Know why? Because they've been validating ever more intrusive methods of poking around people's computers by private companies. Because they've constantly villainized end-users and upheld the companies that are trashing the end-users' computers with spyware.
...
I can't bring myself to trust a government that runs on fear and anecdotal evidence and the sort of shallow labelling I'd expect to find among a group of freshmen in High School.
You want to fix that? VOTE. Get your friends to VOTE. Get your parents to VOTE. Talk to people who do VOTE and change their minds to VOTE the way you want. Don't just ***** and whine about the government. Fix it. VOTE.
Did I remind you to VOTE? If not, VOTE!!!!
Sorry, dude, but this is something that pisses me off. Everyone and their brother *****es and whines about how its old white guys screwing over the youth of america. Yet were was the youth of america in the last election? They were a damned no-show.
VOTE DAMN YOU.
-
Really? From what I heard, they voted in overwhelming numbers. But the problem is that while your vote is important, it's not nearly as important as your money. And the old white guys have more of it than anyone. That, and the candidates usually tend to be pretty computer illiterate as a whole, regardless or colour or sex.
-
[color=66ff00]I don't think you understand mik, democracy is an illusion in america, it's a facade to placate the masses.
Bush's supporters fixed the election not once but twice and it was blatently obvious, any attempt to point this out was quashed.
america is the richest country in the world yet so many live below the poverty line, over ten times more money is given to the military than education.
Keep the people stupid, keep them afraid, keep the money rolling in.
[/color]
-
You're right abou the military vs education. You're right about the number of people below the poverty line. You're even right about the strategy of keeping people dumb and afraid.
You are, I think, wrong about the the elections. One might have been fixed (the first), but the second was not. Only the most bitter of liberals can even claim that.
Democracy is not an illusion, its a muscle that has been allowed to atrophy because the people are not exercising it.
Rictor: despite what you might have heard, the 18-25 set did not vote in overwhelming numbers. They voted in unprecedented numbers. One in ten is unprecedented, but its still an underwhelming 10%. All in all, election turn out was up--more voters than ever before, per capita, in the entire history of the nation. It was still far short of even 40% of elibible voters though. Imagine that: Just over one THIRD of American voters bothered to get off their fat lazy asses and vote. If that's not atrophy, I don't know what is.
So, again I say to all you useless bastards: get off your lazy whiny pathetic ass and VOTE. I don't care if you vote for a split Fidel Castro/Saddam Hussein ticket. I just want you to VOTE and quit your whinging. I'll settle for you just VOTING.
-
[color=66ff00]Given the numerous 'errors (www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles8/Solo_Fixed-Elections.htm)' with the voting machines and the immediacy at which John Kerry threw in the towel even when there was a good chance a recount could have proclaimed him victor I'd say there's something sinister about the last election's proceedings.
[/color]
-
What about voting for the Jerry Falwell/ Lois Farakhan ticket? I guess they'de have to go after the Jews or something.
Though seriously, was it less than 40%? I didn't think it was that bad. Maybe like 60% or so, but less than half? And Bush is supposed to be the most controversial Prez in recent times.
-
vote? for who, when was the last time a candidate gave you any sort of decent explaination on what they were going to do? when was the last time you've heard someone running for senate describeing some of the laws he was planning to write in any sort of detail, all you get these days is: "I'm a steriotypical republican conservitive and I aproved this mesage"
I voted BTW.
-
nevertheless,, hacking US computers (including top-secret Military computers) is a federal offense, and he should get no less than about 40 years in prison. i think they would also peg that as terrorism, no doubt.
[EDIT] and i would very much like to kick that bastards ass.
-
Originally posted by Cobra
still, hacking US computers (including top-secret Military computers) is a federal offense, and he should get no less than about 40 years in prison. i think they would also peg that as terrorism, no doubt.
[color=66ff00]Yeah, notice your use of the term 'federal offence'. :rolleyes:
[/color]
-
feh, offence is Britain's way of spelling. :p
-
[color=66ff00]The spelling was my error and isn't what's relevant, the word federal is what's relevant.
Federal offences are carried out by american criminals not British.
[/color]
-
[OT][blatant ripoff] your use of offence confuses and infuriates me. :p[/blatant ripoff][/OT]
-
do you realy think what he did warrents him getting ass raped funtill he is in his late 70s, all he did, apparently, was looked at stuff.
-
ah, but if you look at the document, he hacked an air force computer. that's one of the things that got him there.
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
vote? for who, when was the last time a candidate gave you any sort of decent explaination on what they were going to do?
If that's the problem go in and spoil your ballot paper deliberately. 100 million votes that basically say neither might encourage independants to run.
Or you could just vote for an independant who does say what he'll do.
I know you voted but 100m people didn't and that's almost twice the number who actually voted for Bush. If you could get even half of those people to vote for someone as a protest vote who ever you'd put up would have won.
Democracy is such a stupid system at times. I remember reading a report that said that in the UK the Liberal Democrats would win a landslide victory is all the people who didn't vote for them because "they couldn't win" actually voted for them. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]I don't think you understand mik, democracy is an illusion in america, it's a facade to placate the masses.
Bush's supporters fixed the election not once but twice and it was blatently obvious, any attempt to point this out was quashed.
america is the richest country in the world yet so many live below the poverty line, over ten times more money is given to the military than education.
Keep the people stupid, keep them afraid, keep the money rolling in.
[/color]
I agree completly. I didn't vote. I am not even registered to vote. Why? Because I can see the big picture. Voting does nothing. Besides, I knew my state was going to go to Kerry anyway.
Not to mention the deception and outright lies that are going on, especially with this administration. The government is not by the people and not for the people. The whole "exporting freedom" thing they have going on is just a way to distract an already gullible public.
Or you could just vote for an independant who does say what he'll do.
For all the good it will do. Independants in this country only get about 5% or less of the vote put together. People here just vote for their party, not the candidate. Is this REALLY democracy? I don't think so.
-
I hate to say this but voting should be mandatory.
-
That'd be even worse. You'd have people going to the ballots and choosing random candidates based on how funny their name sounds, because they won't be arsed to do any research.
What we need is some kind of incentive for making good voting choices. :p
-
Originally posted by Kosh
For all the good it will do. Independants in this country only get about 5% or less of the vote put together. People here just vote for their party, not the candidate. Is this REALLY democracy? I don't think so.
They only get 5% because people like you can't be bothered to vote. Like I said even going in and deliberately spoiling your ballot paper is better than not voting.
Not voting lets everyone assume you don't care. Spoiling the paper at least proves that you hate everyone.
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
That'd be even worse. You'd have people going to the ballots and choosing random candidates based on how funny their name sounds, because they won't be arsed to do any research.
What we need is some kind of incentive for making good voting choices. :p
Or they could vote null if they don't know who to vote. Anything is better than not voting.
-
So instead of having most of the population not voting, we'd have most of the population making meaningless votes. :p
-
Yes, but I assume most of them would at least get informed on who they would like to vote rather than voting null. I bet it would raise the ammount of people voting on candidates.
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
So instead of having most of the population not voting, we'd have most of the population making meaningless votes. :p
Which would prove to other candidates that there are a large number of people out there willing to vote but unwilling to vote for what they see at the moment.
-
Not voting lets everyone assume you don't care.
They can assume that if they want, they are irrelevant.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Which would prove to other candidates that there are a large number of people out there willing to vote but unwilling to vote for what they see at the moment.
Actually it would just show that there are a large number of people who don't want to be fined/thrown in prison.
-
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]It's the american mentality that 'our justice system is best' when it's widely accepted that it's an utter disgusting joke.
Rich people rule, laws are made by inept old men (particularly in reference to computing and the internet) and it's a simple case of a large company keeping a small company in the courts long enough for the smaller company to run out of cash and lose by proxy.
[/color]
No... In fact I meant it seemed stinky just because there was exactly the right amount of bad thing for it to look real, but still make a good enough view of the subject.
I'm usually not a conspiracy guy, but there, it really is too big imho.
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
Actually it would just show that there are a large number of people who don't want to be fined/thrown in prison.
Only if you brought in mandatory voting. At the moment it would have that effect.
-
You're right. Don't vote.
-
If you don't care, don't vote.
If you care (or want people to care), then vote.
OTOH, maybe mandatory voting is what the US needs to shock it out of its withdrawn state right now. It depends how many people would see it as their 'duty' and research it further, and how many people would see it as a 'chore' and rebel against it.
-
:ick: no. Mandatory voting fixes the symptom, not the cause. It won't help and it will likely make things worse.
-
Not really. If it takes equal effort to spoil your vote as to cast a legitimate one, people would likely take the extra few seconds to vote for the least dislikable choice.
Though one could argue that voter apathy is a sign that all parties are up to such a high standard that voters feel their daily lives will not be affected by a change in government, which is arguably the point.
-
No. Mandatory voting increases the likelihood of the voting populace being manipulated by the politicians they're voting for. Participation increases but apathy and personal research remain constant.
-
Personal research almost doesn't exist in this country.
-
Which is why mandatory voting is a bad idea. You'd get idiots voting for the person they found the most attractive or other crap like that.
Anyone who cares so little about the process that they don't want to vote shouldn't be forced to do so.
On the other hand the second manditory voting comes in I'm running for parliment. I've got a tactic in mind that would probably get me elected (I'm 100% certain I wouldn't lose my deposit) :D
-
Personally, i like Fry's mentality when he said;
"Oh yeah, I was gonna vote for you once...but voting isn't cool, so I stayed home and got trashed on Listerine"
:p
-
*Blatantly ignores discussion of matters of national security*
My favorite Futurama quote has gotta be:
PROFESSOR: "And Fry, you've got that brain thing!"
FRY: "I already did!"
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Which is why mandatory voting is a bad idea. You'd get idiots voting for the person they found the most attractive or other crap like that.
Anyone who cares so little about the process that they don't want to vote shouldn't be forced to do so.
On the other hand the second manditory voting comes in I'm running for parliment. I've got a tactic in mind that would probably get me elected (I'm 100% certain I wouldn't lose my deposit) :D
You're changing your name to 'none of the above'?
-
:) I can see that working quite well can't you? :)
-
Which is why mandatory voting is a bad idea. You'd get idiots voting for the person they found the most attractive or other crap like that.
That already happens in this country, with most people who do vote. With mandatory voting we would just get the entire country doing that.
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
That'd be even worse. You'd have people going to the ballots and choosing random candidates based on how funny their name sounds, because they won't be arsed to do any research.
What we need is some kind of incentive for making good voting choices. :p
Really? The funny named people don't win here, where voting is mandatory. In fact, it works quite well.
-
Psst.. on the topic of voting the two party system screws us over. It's just plain wrong they should have a cap limit on advertising take the best part about socialism and apply to capitalism and you have awesomingsisme ala me!