Slashdot Mirror
What Do You Think of Online Vigilantes?
gwoodrow asks: "I'm a member of the (primarily) Mac community Spymac. I originally joined for the 1 gb of email, but eventually found myself joining in on discussions in the forum. Today, I received an email from a supposedly anonymous Spymac member ("supposedly" because the smart guy didn't mask his IP). Basically, it said that he or she had harvested 10,000 member screen names/email addresses from Spymac's pages and that this, paired with the ability to view individual member's profiles, created a major problem because of the extent of information so readily available. The email this person sent out and the forum discussion that follow are available here. All cracks and personal opinion about Spymac aside, what do Slashdot members think of online 'vigilante' justice?"
"Some viruses are released with little notes within that say things like - 'this is why you need to do X or Y to fix your software' Some hackers have also gained infamy by hacking a major system allegedly to help. Do you support such actions and why? Are virus/trojan writers, hackers, and spammers doing a noble deed or going about things in the wrong way? If you don't agree generally, are there exceptions when online vigilantes are fully in the right? Is the accessibility of vulnerabilities a good excuse to partake in such actions, or should there be ethical bounds regardless?"
anyone who uses p2p apps should join up. they request that you only report websites and stuff, but ips and timestamps are probably fine. all the reports are forwarded to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
The More Laws, the less Justice --Marcus Tullius Cicero
...but I'm too busy watching this cool video of Osama Bin Laden committing suicide.
"Atlanta's yearly net peanut harvest yeild between 1990 and 2000 declined at an average rate of 6.3% per square hectare. All cracks and personal opinion about Atlanta aside, what do Slashdot members think of online 'vigilante' justice?"
WTF does "vigilante justice" have to do with the whole premise of this post about whiny Mac users?
There are 100 people in society.
2 people are brilliant.
20 people are greedy.
20 people are gullible.
10 people are opposed.
48 people are sacked with taxes.
5 greedy people beat up 2 brilliant people to keep them quiet.
5 greedy people convince 20 gullible people.
20 gullible people make noise.
48 people sacked by taxes are distracted.
48 working people convince 10 who are opposed to appease the 20 gullible people.
5 greedy people, 20 gullible people, 20 working people, and 2 who are opposed go to the polls and vote.
5 greedy people sit back, enjoy the show, and profit.
This guy compiling databases of online user info without the express written consent of the user falls into the 20 gullible people category. Or he falls into the 5 greedy people convincing the 20 gullible people.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
I give shout outs and props to Anti-slash for all of their work. Special props to faker, he says things like I would.
CB
free ipod and free gmail!
Was I the only person who misread the title? Immediately I started thinking of oh yeah AOL users bunch of... and then I reread the title and thought whoops slow down cowboy wrong crowd :)
are servers of been compremised! ..the twinkie?
Time to turn on the hackerman signal!
Shines light of a diet coke and twinkies
[90 minutes alter]
I..puff...came..wheeaze..as fast...cough..as I could. Where's
ahhh, hackermenr, thats just the the signal.
WHat! no twinkie? stupid users...NI!
[Commisioner turns to police chief]
Damn, thats annoying.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
In brightest day, against the blackest hat,
no evil shall escape my hack.
Let those who worship evil's might,
beware my power,
GREEN SCREEN'S LIGHT!
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Joke(s): It's a little long, but anything that will degrade, humialiate or upset those nasty, disgusting, delusional subhumans is worth the reading...
Randy S from Raleigh NC
An Englishman, an American and a Frenchman are all in Saudi Arabia, sharing a smuggled crate of booze when, all of a sudden, Saudi police rush in and arrest them. The mere possession of alcohol is a severe offense in Saudi Arabia, so for the terrible crime of actually being caught consuming the booze, they are all sentenced to death! However, after many months and with the help of very good lawyers, they are able to successfully appeal their sentences down to life imprisonment. By a stroke of luck, it was a Saudi national holiday the day their trial finished, and the extremely benevolent Sheik decided they could be released after each receiving just 20 lashes of the whip.
As they were preparing for their punishment, the Sheik announced: "It's my first wife's birthday today, and she has asked me to allow each of you one wish before your whipping."
The Englishman was first in line, he thought for a while and then said: "Please tie a pillow to my back."
This was done, but the pillow only lasted 10 lashes before the whip went through. When the punishment was done he had to be carried away bleeding and crying with pain.
The Frenchman was next up. After watching the Engishman in horror he said smugly: "Please fix deux pillows to my back."
But even two pillows could only take 15 lashes before the whip went through again and the Frenchman was soon led away whimpering loudly (as they do).
The American was the last one up, but before he could say anything, the Sheik turned to him and said: "You are from a most beautiful part of the world and your people are the kindest and most generous in the world. For this, you may have two wishes!"
"Thank you, your Most Royal and Merciful highness", The American replied. "In recognition of your kindness, my first wish is that you give me not 20, but 100 lashes."
"Not only are you an honorable, handsome and powerful man, you are also very brave". The Sheik said with an admiring look on his face.
"If 100 lashes is what you desire, then so be it. And your second wish, what is it to be?" the Sheik asked.
"Tie the Frenchman to my back."
Not only that, but he also managed to debunk your claim before you even made it, by mentioning the term "dinosaurs". Unless you want to try and claim that dinosaurs never existed and begin to look like a silly lunatic in the meantime...
[Off topic, but the grandparent started it]
The reason the regilious/anti-religious arguments are still going on is that neither side bothers to learn the other sides arguments, because - hey - they're wrong and its a waste of time.
Each side only learns enough of the other to see that the other side must be wrong.
So now the subject cropped up, lets take a look:
1) Just to cover the 6,000 year lark from the bible; its supposed to be 6,000 years since Adam and Eve left the harden of Eden after eating the fruit. No-one knows how long they were in there before they ate it, or what was outside the garden keeping the eco-system going.
2) And if good old Noah's flood did happen it might have screwed up the climate something rotton so there goes the basis for carbon dating (carbon ratios in the atmopshere).
Thats what you get when your theory damages someone elses premise.
So lets not fight about it; most people don't bother to learn "their sides doctrine" well enough to make a case anyway, or even enough to know if they actually believe it, so for both sides its not even a matter of belief but ignorant and partisan faith.
There's a difference between wanting truth and wanting to be right.
Sam
blog.sam.liddicott.com