Slashdot Mirror


Teen Sentenced for Releasing Variant of Blaster Worm

ScentCone writes "Minnesota teen Jeffrey Lee Parsons got a year and half for releasing a Blaster variant. The lightweight sentence was due, said the judge, to the parents' neglect. Quoting the judge: 'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.' Which means most slashdotters basically have a get out of jail free card."

438 comments

  1. Not true by ActionJesus · · Score: 5, Funny

    I resent this sterotype that I "lock myself in my room and create my own reality".

    Im playing World of Warcraft: surely thats Blizzards trademarked reality?

    1. Re:Not true by packeteer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No Kidding...

      I used to read slashdot a lot. I have over 1000 posts, Karma bonus, I have had articles submitted. But i NEVER read slashdot anymore. Its not becuase i dont enjoy it. Its becuasei play WoW all the time im on my computer. Why am i here typing this up right now then if i never read slashdot. Well becuase there is a que to connect the the server. Well time to go check to see if i can go back to my reality.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    2. Re:Not true by Kjuib · · Score: 1

      I pay good money to "borrow" Blizzard's reality... it is a worthy reality.. and much better then any old reality I could come up with... except maybe one with hot gritz...uhm....

      --
      - Your stupidity got you into this mess, why can't it get you out? -Will Rogers
    3. Re:Not true by Meagermanx · · Score: 4, Funny

      See? This kid should be sentenced to a year and a half of free WoW and absolutely NO compilers!

    4. Re:Not true by Seumas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'

      Yeah, there's all of those unhealthy millionaires like Douglas Adams, Stephen King, the Wachowski brothers, Stan Lee, locking themselves into a room alone to create their own realities. How evil!

    5. Re:Not true by powerlinekid · · Score: 4, Funny

      Shit, if thats the punishment I need to get my hands on the Blaster source...

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    6. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Quoting the judge: 'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality


      Well, that's how I do my best work. Unfortunately, the real world around me is pretty grim, and when I can get to my little house and work on my computers, then I have something that is my own. I'm sure the Judge in this case was just trying to say something important about writing viruses, but there are those of us who do decent law-abiding coding work, and create something worthwhile under those circumstances.

    7. Re:Not true by sketerpot · · Score: 2, Funny
      But i NEVER read slashdot anymore.

      And I never post on slashdot.

    8. Re:Not true by deblau · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen Stephen King?

      --
      This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
    9. Re:Not true by PoopJuggler · · Score: 0

      Are you suggesting that Stephen King wrote the Klez virus?

    10. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Motherfucker, the Wackedupski brothers? One of em had a sex change, the other one has a live-in dominatrix. Yeah, fucking examples of mental stability right there.

    11. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, at least rewrite and profit from someone else's.

    12. Re:Not true by AndyL · · Score: 1

      I can't remember the last time I even used a computer.

    13. Re:Not true by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wachowski brothers are a bad example. Firstly, they didn't really create their own reality so much as they assembled it from a couple Japanese cartoons and Tron. Secondly, a theatrical production involves a hell of a lot of interpersonal interactions; you have to constantly deal with actors, various production teams, and funders.

      Douglas Adams died while going to the gym, so he wasn't exactly locking himself in a room. Stephen King may or may not actually be healthy, it's an iffy question. If he is, I'd imagine he's fairly capable of separating himself from his own stories. I don't know enough about Stan Lee to comment on that one, though, he may be a valid example.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    14. Re:Not true by omicronish · · Score: 1

      My god all I've heard about that game makes it sound exactly like crack. And all my friends are telling me to get it too! I have so much homework and not enough time, but ohh the peer pressure...

    15. Re:Not true by wdr1 · · Score: 0

      what's a computer???

      --
      SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
    16. Re:Not true by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Oh, look at mister big shot, used a computer! I've been dead, stuffed into a trash can, and, ironically enough, rotting in this "self-storage" facility since before there were computers!

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    17. Re:Not true by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      the Wachowski brothers

      What does tightrope walking have to do with it?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    18. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      01110111 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110111 01101111 01110010 01100100 01110011 00111111

    19. Re:Not true by kazoosandinstruments · · Score: 2, Insightful

      binary encoded ascii for: what are words?

    20. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell your friends to go fuck themselves. Do your homework and kick their stinking butts, own them, OWN THEM I tell ya! I pity the fool who gives in to peer pressure. Fucking shithead friends.

    21. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leave it to a slashbot to defend never leaving their room as healthy!

    22. Re:Not true by operagost · · Score: 1

      Your reality sucks.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    23. Re:Not true by menscher · · Score: 1

      Gah, sad. I thought you were asking what the words were for the above-posted binary coded ascii. Wasn't till I'd translated the entire thing, and re-read your post, that I discovered the truth.

    24. Re:Not true by moonsammy · · Score: 1

      Stephen King may or may not actually be healthy, it's an iffy question.

      Well, he's unhealthy as far as his eyes go at the very least. And I can't imagine all of those years of drug and alcohol abuse did many of his major organs any good at all.

      If he is, I'd imagine he's fairly capable of separating himself from his own stories.

      Clearly you haven't read The Dark Tower 5-7. He's one of the main freaking characters.

    25. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Nice joe-job there. I was going to ignore it, because obviously you're just some jerk trying to get 14249755 in trouble, but then I realized that any idiot who would sign up with FreeWhatevers.com deserves a backhanded slap across the face from five friends, and five of their friends, and so on, and so on, and so on.

      LART sent. Hey 14249755, you annoyed all your relatives and cow-orkers for nothing! LOL!

    26. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To add another to the list... Linus Torvalds locked himself in his room and created a reality that most of us consider healthier than the common alternative!

    27. Re:Not true by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Yeah, Larry Wachowski definitely strikes me as the epitome of mental health.

      Uh oh, send in the nihilists and moral relativists...

    28. Re:Not true by flonker · · Score: 1

      Get a second monitor. I've got AO running on one monitor, where I just killed a Borer Scorpion, as I was typing this.

      I do tend to die rather more often this way, but, hey, I'm getting a lot more wasting time done at once.

    29. Re:Not true by brunson · · Score: 1
      I know this is a little off topic, but it's a pet peeve.
      Pechman said she was sentencing him at the low end of the range because although he was 18 at the time of the attack, his maturity level was much younger than that.

      So, this guy is determined not to have the facilities of a grownup, but there's a 9 year old kid in Denver killed his little brother and is being tried as an adult.

      Okay, sure it was a horrible, horrible thing, but he's NINE YEARS OLD. Just because the crime is bad doesn't mean he somehow had the facilities to understand the implications of his actions.

      Our legal system is fuqued up.
      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      Jesus loves you, I think you suck
    30. Re:Not true by xbrokenwingx · · Score: 1

      hell yea it is

      --
      }{011Y ~ teh chiXoR
    31. Re:Not true by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Can you post a link to the story? (About the 9 year old being tried as an adult.) I tried googling for it and found nothing.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  2. Haha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get out of jail free card! FUNNY! REALLY!

  3. Goin Up Da River by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Ha! A year and a half, by the time he's out of the jug it'll all be different (except luddites who are still using the same version of Windows they bought over 18 months back) and he won't even be able to recognize the world anymore.

    Maybe Their Charity, the Lord Protector, will assign him to tranlate old MS-DOS textbooks.

    18 months in a Minnesota prison may only seem like 2000 years. Maybe his cellmate will be like that guy from Fargo...

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Goin Up Da River by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 5, Funny

      18 months sucks from a loss of life perspective, but you won't be totally obsolete when you get out.

      1. The Web will still not even have even half the sites HTML 4 compliant, XHTML compliant sites will still be less than 10% at best.
      2. Java will still be slow, cumbersome and buggy. Most Java programs will still abort with exceptions (what good is exception handling if you just crash) much of the time.
      3. GNOME will still be siphoning mindshare from KDE. (the license wars are over, join forces with KDE already!)
      4. Software will still be bloated.
      5. CPUs will just be faster versions of the ones today, but never fast enough.
      6. Apple will still be expensive, Apple users will still be elitist.
      7. There will still be plenty of lawsuits going on.
      8. Same with patents.
      9. IPv6 still won't be available to most of the Internet.
      10. People will still worship XML and web services, but not actually have a use for them.
      11. There will still be many sites which only work in IE.
      12. There will still be many sites that need Active X.
      13. Same for windows only plugins.

      Mid 2006 will be a lot like today.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    2. Re:Goin Up Da River by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Having the solitude to read and think is a geeks dream. Hell, if locking yourself secluded from the outside world is what your used too, how is jail time that much different?

      Ok, so don't drop the soap. Mind your own damn business. Learn not to be piss shy.

      Seriously though. If you get free room and food, then applying yourself to study can be all you need. At least you wont be bothered by the "outside world"

      Mind you, I've never been to jail nor would I want too.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:Goin Up Da River by servognome · · Score: 1

      Except we'll have flying cars... Of the FUTURE!

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    4. Re:Goin Up Da River by pilgrim23 · · Score: 1

      I find it interesting that this world view of the "Big Man on Campus" (tm), usually named Ted, Biff, or some other similar monosyllable, is now the acceptable world in social integration, and justice. I am glad the judge is saving us from such social misfits as Albert Einstein, and Bill Gates. now where did I put my stone knives and bearskins....

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    5. Re:Goin Up Da River by shadowmatter · · Score: 3, Funny

      On the other side of the coin, Longhorn will have been releas.... Oh wait, never mind. It's a one-sided coin. - sm

    6. Re:Goin Up Da River by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Tiger will be, though. : )

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    7. Re:Goin Up Da River by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yeah but the difference between a virus writer and Bill Gates is... eh, forget it.

    8. Re:Goin Up Da River by the+gnat · · Score: 1

      I am glad the judge is saving us from such social misfits as Albert Einstein, and Bill Gates

      Um.

      1. Whatever makes you think this kid is as smart as Einstein or even Gates? He release some ripoff of a Windows worm, and got caught. He's just a stupid vandal with nothing better to do, who's not adept enough to cover his tracks.

      2. When did Einstein or Gates resort to pointless vandalism because they were too pathetic to do something useful?

    9. Re:Goin Up Da River by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha. Best comment all day. :)

    10. Re:Goin Up Da River by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, and Lion will have been previewed to the public by then. Can't wait for WWDC '06!

    11. Re:Goin Up Da River by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who ever said that albert einstein or bill gates were social misfits? on the contrary, i would argue that the reason we know both of those names is because the were very socially *fit* individuals.

    12. Re:Goin Up Da River by John+Pliskin · · Score: 1

      Go look up Gates, he was thrown in the pokie you know.

      Hell he even stole a CAT at one point.

      $

    13. Re:Goin Up Da River by ignorant_newbie · · Score: 2, Interesting
      2. When did Einstein or Gates resort to pointless vandalism because they were too pathetic to do something useful?

      ignoring for a moment your confusing grouping of einstein and gates, what i'd like to know is: when was the last time gates did something usefull? or even, when was the last time he paid someone to do something usefull?

      apple basic is the only thing i can come up with

    14. Re:Goin Up Da River by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Along with point 1, slashdot *still* won't render properly in Firefox.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    15. Re:Goin Up Da River by snuf23 · · Score: 0
      "6. Apple will still be expensive, Apple users will still be elitist."

      Let's just get the obligatory Apple troll out of the way...

      Expensive? Let's see you find a PC that is priced the same as a Mac Mini and has such awesome speed power and software!

      Oh yeah and it doesn't run spyware! So there!

      And the OS only needs a one button mouse, because it was designed to only use one button unlike stupid multi mouse interfaces like Windows and UNIX.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    16. Re:Goin Up Da River by AndyL · · Score: 1

      The cyborg overlords will probably throw him for a loop though.

    17. Re:Goin Up Da River by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      The onion tells me he granted himself 18 dexterity and 20 charisma. That's pretty useful.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    18. Re:Goin Up Da River by handsome+b · · Score: 1

      GNOME beats the panties off of KDE. Mindshare or otherwise, they're doing a better job.

      mreh

    19. Re:Goin Up Da River by the+gnat · · Score: 1

      ignoring for a moment your confusing grouping of einstein and gates

      Wasn't my grouping! Blame the parent poster.

      when was the last time gates did something usefull? or even, when was the last time he paid someone to do something usefull?

      Well, I share your opinion of MS products, but again, comparison was not mine. However, in all fairness to Gates, I greatly admire his philanthropic work, and wish he'd quit his day job and spend all his time funding research into diseases afflicting the Third World. All of which is quite a lot more useful than unleashing yet another worm on poor office assistants. (And on the tech support guys who have to clean up the mess afterwards.)

    20. Re:Goin Up Da River by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      That was so lifelike, you actually got moded up!

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    21. Re:Goin Up Da River by metlin · · Score: 1

      what i'd like to know is: when was the last time gates did something usefull? or even, when was the last time he paid someone to do something usefull?

      Helped bring computers to the masses. But I suppose you'd disagree - so perhaps you should have a look at "something" useful he paid to get done.

    22. Re:Goin Up Da River by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Ok, so don't drop the soap. Mind your own damn business. Learn not to be piss shy.

      I think it's more like: watch your step every single waking moment, because your fellows don't need an excuse to hurt you.

      I think it's more like: pack a big jar of vaseline to avoid tearing of the flesh around your anus, because chances are fairly high that you'll get raped if you can't defend yourself.

      I think it's more like: what's left of the free food, once those stronger than you have decided they don't want what's left, seeing as you can't even defend what's on your plate.

      I don't know where you guys get your ideas about prison and jail, or the idea that you could easily survive there by just minding your own business.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    23. Re:Goin Up Da River by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac troll loving on OS X and hating on Unix. Now I've seen everything. Yes, I _am_ new here.

    24. Re:Goin Up Da River by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I've never been to either jail or prison. But I've always been under the impression that prison was different and reserved for violent offenders. Also, don't the keep inmates separated in groups based on the offense such as violent and white collar crimes?

      If I'm wrong and you've been in jail/prison, please do tell.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    25. Re:Goin Up Da River by accelleron · · Score: 1

      speak for yourself...

      I'm using Firefox 1.0 right now, it's rendering fine @ 1024x768...

      --
      Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.
    26. Re:Goin Up Da River by operagost · · Score: 1

      14. FreeBSD will still be dead.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    27. Re:Goin Up Da River by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "what i'd like to know is: when was the last time gates did something usefull?"

      As if Slashdot would post something like that.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    28. Re:Goin Up Da River by thephotoman · · Score: 1

      /. renders properly 100% of the time in the latest nightly builds. However, those builds cannot handle Wiki-Wiki quite yet.

      --
      Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    29. Re:Goin Up Da River by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I've never been to jail nor prison, but I've worked with quite a few that have.

      In certain cases, white collar criminals are separated from the violent one re: Martha Stewart in a minimum security prison. This is the exception rather than the rule, and a lot can depend on the judge, your lawyer, and the prosecutor. After you're turned over to your state Dept. of Corrections, it'll be up to whatever overworked bureaucrat handles your case to decide where you belong, if the judge hasn't dictated otherwise. And you'll just be another file the bureaucrat has to get out of his inbox. Surprise! You're no longer human. You are now another worthless body to be warehoused.

      Some prisons will have a wing to segregate the ultra violent from the general population. But don't assume that the general population isn't going to be violent.

      Oh, one last thing. I have talked with an avid reader who was imprisoned. Prison libraries generally aren't well stocked with good literature.

      So now you're looking at a year and a half of boredom and fear for your safety, with time off for good behavior. Chances are you can get out in 9 months. Just don't plan on finding a good job when you get out. Most employers don't want to hire anyone who's been to prison. Hell, just a few days jail time will put you at a severe disadvantage you when apply for a job, even for a misdemeanor charge.

      The good news is that you might be able to smuggle in your iPod Shuffle. =)

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    30. Re:Goin Up Da River by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      speak for yourself...

      I'm using Firefox 0.8 right now, it's rendering fine @ 1024x768...

    31. Re:Goin Up Da River by JohnRoche · · Score: 1

      "Now I've seen everything." Have you ever seen a man eat his own head? ... Then you haven't seen everything.

    32. Re:Goin Up Da River by Shardis · · Score: 1

      Looks fine to me...

    33. Re:Goin Up Da River by Stepping+Razor · · Score: 1

      team america...fuck yeah!

    34. Re:Goin Up Da River by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's what's going to happen to the neck of his jug that's the problem.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    35. Re:Goin Up Da River by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      As the original poster I guess I must expand:

      The post was sarcastic.

      The UNIX hating comment was injected purely for irony.

      The reality of it is that many Mac users have no clue that OSX is based on UNIX. Do these post often on Slashdot. To be fair, no they don't. In fact most of these users don't even know that UNIX exists.

      Aloha from a user of Windows, Linux, BSD UNIX, Mac OS 9 and X.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
  4. bad. by machocomacho · · Score: 0, Insightful

    why should he be punished for the ineffectiveness of others people's software/inabiltiy to update?

    1. Re:bad. by bairy · · Score: 1

      Although that's vaguely insightful, if it wasn't for people like him, there would be no need for av software at all.

      --


      Get paid to search..It's geniune and
    2. Re:bad. by Strange42 · · Score: 1

      If people were not using software crippled with security holes, there would be no need for putting script kiddies in prison.

    3. Re:bad. by spac3manspiff · · Score: 2, Insightful

      while you're at it, we wouldnt need locks on our door. When you get a chance read Brave New World.

    4. Re:bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I thought he was punished for releasing a virus?

      Why would a burglar be punished for the lack of an alarm system in the house? He could break in, clearly it's not his fault that he did it...

  5. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My door doesn't have a lock, you insensitive clod!

    1. Re:But... by korgull · · Score: 1

      a password ?

    2. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um...what good is a password without a lock?

  6. He was young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and because he was a teenager. If this was a 40 year old geek he probably would have been made an example of.

    1. Re:He was young by ackthpt · · Score: 1, Troll
      ... and because he was a teenager. If this was a 40 year old geek he probably would have been made an example of.

      Dunno, Mitnick only did 10 months, same for Abene.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:He was young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't Mitnick in for several years before he even got a trial?

    3. Re:He was young by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      Wasn't Mitnick in for several years before he even got a trial?

      I think that's where we perfected the Guantanamo Prisoner Status idea.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:He was young by nikoliky · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which sentence are you talking about for Mitnick? The one that made him famous was a 7 years stint from 1995 to 2002.

    5. Re:He was young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how is this marked insightful when the guy is not even correct?

  7. Getting out free.. by jedimasta · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't forget MMORPG players, masturbation addicts and D&D fans...

    --
    Who is more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows?
    1. Re:Getting out free.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Masturbation is not an addiction. Sometimes....ummmm....it's the only way.

    2. Re:Getting out free.. by Lisandro · · Score: 2, Funny

      Isn't all of the above prety much the same?

      (ok ok, enough! it was a joke damnit!)

    3. Re:Getting out free.. by jedimasta · · Score: 1

      only if yer single and playing Everquest

      --
      Who is more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows?
    4. Re:Getting out free.. by iXiXi · · Score: 1

      I am addicted to masturbating to MMORPG's while wearing my grandma's old wedding dress. Does that make me a risk for antisocial behavior? I am 35 so I guess I wouldn't get off cuz of my parents. Since they are locked up in a dungeon under my house and are made to perform my bidding wearing old cheerleader outfits and no pants while listening to Marylin Manson and beating dead puppies with a whisk.... errr I think I have said too much....

  8. Prison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    He going to have an interesting "first date"

    1. Re:Prison by beliavsky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not funny. The kid may deserve to go to jail, but no one deserves to be raped.

    2. Re:Prison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your humour, much like car keys dropped into lava, was already gone.

    3. Re:Prison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, you do realize that the whole getting raped in prison thing is a joke, right? Prisoners don't really get raped.

    4. Re:Prison by RTMFD · · Score: 1

      What about all of the computers he "raped" with his "worm"?

    5. Re:Prison by horza · · Score: 1

      The story states that he's going to a minimum security jail. If they are anything like here in the UK, it's more like being forced to stay in a youth hostel.

      Phillip.

    6. Re:Prison by loraksus · · Score: 1
      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  9. Does that mean by cy_a253 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...his first girlfriend experience will not work out as planned?

    1. Re:Does that mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      girlfriend!

      Now whos creating their own reality!

    2. Re:Does that mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      awww so close, yet so redundant

    3. Re:Does that mean by niittyniemi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Can someone tell me what is humourous about human beings being raped and sodomized ?

      It's a variant of the banana skin joke. It's funny when something dangerous happens to somebody else but not when it happens to you. Read: Vilayanur S. Ramachandran's Reith lecture to learn about some of the neuroscience behind it.

      I'm probably in a similar position to many in that I find the rape gags funny (I'd argue that it's inhuman not to) but I deplore the male rape that goes on in American prisons.

      Remember that geeks like Dimitry Skylarov get thrown into American prisons and people wonder why Alan Cox refuses to go to the States!

      It's just one of many reasons I refuse to go to the States...Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib are just different aspects of the same culture of abuse within American prisons.

      "Land of the Free", where "Free" includes a large tool jammed up your backside....it's funny because it's true :(

      --
      The Machine stops.
  10. Gitmo by jon_oner · · Score: 1

    Average joe would say "send him to Gitmo with the others." I am personally glad that people not yet 18 -basically children- can get away with doing stuff like that.

    1. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I am personally glad that people not yet 18 -basically children- can get away with doing stuff like that.

      Except... those children can ruin businesses and careers. I know, if no machine was ever vulnerable, it could never happen. But, truly, this is just like 14 year old kids who drop rocks off of bridges onto the highway, just to see if they can hit a windshield. Being older than 10, and not able to see at least a couple consequences of your actions is pretty much of a defect (or, indeed, the sign of some seriously loser parents).

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Gitmo by jon_oner · · Score: 1

      Every single kid in the world has done something he wasn't supposed to do at some point in his life.

      When he makes a mistake, make him understand (through persuation/violence/guilt pick your flavor) never to do it again.

      Kids are NOT responsible for their actions, that's why they can't vote.

    3. Re:Gitmo by realdpk · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "But, truly, this is just like 14 year old kids who drop rocks off of bridges onto the highway, just to see if they can hit a windshield."

      Not even close. This is more like egging someone's car, parked on the street instead of in a garage. That's not entirely accurate, either, but at least it wouldn't involve people actually dying (like chucking rocks at cars on the highway could).

    4. Re:Gitmo by dillon_rinker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know, if no machine was ever vulnerable, it could never happen.

      Which is a bit like saying that breaking and entering is the homeowner's fault for using windows. No windows means no part of the wall is easily breakable, so no one can get in.

    5. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Kids are NOT responsible for their actions, that's why they can't vote

      But where do you (personally) draw the line? Candidly, I'd rather they could vote at 16, but not drive until 21. But a 17 year old (really, now) should be able to understand basic stuff like: millions of people rely on something that's not bulletproof, and this malicious thing I'm about to do will really, really screw with them. It's not that he doesn't know that, it's that he doesn't care. Same could be said about a 16 year old that decides to torch an apartment building, or throw rat poison in someone's food.

      To some extent people like that are just plain broken... but cognitively, a 17 year old should be plenty functional enough not to pull crap like this, and should know it. If not, based only on his age, he sure as hell shouldn't be allowed to go out solo and drive 2500 pounds of metal across railroad tracks that carry, say tanker cars of chlorine. Of course, we trust 16 year-olds to not kill people, at the expense of some serious consequences. Can't we trust them not to trash people's businesses?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    6. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      but at least it wouldn't involve people actually dying

      OK, so assume that it's just something benign, like trashing someone's network on the day that their growing company is trying to perform a make-or-break demo. Deal lost, business ruined, business owner's mortgage foreclosed...

      Not trying to sound hysterical here, but I know small e-businesses that are still at the point where losing even one day's revenue at the wrong time would almost be their undoing. Mitigating risk is important, and people that don't do it are (sort of) asking for it... but that doesn't mean that the people who deliberately trash systems should be laughed off as egg-throwers.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    7. Re:Gitmo by blew_fantom · · Score: 1

      we're living in a more and more morally ambiguous society. children are committing "adult" crimes and are getting away with it because they are "minors". i don't agree with you. if there is willful intent, forethought, and cognizance, they should be punished just the same as adults. such criminal behavior is not to be confused with kiddie-mischief. certainly, crimes like rape, murder/manslaughter, theft (of all kinds), assault and the like should be treated the same whether the perpetrator is a child or an adult.

    8. Re:Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Windows? Man, what a poor choice for an analogy in this situation. :)

    9. Re:Gitmo by jon_oner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure, there is a lot of debate around the legal age of reason.
      Sometimes the law draws an arbitrary line (voting age, army age, driving age) and sometime it prefers to judge in case by case (as in murders, trials as an adult).

      If legal age for prison can fluctuate, then the legal age for voting, drinking, driving, and the army should also be decided on a case by case basis.

    10. Re:Gitmo by izomiac · · Score: 1

      I personally I agree with the sentence. It's not like he caused anybody any physical harm, or did it for financial gain. His punishment seems to fit the crime (after all, it is just computer code) and it should prevent him from doing something like this in the future. As for anybody hurt by it, well, that would be at least half their own fault. If you have something very important to do (like the situation you described) then it would be stupid not to have a contingency plan. Computer data isn't like the real world, if it's deleted then it can be quickly restored. I can see how e-commerce would be effected (hence the jail sentence), but viruses aren't exactly uncommon, and if a website can't respond to them quickly enough then it's their own fault. If he hadn't written that worm then someone else probably would have.

    11. Re:Gitmo by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      More like the homeowner has payed infinitely more for a window that is easily breakable when a windows supplied for free is much, much harder to break.

      But yes, I get your point.

    12. Re:Gitmo by fd0man · · Score: 1

      While a seventeen year old should be able to understand things like what you mentioned above, wouldn't you think that it's pretty bad that we're relying on things (as a society, really) that are weak and feable?

      Why do we permit it?

      Honestly, because the masses really don't know any better. I don't personally think that the kid should be jailed.

      So many people have done things like this to try to enlighten, and they become suppressed, and the world takes a reactive approach to security, instead of a proactive one.

      The people that are writing these things to get into networks and such are the people that should get jobs testing networks, programs, implementations. These are the people that should assist the world in creating so-called "bulletproof" systems.

      And yet we throw them away, and these dolts that write software with holes large enough to drive a Mack truck through, go on making their large amounts of pay from wherever they work, able to hide behind the excuse that it works, or someone shouldn't have attempted the break-in/malicious code, to begin with.

      Is it just me, or is this COMPLETELY the wrong way?

    13. Re:Gitmo by bani · · Score: 1

      it's more like slashing the tires of everyones car in a 10 block radius.

    14. Re:Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Teenagers are often smarter than we adults give them credit for. That said, they are generally not wise. A teenager can understand that doing something is wrong, but he/she may not have the maturity or wisdom to keep from doing it anyway.

    15. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I have to disagree with you. I live in a townhouse in a marginal neighborhood. There's very little that keeps people from simply coming into my house and trashing the place: a locked door, and some very thin glass windows. Any kid not worried about his own integrity and the consequences could be in my house stealing, vandalizing, or drinking my precious 16-year-old Laghavulin with only a couple of swift kicks.

      So, am I asking for (and deserving) such a break in? Should I simply consider myself lucky that it hasn't happened? Or, in order to put myself (within your framework) on the side of reason, should I bar my windows, arm myself, let my cranky dog run loose on the other side of those windows? As a corollary, should someone who breaks in (not for personal gain, mind you, but just to prove that my house is vulnerable, and to make the point that robber baron glass manufacturers should make all household glass indestructible, and not charge for it) be not only considered bright and inquisitive, but apply for a law enforcement job?

      Making a young man (not a kid!) spend a few months chewing on what he knowingly did (which was to burn up untold thousands of man hours in IT shops all over the world) is not "throwing him away." It may a real citizen out of him yet.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    16. Re:Gitmo by prshaw · · Score: 1

      >> or did it for financial gain

      I thought there was a password stealing part of the code he modified? Something where he could get back on their computers and get it?

      Or am I thinking of another person who got caught?

    17. Re:Gitmo by utlemming · · Score: 1

      Agreed. This is something that I have a big problem with -- staggered ages of majority. When you reach 18 then you can smoke and vote. You can also do somethings with out the consent of your parents -- if you still in high school, even though you're legally an adult, you are not recognized as an adult by the school systems. Then you can't drink until 21. Which, in my mind is morally wrong (BTW, this is just out of principle, not practice. I don't drink, never have, and never will). If you are expected to maintain the responsabilities of a citizen, but you don't enjoy all the privelages of citizenship (and you haven't done anything to have those privelages revoked) then that is a social injustice. I am way past the ages of majority and still feel that we should give full rights to those reaching the age of 18. Laws should happen that at the age of 18 you enjoy full majority rights, or 21. Not 18, 21, and then 24. Else, the laws regarding responsability and liability should reflect the different ages of majority.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    18. Re:Gitmo by TFGeditor · · Score: 1

      "...a windows supplied for free is much, much harder to break."

      And also much, much harder to install and maintain without outside help for the average user.

      Linux (or other OSS, to which you seem to be alluding) is great for what it does, but the current reality is that it is a geek toy for the most part. It might eventually evolve into a practical application for the masses, but in the meantime, it is not the cure-all for IT ills as so often espoused.

      I am neither anti-Linux/OSS nor a Windows Defender (hey, great game that, maybe?), and this is not intended as flame, just a reality check.

      --
      Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
    19. Re:Gitmo by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      I put Fedora on a computer last night. No problems at all...you can just do auto-partition, and choose the server install option. Gentoo is a bit more difficult, but it's not meant for that sort of user.

      Graphical config for everything, really, really easy to use.

      But I guess if you want something to be easy to use you need to make compromises on security, etc.

    20. Re:Gitmo by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      Kids are NOT responsible for their actions, that's why they can't vote.

      Oh, but kids LOVE being nasty and NOT being punished, don't they?

      A couple of spanks at an early age might have been MUCH more effective than a couple of years at 16. BTW, what's his excuse now? "Bill Gates made me do it"?

      Well maybe you're right. Kids aren't FULLY responsible for their actions... parents are (ouch).

    21. Re:Gitmo by TFGeditor · · Score: 1

      But, you are obviously not an "average user" on the evidence that you use words like "Fedora," "auto-partition," "server install option," and "Gentoo" and know what they mean. Tell all that to the guy who sells Purple People Widgits via a web-based business, and the glare from the glazed look will probably blind you.

      --
      Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
    22. Re:Gitmo by realdpk · · Score: 1

      Hmm. How about pulling the stems out of the valves? Something that would still require "significant" work to identify and fix, but not total replacement?

      Heh. Analogies are fun.

    23. Re:Gitmo by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Surely if people have 100% responsibility for their actions, they should also have a 100% freedom to do whatever they choose to make themselves happy and avoid pressure to commit crime. Certainly bad family and school is a big source of bad influence, smoking pot can release stress and paid sex could prevent rape. Would you really allow a 12 year old boy to move to neighbor's house (say, in exchange for doing some chores), quit school, hire a prostitute and smoke a joint? If not, it's not fair to require children (or even US adults) to be fully responsible for themselves. You decide something for another human, you take partial responsibility for his/her actions.

    24. Re:Gitmo by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      Well, for me anyway, I find the Fedora install process a lot easier than Windows. Don't know about SuSE, but that's good too I hear.

      Server is a radio button, above "desktop", "workstation" and "custom". Auto partition is a button above "partition manually".

    25. Re:Gitmo by TFGeditor · · Score: 1

      Actually, I wish there was a distro that would support the software associated with my satellite internet uplink. I loathe Windows, but am stuck due to the satellite thing. :-(

      --
      Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
    26. Re:Gitmo by Copid · · Score: 1
      So many people have done things like this to try to enlighten, and they become suppressed, and the world takes a reactive approach to security, instead of a proactive one.

      Perhaps the person who is going about solving the problem "the wrong way" is the person who makes his point by doing damage instead of helping to fix the problem? It seems to me that this isn't society's fault.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    27. Re:Gitmo by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      Just find some drivers, burn to cd, and install from there if they are available for linux. Don't need them to come with the distro.

    28. Re:Gitmo by fd0man · · Score: 1

      Destroying property, and showing a flaw in logic, are two *entirely* different things.

      The point is that you should protect what you can, and what you have the power to. Sure, you can break in, but you will in fact be taken away if you do, breaking and entering is the destruction if property. It's against the law, and has been for years.

      OTOH, it should be against the law to prosecute people smart enough to point out the dumbassness of others. It shouldn't be legal to prosecute someone for showing a flaw in someone's thinking. What is programming? What is code? It's logic. And if your logic is flawed... and you're going to say it's okay to punish someone for showing you what's flawed?

    29. Re:Gitmo by fd0man · · Score: 1

      And you're telling me that you can submit a patch or help to fix it with any closed company, without making a scene that embarasses them?

      I think that if the damage could be done in the first place, it's the fault of the software producer. Especially in the case of something such as Microsoft software, where people PAY for it and expect it to work as advertised. It's not advertised to have several breaches, it's advertised to be speedy and reliable.

    30. Re:Gitmo by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 1

      And this is why we have jails... to teach people who aren't "wise" that actions have consequences.

      Plus he'll be getting some lubbing in jail. Group hug.

      --

      eTrade SUCKS
    31. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Destroying property, and showing a flaw in logic, are two *entirely* different things.

      What sophistry. So, if someone simply vandalizes your car because they want to teach you a lesson about how you park... that's OK? You've conveniently ignored my other point. What if someone truly thinks that household security is important, and that the only way to improve it is to make sure that everyone uses tempered glass windows. No theft on his part, no... he just breaks windows to show how cheap and poorly chosen they are. Or, he walks up to houses with less expensive locks on the doors, and picks them, leaving the doors wide open, just to show people that they should install better locks. Why, it's just illogical that people would own breakable windows or pickable locks!

      Don't you see that the damages caused by someone like that are worth prosecuting? If you say you can't see the parallels, then you're not being honest.

      Do you really think that the script kiddie that gleefully cracks someone's system or cuts a worm loose for boasting rights is a high-minded crusader for better computing? They're the worst, because they're not even making a new point - they're just trying to buy some reflected infamy. They're piggy-backing on someone else's vandalism, and you're going to say they're doing me a favor?

      you're going to say it's okay to punish someone for showing you what's flawed?

      If, without invitation, they decide they're going to show me that I've made a bad decision in using technology X by doing their best to destroy what I'm using, and to wreck my ability to make a living, why would I want to go easy on them, let alone hold them up as some sort of noble idealists? Destruction of property (which you seem to think is worth prosecuting) and denying a business access to its services and customers, and causing them damage that requires expensive remediation aren't a whit different, and you know it.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    32. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I have a speedy and reliable car, too. And no one advertises the fact that any punk with a hammer can break into it (and yours). But we have the reasonable expectation that people won't do that, and there are perfectly good laws, including those that provide for jail time, when someone makes a habit if doing just that. How is any different when people make a hobby out of trashing business systems and networks? Let me know how that vandalism-proof car of yours is working out, OK?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    33. Re:Gitmo by izomiac · · Score: 1

      I was never affected by it (paranoid firewall settings), so I don't really know much about the blaster worm in general (or his variant). That would seem like a stupid addition though, because then each copy of the worm would know how to send him the information, which would mean that anyone who decompiled/packet sniffed the worm could most likely figure out who he was/where he connects to the internet. Of course he did get caught, so he had to do something careless. I mean, if I were going to release a worm I'd do it from an open wireless access point while I was on vacation (maybe even find a nice unpatched home computer to send it a couple weeks later). In any case stealing passwords isn't always for stealing credit card numbers or bank accounts (althugh I guess it is stealing people's identities in a way).

    34. Re:Gitmo by Everleet · · Score: 1

      No, it's more like putting a sign in your window that says "Slash your tires if you love Jesus."

      --
      It's tragic. Laugh.
    35. Re:Gitmo by razjml · · Score: 0

      The idea that someone is somehow deranged and broken when they know something but don't care about it is absolutely ridiculous. The problem here is that knowing a virus released onto the internet will hurt people is abstracted knowledge. You have no reason to believe you'll ever meet any of the people who are harmed by it, and so the harm stays distanced and almost unreal. It's the same way we can see violence on the news and continue to go about what we're doing: it's not real to us. If we knew the people harmed by that violence, or if we have some personal connection to where it happened, anything that creates an emotional connection to it, then it becomes real, and it affects us. I'm not saying this is how things have to be, but it's how things often are until we stop and personally examine our own perceptions of reality. Sometimes it takes a long time for people to do this.

    36. Re:Gitmo by fd0man · · Score: 1
      You've conveniently ignored my other point. What if someone truly thinks that household security is important, and that the only way to improve it is to make sure that everyone uses tempered glass windows. No theft on his part, no... he just breaks windows to show how cheap and poorly chosen they are.

      No, I wasn't ignoring it. That's destruction of property. Re-read what I typed. I covered that. Same for the vandalism.

      And, if the business is going to use software that isn't properly secure, they are, in my humble opinion, not in a position to be shocked when it breaks - regardless of why. The people in charge of security on those networks should *not* have their jobs if that's what is going to happen. There is a large difference between the physical world and the logical one, and in more then just this particular issue.

    37. Re:Gitmo by fd0man · · Score: 1

      Nobody said that I had a vandalism proof car... I find it very interesting that you would liken the electronic, non-physical world to a physical one. While the two are interdependant on each other nowadays, that does not mean that the rules are the same.

      That having been said, however, people attempt to break into my server all the time. People do not attempt to break into my car all the time.

      It stands to reason that if you run weak software with no monitoring (or poor monitoring), and without the ability to find/discover things easier then by trying to break them, you're going to have problems and issues. It also makes sense, following that, IMHO, that you should maintain a properly secure network with ways to keep people out, even being paranoid even.

      Not to mention that the legal liability on protection of some data (credit card numbers for example) rests with the agency holding the numbers. If the servers are compromised, the law in many locations holds the agency running the server at fault, for negligence.

      If people were not so neglegent in the world of the vast network known as the Internet, perhaps it would be a more secure place. If people made better choices about their software decisions on Internet-reachable hosts, perhaps we wouldn't even be having a conversation - because there would be no need... it would be quite pointless. Now, as to whatever you may be running on hosts not on the Internet, that's your own choice. Make it insecure as hell if you want, but if you're going to put an insecure front on the outside, don't be shocked when something breaks it.

    38. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I find it very interesting that you would liken the electronic, non-physical world to a physical one

      The net is the physical world! Just like your phones and the lines that connect them to the outside world. Extend your analogy to people hiding in a closet and listening in on a business meeting - or any other per-internet form of subterfuge, industrial espionage, record stealing, etc... it's information that runs businesses, and the physical mechanism of its conveyence (paper in a file drawer being torched by a vandal, or magnetic bits on a disk being erased by a vandal) is irrelevent - at least, ethically, morally, and (ideally) legally. The main difference (and it's strictly one of practicality, not morality/ethics) is that most 17 year old malcontents don't have the courage or skill to get into a building and mess with a business's paper records. That's ironic, because things like your sensitive medical records, which are on paper in your doctor's office, are usuall protected, at best, by a pickable Home Depot grade lock, and maybe some glass windows, and perhaps an alarm system that probably gives off so many false positives that the police will be in no hurry to respond. But does the doctor go to the trouble to establish a physical fortress around his records? No. Should someone who considers that irresponsible break down his door just to show that it can be done, and that lock manufacturers are selling mostly the illusion of security? No.

      people attempt to break into my server all the time. People do not attempt to break into my car all the time.

      Well, I've had hacking attempts on the 30 or so servers I run, and only one semi-successful crack that I know of on one box. Over the years, I've had my car broken into (and lost all of my tools and LAN test gear), had paint keyed, hubcaps stolen, and a tire slashed. I don't know how many times someone has walked up and tried the door handles to see if it was unlocked - but experience says that it has happened plenty. What we'll never know is how many times some kid has thought about breaking into my car, but his friend's experiences with law enforcement reminded him that it's a bad idea.

      Not to mention that the legal liability on protection of some data (credit card numbers for example) rests with the agency holding the numbers. If the servers are compromised, the law in many locations holds the agency running the server at fault, for negligence.

      Absolutely. Also just as true (running with the doctor's office analogy for a moment) of printed medical records stored in a cheap metal file cabinet - federal HIPAA regulations make recklessness with that info a federal crime.

      If people were not so neglegent in the world of the vast network known as the Internet, perhaps it would be a more secure place

      I've got friends that live in farming communities where they leave their car keys in the car. All the time. It's remeniscent of the early days of the internet. But when someone steals a car, it's not the car owner's fault. Is the car owner smart, under the circumstances to leave the car vulnerable? No. But is he causing the crime? No!

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    39. Re:Gitmo by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      But how is destroying someone's information not destroying their property? And regardless of what you think are reasonable precautions (should IT teams be held accountable if someone rams an airplane into their datacenter?), the person who actually ACTS to cause the damage is the responsible party. Period. No judge or jury ever lessened a car thief's sentence because the car was left unlocked inside a presumably locked garage.

      Note that we are not talking about whether impacted IT teams could or should have done more to protect their systems. I'm saying that if malicious people didn't act with malice, there wouldn't be as much grief to deal with (including DNS attacks, Akamai border cache attacks and a whole lot of other recent problems that had zip, zero, nothing to do with MS, and everything to do with *nix systems that everyone had been crowing about as unassailable). It's the Bad Guys that get and deserve the legal attention. Destruction of property includes destruction of intellectual property, on paper or on disk.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    40. Re:Gitmo by RWerp · · Score: 1

      That's not entirely accurate, either, but at least it wouldn't involve people actually dying (like chucking rocks at cars on the highway could).

      So many things in our lives depend on computers, that someone might die because of a computer virus. Of course, this would mean some incompetence on the side of some admin, but morally and legally, the virus author would be guilty.

      --
      "Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
    41. Re:Gitmo by rinkjustice · · Score: 1

      You have the most ignorant, most blasphemous nickname I have ever seen. Please change it.

      "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling" Philippians 2:12

    42. Re:Gitmo by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1
      The people in charge of security on those networks should *not* have their jobs if that's what is going to happen


      Don't expect every company in the 3rd world (nor 1st, I guess) to have people dedicated to network security. Worms get here, they do unnecesary damage and, even though we have protection, it is HIS responsability for causing damage to OTHER PEOPLE's information which doesn't belong to HIM. What HE is doing is, instead of doing something USEFUL, he's destroying the work of PEOPLE who are.
      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
    43. Re:Gitmo by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      I consider Biblical quotes offensive.

      In a free society though, it's your right to issue freaky quotes from the Bible. I won't ask you to refrain from doing so.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
  11. Community Chest? by MorboNixon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.' Which means most slashdotters basically have a get out of jail free card."

    Don't you mean a "locked yourself into jail already" card?

    1. Re:Community Chest? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > > It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.' Which means most slashdotters basically have a get out of jail free card."
      >
      >Don't you mean a "locked yourself into jail already" card?

      Yeah, but if SVCHOST.EXE could run chrooted, we wouldn't be having this conversation, would we?

    2. Re:Community Chest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Don't you mean a "locked yourself into jail aready" card?

      No, I'm pretty sure get out of free. Read it. It says get out of jail free. Yep...

    3. Re:Community Chest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. chrooting it wouldn't stop the worm from spreading and would make the service useless for what it was intended for (home users 'my documents').

  12. Parents need more legal liability by Queer+Boy · · Score: 1, Troll

    I think if a child commits some kind of crime that requires a trial that there needs to be some consequence for the parents. I can't understand squirting out some kids and then letting them run rampant and not having any responsibility for a minor's actions. The excuses for bad parenting need to stop or they need to stop being bad parents.

    --
    Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
    1. Re:Parents need more legal liability by jon_oner · · Score: 1

      Just because your child is a script kiddie doesn't make you a bad parent. He gets caught, you punish/explain/guilt him, he won't do it again. Kids are not meant to be perfect, and teens are designed to push limits. Have some humanity, please.

    2. Re:Parents need more legal liability by psi42 · · Score: 1

      I think if a child commits some kind of crime that requires a trial that there needs to be some consequence for the parents. I can't understand squirting out some kids and then letting them run rampant and not having any responsibility for a minor's actions. The excuses for bad parenting need to stop or they need to stop being bad parents.

      He was 18, therefore legally an adult. He was quite old enough to understand what he was doing.

      Of course, MS and friends are going to gloat over this. They finally caught someone...

      --
      Defenestrate Windows...
    3. Re:Parents need more legal liability by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't understand squirting out some kids and then letting them run rampant and not having any responsibility for a minor's actions.

      First off, he's 17, and is an adult in most ways that count. At 17, he can't really hide behind the shield of your parents. He should be held responsible for most or all of his actions.

      Secondly, I doubt his parents would realize he was making a virus even if they were looking. As far as they probably knew, he was programming, learning computers. He didn't get busted for drugs or playing with guns, which means his parents were doing something right.

      Obviously they weren't perfect parents, but no parents are perfect.

    4. Re:Parents need more legal liability by loucura! · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I doubt his parents would realize he was making a virus even if they were looking.

      He used a hex editor to change the name of the virus and put his "handle" in. That's it. He didn't write a variant of the blaster worm, he changed a couple strings in a binary.

      --
      Black and grey are both shades of white.
    5. Re:Parents need more legal liability by darkfire5252 · · Score: 1

      Well, from a parent's point of view, I'm sure running around joining a gang raises more of a red flag then, say, sitting at a computer typing.

      Would your dad know what you were doing if you were coding?

    6. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are going to put aside a discussion of exactly what he did (which sounds very moinor) or his age (should be an adult at 17 or 18 or whatever) or if the sentance is fair and balanced.

      What your saying is that the parents could understand what he was going to do, could tell he was going to do it and could prevent him from doing it.

      Right.

      This isnt like they found a handgun under his pillow and ignored it. Computers are part of life now, schools require it for homework,it is everywhere in everything. How do you prevent your child from doing this if your a parent and know nothing about computers. I am open to any answer that could work.

    7. Re:Parents need more legal liability by dmarx · · Score: 1

      I can't agree with that. People are individuals. They should only be punished for wrongs they individualy commit

      --
      "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
    8. Re:Parents need more legal liability by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

      But then he released the varient and 40000 computers were infected by his varient, right?

      18 months does seem extreme for his actions, but from what I read it seems it was the miniumum term allowed.

    9. Re:Parents need more legal liability by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      He didn't write a variant of the blaster worm, he changed a couple strings in a binary.

      And then, he let it loose. Deliberately, and obviously aware that he wasn't helping matters. If he found a gun at a crime scene, loaded it wiht a different brand of ammo (just as a learning experience, see!), and then started shooting, he's not off the hook for being a jackass. His upbringing sure didn't help - be he's obviously not stupid.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    10. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was busted for drugs you insensitive clod. I may have been busted for drugs but at the time I was busted I was:
      1) Persuing a Computer Science degree
      2) Working as a programmer

      Between my arrest and court costs I have been bankrupted, and my parents have taken a huge financial hit. I've missed more school to attend countless court settings then I ever would imagine skipping voluntarily. It looks like I'm going to be able to avoid jail thanks to my uber-expensive lawyer but the consequences have still been way out of proportion for simply posessing a forbidden item which causes no harm to anyone other than perhaps myself.

      I guess It's not your fault you ar prejudiced against drug users, It's what government and society teaches. It is gunna suck trying to get a job in a world full of anti-stoners like yourself but I guess that's life.

      Mostly I'm just making this long and rambling comment to offer a little advice to anyone who is ever caught in my predicatment: Get the best lawyer you can afford. Your freedom is worth all the money in the world.

    11. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know I am sick and tired of this blame the parents shit. I was bought up by a very loving and caring mother and father. Today I am good all around BUT I did some fucked up shit. Was it my parents fault? NO. I made the decision to smoke weed, do coke and fuck some real dirty girls. I also participated in criminal activities. My parents are to blame right? By your standards yes, because 24/7 they should be holding my fucking hand watching everything I do. Get a clue. Sometimes IT might be bad parents but those are the fucked up ones who abuse there children or who are fucked up to begin with and pass along the garbadge genes.

      Parents are usually out of the loop when it comes to there childrens activities on the computer. Hell my mother barely knows how to get online, would she wouldent know the difference between me coding a worm or surfing the web.

    12. Re:Parents need more legal liability by aldoman · · Score: 1

      They would of been compromised anyway.

    13. Re:Parents need more legal liability by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

      I was busted for drugs you insensitive clod.

      I'm guessing that if you went to trial and need a high priced lawyer, you weren't busted for having a few eights of pot, a couple shrooms or a bottle of Jack Daniels in your closet. You either got busted for something more major, or else you are unluckly to live in one of the super anti-drug states. If it wasn't an addictive drug, you have many sympathy.

      I guess It's not your fault you ar prejudiced against drug users

      When did I say anything against drug users? I'm in favor of legalizing most drugs to adults. At the very least, non-addictive drugs like Marijuana, Shrooms, Acid and E should be treated like liquor. If coke or heroin remains illegal, the drug addicts should undergo mandatory treatment and therapy, not jailed. Lower the drinking age-- at the very least, kids should be allowed to drink with their parents at home.

      Now, if you harm someone while on drugs (DUI or you become violent), I have very little sympathy.

      But this virus writer intentionally harmed people... it was mostly a minor offsense, but then multiply that times 40K computers and you've got a bigger problem.

    14. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Twanfox · · Score: 1

      What could have happened is irrelevent in legal proceedings. What did happen is. This boy did release a virus, modified (would AV scanners automatically pick up a 'close, but not quite' virus to something it knew?) that did infect a good number of PCs. That is an act of computer vandalism (or whatever it was he was conviced of).

      Saying that they could or would have been compromised is like me saying you could or would have been killed if you stood in front of a drive by shooting. No crime is committed until an act occurs.

    15. Re:Parents need more legal liability by gfody · · Score: 5, Insightful

      what exactly did he do to "release it to 40,000 computers".. it's a worm. he modified the copy that infected his machine and it went on doing what it does. Had he not done that 40,000 computers would still have been infected just not with his modified version.

      He probably took too much credit for it thinking he wasn't going to get caught. If he had a better lawyer he probably could've walked clean

      --

      bite my glorious golden ass.
    16. Re:Parents need more legal liability by supmylO · · Score: 1

      Atleast he gets what he deserves for plagarism. Are viruses under the GPL?

    17. Re:Parents need more legal liability by adeydas · · Score: 1

      That can only be a possibility if his parents knows little or nothing about computers.
      Besides that is not what we are talking about here. The judge said that its the parents' responsibility to not allow a minor shut himself in a room and make a whole new reality without facing the real world, that's what the judge has charged them with.

    18. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Vexar · · Score: 1
      What really bugs me about this is Jeffrey used to work at Hopkins Cinema Six (find it at Moviefone), so the whole social cave dweller line is just effective lawyerisms. I distinctly remember him saying to me on multiple occasions: "Theater two on your left, enjoy the show."

      Jeffrey wasn't particularly bright, I concur with Loucura that all he did was re-release, from his Dad's computer no less. If he was smart, he would have been more intelligent about launch approaches, especially with a rap. Variant is clearly an overstatement.

    19. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Iriel · · Score: 1

      I, personally agree to the idea that by the age of 17, he should be held accountable for his actions, but there's something else to consider:

      While his parents probably wouldn't have known what he was doing if they were watching (lord knows my mom asks me to be the family tech support because she doesn't understand computers that well), as long as the court is going to put him behind the shield of his parents, they should share some of the sentence. If the case decides that the parenting is to blame for some of it and it even takes off some of the final sentencing, then they should be held accountable. To do otherwise would be like getting arrested for possession of marijuana, getting off because it actually belonged to your friend, but then your friend doesn't get busted like they should (according to law, I'm not making a personal opinion on that).

      --
      Perfecting Discordia
      www.stevenvansickle.com
    20. Re:Parents need more legal liability by loucura! · · Score: 1

      I'm not denying that he released it, the parent to my post said that the parents couldn't have done anything because he was writing viruses, and they probably wouldn't have known what he was doing, only that he was "learning about computers". I pointed out that he hadn't done anything remotely related to learning about computers.

      --
      Black and grey are both shades of white.
    21. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But then he released the varient and 40000 computers were infected by his varient, right?

      So I take it that we should prosecute those who unable to remove the virus infection since they are spreading the infection, eh?

    22. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah i know. learning hex editors and the format well enough to stick his signature in isn't computer related

    23. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Jebediah21 · · Score: 1

      Maybe it was cry for help.

      --

      Everytime you look at porn a devil gets their horns.
    24. Re:Parents need more legal liability by loucura! · · Score: 1

      He modified strings that were already human readable.

      --
      Black and grey are both shades of white.
    25. Re:Parents need more legal liability by jadavis · · Score: 1

      Those people aren't willfully releasing the virus.

      Really, is it that hard to make the analogy to a real virus?

      If you get sick and transmit the virus to someone, oh well.

      If you cultivate a virus and intentionally spread it around, you should go to jail.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
    26. Re:Parents need more legal liability by sirgallihad · · Score: 1

      Yes, but now he will be forever doomed to a life where a job in computer sciences will be impossible, and, in the public's view, he will be worse than joe druggie, because he hurt their computers. This, for the non-internet savvy people, is a terrible and frightning crime.

    27. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think if you're going to make lists of drugs that should be legal, you should inform yourself a bit more. E is far from harmless. Although it has some minor psychedelic effects, it is more closely related to methamphetamine.

      When chronically abused, it can lead to some serious physical and mental problems. Of course, the same could be said about alcohol. True psychedelics can lead to mental problems when chronically abused, but they're generally not abused to that extent. Juries still out on that one. Marijuana is probably the safest. If marijuana was legal and everything else, including alcohol, was illegal, we'd probably be better off than we are now. And I don't even like pot.

    28. Re:Parents need more legal liability by remahl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      be he's obviously not stupid.

      He's obviously stupid. His actions served nobody, and landed himself in jail. That is not intelligent behaviour by any measure.

    29. Re:Parents need more legal liability by houghi · · Score: 1

      First off, he's 17, and is an adult in most ways that count. At 17, he can't really hide behind the shield of your parents. He should be held responsible for most or all of his actions.

      Then all people who are 17 should be adults in every way. 17 for voting. 17 for drinking as well as any other age limited thing.

      I believe it is more a thing of letting crackers know that they will be targetted hard. As the war on drugs is won, it is proven to be a very effective way to get people not to do anything against the law.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    30. Re:Parents need more legal liability by Steve+Cox · · Score: 1

      So could this have set up an interesting precedent?

      Since the modifications to the already existing worm had *no* effect on it's behaviour his actions seem to boil down to simply knowingly connecting his machine to the internet while it is infected with a virus.

    31. Re:Parents need more legal liability by flosofl · · Score: 1

      Had he not done that 40,000 computers would still have been infected...

      Bad argument. Say I have a flimsy lock and live in a bad neigborhood. Someone breaks in and trashes my place (what this kid did is analogous, though on a larger scale). I have this person arrested. Now should he be let off because "I had inadequate security and it would have happened sonner or later." As it has been noted before, criminal law doesn't care about "might" or "could" or "would". It cares about what did happen.

      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
    32. Re:Parents need more legal liability by ActivLink · · Score: 1

      At 17, he can't really hide behind the shield of your parents.

      At 2, he can't really hide behind the shield of your parents, but maybe his own.

      Irregardless, you think his parents knew he was "programming"? They probably think he was learning mspaint or playing solitaire, as that's all those new-fangled compewters can do anyhow. That and looking up his book report information on that there innernet.

      --
      -Activ
  13. kidding by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why didn't his parents get some time in the klink, if they're contributory in their neglect? And why does "try a child as an adult" make any sense at all? He was 17 when committed the crimes - the "child" treatment acknowledges that children have a chance to learn from their corrections *differently* than adults, for whom it's usually too late to form their social attitudes. Children can be educated, while adults usually must be intimidated with punishment. Kids don't get "mercy" because we're "nice"; they get different treatment because it works better on them, with less cost and risk to us. Meanwhile, the adults at Microsoft, who wrote the malware that his Blaster exploited, have learned that Microsoft profits from security holes, and we'll never see the end of them.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:kidding by servognome · · Score: 1

      Pechman said she was sentencing him at the low end of the range because although he was 18 at the time of the attack, his maturity level was much younger than that.
      They took into account his maturity level, and he was an adult.
      I don't know about you, but even at 13 I knew what a virus would do and also the implications of the damage it could do. Younger than that I would have known what I was doing was wrong, though I may not have been able to fully comprehend exactly how much damage could have been done.
      That is the key to trying people as adults or children, did they know what they did was wrong, and did they realize the consequences of their actions. That's why you will see a 14 year old tried as an adult for murder, but not tried as an adult for extortion or wire fraud which are more difficult concepts to understand.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    2. Re:kidding by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's actually more complicated. American justice sensibly splits into trials of "guilty" or not, and sentencing. Your distinction makes some sense in the "guilty" part, though even an 11 year old knows stealing is wrong, but they won't be tried as an adult for shoplifting. But the real distinction makes the most sense in sentencing. That's where the court decides what to do about it. And deciding what to do about a kid's bad behavior can include education, while incarceration destroys most chances of socializing them. In this case, the court learned that the kid had been deprived of time that other kids spend socializing and learning consequences of destructive behavior. So he was all the more suited to education, rather than just incarceration, even if they reduced the time. The rest of the sentence, denying access to "fun" computing, seemed to recognize that. But justice must be applied consistently for it to work at all.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:kidding by dmarx · · Score: 1

      He may have been a kid when he wrote it, but he sure as hell caused adult sized damage. If you're smart enough to write something like the Blaster worm, you're smart enough to understand the harm it will cause, no matter how young you are.

      --
      "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
    4. Re:kidding by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Informative

      Every nerd knows that Intelligence and Wisdom are independent dicerolls.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to "MOD PARENT UP" you but then realized the irony...

    6. Re:kidding by servognome · · Score: 1

      I was just responding to the comment the previous poster made And why does "try a child as an adult" make any sense at all?.
      Yes there is alot more that goes into the sentencing part than what goes into the guilty part. In that portion you try to take into account the factors why the crime occurred, the probability of repeating the crime, the mental status of the guilty party before and after the crime was commited, the social consequence of giving too harsh/too lenient sentence, etc.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    7. Re:kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thats ridiculous, almost all crimes are the same for adults and children (except of course things like drinking under age etc). thats equivilent to say a 16 year old robbing a department store in a grand way (a few people and a getaway car) maybe stealing $5,000 worth of clothes and then saying, WELL HES ADULT ENOUGH TO COMMIT GRAND THEFT, reread parent before you make such statements.

    8. Re:kidding by dmarx · · Score: 1
      thats ridiculous, almost all crimes are the same for adults and children (except of course things like drinking under age etc). thats equivilent to say a 16 year old robbing a department store in a grand way (a few people and a getaway car) maybe stealing $5,000 worth of clothes and then saying, WELL HES ADULT ENOUGH TO COMMIT GRAND THEFT, reread parent before you make such statements.

      Actually, I would try the kid as an adult in your example. If someone is smart enough to organize a gang and arrange for a getaway car, he's smart enough to know the consequences for his actions.
      And as to the drinking age, I actually would not punish kids for drinking underage unless they were DUI or something like that. I feel that kids who act like adults should be treated like adults-both regarding privileges and responsibilities.

      --
      "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
    9. Re:kidding by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      ...may not have been able to fully comprehend exactly how much damage could have been done. That is the key to trying people as adults or children, did they know what they did was wrong, and did they realize the consequences of their actions

      This is why many big time spammers/spyware authors have a carefully-crafted public persona as being innocent morons and dupes (maybe also having rah-rah, pro-business, freedom of speech facades). It helps when it comes to court time. "Gee, your honor, I was just trying to fulfill the American Dream, please pity me. The fanatic prosecution is trying to kill business innovation."

    10. Re:kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bwahahahaha MOD PARENT UP

    11. Re:kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand your position, however that simply isn't applicable to the laws in the U.S. If you do that (try kids as adults sometimes) you really have to do it all the time. Otherwise why not "charge an adult as a juvenille" for say, stealing a CD from walmart? children and adults commit the same crimes and it isn't about that, its about rehabilitation. research proves children can be rehabilitated faster and cheaper than adults, even if they commited so-called "adult crimes"

    12. Re:kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you're smart enough to write something like the Blaster worm, you're smart enough to understand the harm it will cause, no matter how young you are.

      He wasn't smart enough to write Blaster, just smart enough to modify it. Still, I agree with you. Most six year olds are smart enough to burn down a house, but know better.

    13. Re:kidding by ricosalomar · · Score: 0

      But he was a MINOR. In the US, he is the responsibility of his parents. A human brain doesn't finish developing untin the early 20's.

      I am so fucking tired of this trying juveniles as adults bullshit!! If we can't take resposibility for our children, then we shouldn't have them.

      If you don't know what your child is doing on his computer, then turn it off.

  14. But it is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'

    But it is healthy to lock YOU in a cell to create your new reality!

    1. Re:But it is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The judge is saying that jail is 'reality'

  15. Partly the parents' fault? by CTO1 · · Score: 5, Funny
    What were they supposed to do?

    "Jeffrey Lee! Stop writing malicious code and get a life!"

    "And take out the trash!"

    1. Re:Partly the parents' fault? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They are supposed to be responsible adults. Provide a stable and secure home environment so that kids don't need to shut themselves away.

      Parents have to live up to their responsibilities when they have minors under their care, and if they can't handle it maybe they should look into support services.

      They certainly shouldn't go around telling their kids to "get a life"

      and yes humor-0.0.1.tar.gz failed to install, something about missing dependencies.

    2. Re:Partly the parents' fault? by DrMorris · · Score: 1

      Hehe, this somehow reminds me on this cartoon...

    3. Re:Partly the parents' fault? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, duh, you're trying to instal humor-0.0.1 humor -1.0.1 has been out for ages, fixing the failure to install issue with gmake version 3.80...

  16. Well I try! by cybersaga · · Score: 5, Funny

    I try to lock myself in a room with my computer, but my wife keeps getting in.

    1. Re:Well I try! by TruthSeeker · · Score: 1

      Mine no longer does. I think she got used to it.

      --
      I sense much beer in you. Beer leads to intoxication, intoxication leads to hangover. Hangover leads to sobering.
    2. Re:Well I try! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wife?!

      Now who's living in a dream world?

    3. Re:Well I try! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhh, you guys! My wife's gonna think one of you is me!

    4. Re:Well I try! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, she's with me when you're in your room. I'm uhh "consoling" her. Yeah that's it.

  17. 18 months in jail != out of jail by realdpk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When did Slashdot math change it so 18 months in jail is like getting no jail at all?

    "He will still have to pay restitution to Microsoft and to people whose commuters were affected in an amount to be determined at a hearing set for Feb. 10."

    "The judge imposed three years of supervised release following his prison term, during which Parson can only use computers for business and education - not video games or file-sharing or hacking."

    Come on. He's not getting off easy. He didn't do anything irrepairable, why would more jail time change things?

    1. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by spac3manspiff · · Score: 1

      "Parson can only use computers for business and education "

      They both have a very vague definition. He could continue hacking as he pleases and call it education. He could just say 'my research is in Computer Security.'

    2. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by BrookHarty · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think 18 months is more time than he deserves, he was stupid yes, but when this young, giving them years to life in prison does nothing but makes citizens fund his imprisonment, and create a useless person that can't give back to society.

      If we looked at this at the cost of putting someone in jail for nonviolent crimes, and had him on probation doing community service, community service would win out. He could serve his time while going to school, much better for everyone.

      We are not only trying to punish them, but also rehabilitate them. Which by all accounts, using the death penalty as an example, criminals will do criminal activity no matter what the punishment.

      Our legal system is broke, and people are paying for it. The cost of law enforcement vs prison is really out of balance. Of course, Texas has turned prison into a money making business, which should show how absurd the whole thing is.

      Kids still do stupid stuff, and writing viruses seem to be something kids do. Same as smoking pot, nothing is going to change if we put everyone in prison, other than making a prison state.

      Non-violent criminals should be treated different, and then circumstances taken into account. Stealing excluded.

    3. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by realdpk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's why judges are involved. He doesn't need to trick a computer into thinking he's following the order. He needs to convince a human being.

    4. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Precisely, when you are growing you are supposed to make mistakes thats how you learn.

      And why should he have to pay restitution to Microsoft?! Its Microsoft that should be compensating its users for producing a faulty product. 'breaks the first it you use it'.

    5. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by Twanfox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I doubt that, if he is kept in school, and learns some structure from being incarcerated, and comprehends right from wrong (releasing a virus into the wilds of the internet is not that innocent). What you describe is generally what occurs if you put them in a hole and forget about them for the length of their sentance.

      While I concur that the legal remedy for crimes is generally pretty screwed up, in this case, I do not think they will make a useless person out of this.

    6. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We are not only trying to punish them, but also rehabilitate them. Which by all accounts, using the death penalty as an example, criminals will do criminal activity no matter what the punishment."

      You do realize that you're contradicting yourself, right? If "criminals will do criminal activity no matter what the punishment", then how are we going to "rehabilitate" them? If the thought of death does not dissuade an individual from performing an illegal act, what logical reason do we have to believe *any* sort of behavioral adjustment will have any effect?

      And I am a firm believer there are adolescent criminals (that would fall into the 'criminals are criminals' sentiment). Don't be so quick to turn a blind eye to illegal acts because "[k]ids still do stupid stuff". I'm not saying this guy is a hardened criminal, but each should be taken on a case by case basis. And from the nature of computer crime, I feel like the deck is stacked against the adolescents who say "I'm just a kid; I didn't know any better". A person needs to posses a certain amount of skill/expertise to understand a virus and then to tinker with it. I can't see an obvious explanation for how this individual could claim they didn't know what they were doing and didn't know that it was wrong.

    7. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by ScentCone · · Score: 1, Troll

      Non-violent criminals should be treated different, and then circumstances taken into account. Stealing excluded.

      How many man hours of very expensive IT productivity went into cleaning up the mess he deliberately caused? How is that, in meaningful terms, not as bad as "stealing?"

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    8. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by MustardMan · · Score: 1

      Non-violent criminals should be treated different, and then circumstances taken into account. Stealing excluded.

      Where's the borderline for stealing? Physically taking goods from someone else? From a store? Hacking someone's bank account and draining it? What makes it stealing? The fact that it takes money or items away from someone else? If that's the case, a worm could be some of the worst stealing possible. You have the potential to cost people thousands, even millions, of dollars. Is it only stealing if you benefit from it? How is taking someone's money one way different from taking it another way? I really don't see why stealing should be such a special case. Nothing is that simple and cut-and-dry that you can say something like "Stealing excluded"

    9. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by pintpusher · · Score: 1

      "He will still have to pay restitution to Microsoft and to people whose commuters were affected in an amount to be determined at a hearing set for Feb. 10."

      Surely M$ will reward the wee lad for helping them learn about yet another security hole?

      --
      man, I feel like mold.
    10. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IT productivity

      You mean there's anything to do when nothing goes horribly wrong?
      I mean douchebags like him keep a lot of useless people employed and busy.

    11. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      would you reward me if I helped you find out that you forgot to lock your door by going into the kitchen and setting your house on fire?

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    12. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by analog_line · · Score: 1

      Same as smoking pot...

      Smoking pot doesn't generally cause tens of thousands of dollars in lost time, lost data, dreckcetera that happens when a Blaster-level virus starts causing havoc.

      Not commenting on his specific case, but equating this in a "what harm does this action do to people effected by it other than myself" sense, releasing a virus does far more damage than lighting up a bowl ever did. No he didn't punch someone, but he did a hell of a lot more than kill a few brain cells.

    13. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      We all know that the leage of nations and UN made POT to be bad, before then no one really cared, oh except DUPONT did, because they saw a threat to their chemical businesses that went to cotton and other unnatural products.

      Hey if Holland can live with legal pot, why cant the rest of the world?

      If the US army made a program to grow cannabis in the 40s for the war effort, then why is it bad now?

      Everything comes back to money and people who have a secure business that see a threat will kill it all costs, even if it means 1.5m people in jail and millions more ruined lives because of records for something that GOD GAVE TO HUMANS, god didnt give nylon.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    14. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well ... the question we must ask ourself is if the people really can blame him when they used a OS that is riddle with buggs AND DIDN'T PATCH IT!

      If people upgraded their software and patched for securityleaks, then they wouldn't been in that mess to begin with.

      Six months, heck even three months in jail would be enought ...

      Of course, that depends on what kind of jail he gets into.

      If he gets sent to a San Quentin look alike prison for 18 months, then I say it's really stupid ;) ...

    15. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by nwbvt · · Score: 1
      Well for starters you are sending the message to any hacker who spends all day in front of his computer that he will get off easy should he do something bad. Yes I know this was a more serious case than someone spending a lot of time in front of his computer, this guy was afraid to leave his house. And yes I know 18 months isn't getting off scot-free even though it is much less than the 3 year maximum sentence. But this is how it will be interpreted. Don't believe me, allow me to quote the reporting of a certain website popular with the hacker community:
      ...The lightweight sentence was due, said the judge, to the parents' neglect. Quoting the judge: 'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.' Which means most slashdotters basically have a get out of jail free card.

      This guy wrote a virus that caused serious damage. If he got off with the minimum sentence, the judge has in effect legitimized the "The Internet made me do it" defense.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    16. Re:18 months in jail != out of jail by pintpusher · · Score: 1

      depends on who went down in the resulting conflagration ;-)

      --
      man, I feel like mold.
  18. She must be new here. by kngthdn · · Score: 1, Informative

    From the article: The Internet "has created a dark hole, a dungeon if you will, for people who have mental illnesses or people who are lonely," Pechman said.

    Well, gee, welcome to Slashdot!! ; )

    On a more serious note, I'm not sure our judges should really be handing out extra-light sentences to people they believe are deranged. SAT classes? Scary stuff. This seems like a slap on the wrist for someone who caused such a tremendous amount of damage. It sets a bad example for other script kiddies.

    I don't know that it makes any difference, but if anyone wants to express their outrage in the "real world", here's her address:

    U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman
    U.S. District Court
    U.S. Courthouse
    1010 Fifth Avenue
    Seattle, WA 98104

    1. Re:She must be new here. by realdpk · · Score: 1

      "It sets a bad example for other script kiddies."

      He'll get some jail time, he'll won't be able to play video games or use a computer for anything but education/work for 3 years after his jail term is up (or he'll probably go back to jail), plus, he'll have to pay money to the victims and Microsoft.

      What part of this is a slap on the wrist? It sounds like this teenager will have a very rough time for the next 5 years of his life.

    2. Re:She must be new here. by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      Seattle is a very, very,very liberal (or "progressive" :) city for those of you who didn't already know that.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    3. Re:She must be new here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even better!

      (206) 553-2671

    4. Re:She must be new here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Spamming someone's personal information on an extremely popular website probably deserves some jail time as well.

      You should note that are supposed to treat deranged people differently in the court system, it isn't just a figment of your imagination.

      I guess you think mistakes you make as a 17 year old should ruin the rest of your life. Because none of use were dumb, rash, or cocky at 17.

    5. Re:She must be new here. by freralqqvba · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Besides, you're missing the entire point of the justice system. It's not there to get revenge on people who've caused damage. I mean sure, you can claim eye for an eye is justice but that view's been going more and more out of favor. Reforming people is generally more successful; not to mention, in the end more benefitial to society. As for preventiveness, I'm sure any amount of actual oversight - from their parents or otherwise - is probably enough to deter most 'script kiddies'.

    6. Re:She must be new here. by jangobongo · · Score: 2, Interesting
      • On a more serious note, I'm not sure our judges should really be handing out extra-light sentences to people they believe are deranged. SAT classes? Scary stuff. This seems like a slap on the wrist for someone who caused such a tremendous amount of damage. It sets a bad example for other script kiddies.
      Really now, we don't know all that much about the details of this person's life. The judge has a lot more information on this person's background and is better able to decide than those of us in the "peanut gallery". It was noted that he had "psychological troubles" due to parental neglect.

      Also, " Pechman said she was sentencing him at the low end of the range because although he was 18 at the time of the attack, his maturity level was much younger than that.

      "I learned a lot about you," she added. "Many of the mental-health problems from the household you grew up in contributed to this problem."


      The interesting thing is that he could have been a Slashdotter. His malicious attacks were against a Microsoft Windows update Web site as well as the Recording Industry Association of America Web site, two favorite "whipping boys" of Slashdotters.
      --

      Sig cancelled due to lack of interest
    7. Re:She must be new here. by incom · · Score: 1

      Umm... Inviting people to lynch a judge because of a light sentence for a computer crime? That is far more sociopathic than the subject. I'd be FAR more interested in putting harsher punishments on corporate crime, it effects alot more people, why exactly do you prioritize your efforts on this minor stuff? And that sentence is actually pretty fair, atleast to this canadian and most europeans I'm guessing, hard sentencing doesn't reduce crime so why bother? Make the punishment fit the crime. I'm well away that you are a troll btw, you didn't 'get' me, this response is purely aimed at the idiotic mods who upped you.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    8. Re:She must be new here. by kngthdn · · Score: 1

      Spamming someone's personal information on an extremely popular website probably deserves some jail time as well.

      Newsbreak! This is a free country, and the Seattle courthouse's address is NOT personal information. It's easy to obtain, publicly available, and exists so that citizens can express their opinions.

  19. Prom Date by digitalgimpus · · Score: 1

    I guess he's taking Martha Stewart (Mar7ha S73war7) to the pr0m.

    1. Re:Prom Date by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you see that cushy jail she got sent to? It's better than my fucking apartment! Where do I sign up?

    2. Re:Prom Date by digitalgimpus · · Score: 1

      You can sign up here

  20. Tee-Hee by dswensen · · Score: 1

    Can we mod this whole article -1, Flamebait?

  21. Microsoft's Culpability by dotslashdot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You know, the thing that really pisses me off is the fact that whenever companies start using a technology, they make everything that the scientists and engineers who don't work for them illegal. In the meantime, they release products (like MS Windows) that are totally insecure. I don't advocate releasing viruses--especially script kiddies--but it seems like more an more things are going to be illegal to give businesses a tool to punish those who reveal the flaws in their shitty products. Soon Nmap will be considered a terrorist tool used to infiltrate networks. Maybe MS can succeed in making all of Linux illegal, since it was put together by a bunch of European commies anyway. That is the attitude of the Bush administration toward Europe anyways--just hope it doesn't whittle Linux down.

    1. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by rekenner · · Score: 0

      Revealing a flaw != Causing damage to 48,000 computers. There was no intent to reveal a flaw in Blaster nor any of the viruses that get out.

    2. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by Zico · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? Microsoft released a patch to fix the vulnerability involved before Blaster and its variants ever saw the light of day.

    3. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by John+Seminal · · Score: 1
      You know, the thing that really pisses me off is the fact that whenever companies start using a technology, they make everything that the scientists and engineers who don't work for them illegal. In the meantime, they release products (like MS Windows) that are totally insecure

      What??? So if I buy a lock that does not work, and you decide you want to "educate" me, you can break in my house? Is that right? What if I don't want to lock my door, is that my fault? What are you saying about human nature?

      We need to get rid of people like this. They are the problem makers. There is probably a reason he locks himself in his room with the computer all day. He is worthless to society. I say get rid of him asap before he turns into a bigger threat like a spam corp. If he can cripple 50,000 computers, what makes anyone think he won't one day send out 50,000,000,000,000 spam emails?

      --

      Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    4. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Educate yourself and try this experiment: remove the lock from your front door, wait for someone to take all your stuff and go to the police explaining that you don't believe in locks. Talk to those police about your views on right, wrong and human nature. They probably won't laugh... until you are out of the room.

    5. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by wwahammy · · Score: 1

      Maybe the parent didn't get it right but your suggestion is nothing short of revenge. You say this person is worthless to society yet he already has used this negative in his life to help stop others from doing the things he did (its in the article, read it). Locking people up will just waste time and money and once we put them back in society they're going to be so fucked up we'll have next to no chance of dealing with him and hopefully helping them. This kid made a mistake and that's wrong. There is no way that you, without knowing much about the person, can say that a 19 year old is worthless to society and that there is no use even in trying to help this person. If you'd like to spend your taxes to cage someone for a long period of time instead of helping them become a member of society that can support themself, be my guest. I don't want to waste my money on that. There are too many real problems to be fixed without us creating more.

    6. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by fd0man · · Score: 1

      Well, if you don't lock your doors, you're asking for someone to come in and take things. And, your insurance won't foot the bill for that, either, really... most insurance companies require that the doors be locked to protect loss from it.

      If I have to force your door (like police do when breaking in), then I've done something that I shouldn't, and we know that gets to be punished, especially if coupled with theft or something else. However, when you have a product that *can* be hacker-proof (or at the VERY least, script-kiddie proof), and you don't make it such, who's wrong?

      Why would you pay for something that's inherantly flawed, anyway? That's like saying, "That's alright. You keep making that crap. I'll keep buying it. And as more people keep breaking in, you go right ahead and keep using money to go after them, and raising the price of my product."

      Why not ask for some better development? Or, if you REALLY want it to be not broken into, keep working on it YOURSELF? It's not terribly hard... and people should work alongside these kiddies and crackers, not otherwise. We would more likely then not have better product that way.

    7. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by Wanderer1 · · Score: 1

      John, I expect you're just trolling. But since I wanted to post something along these lines anyway, thanks for the opening.

      To rebut your post - using the real world example of homes with locks does not validate your point that someone should not distribute software that causes your computer to misbehave.

      First, computers on a network are communicating. That they sometimes blindly accept instructions that we don't like is not the same action as someone using their knowledge of lockpicking against your Schlage deadbolt and ripping off your stuff.

      It is more as though you were brainwashed by someone to accept certain instructions from anyone if they happen to fit a particular sentence. So you happen by someone who knows about this brainwashing and tells you to jump off a cliff - to which you promptly obey. Is it the fault of the speaker, of you or the brainwashing agent? Perhaps the agent has no idea that their brainwashing is the side effect of some sort of fancy treatment? Ethically, the guy telling you to leap is wrong - ethically because he knows better. Legally, he shouldn't be culpable in this instance because he would normally be protected by freedom of speech laws. In this case, the blame would fall on you if you were generally aware that you *might* be vulnerable to brainwashing and that there was both a method to detect and treat it.

      I think we can argue that *all* computer owners with Internet connections are generally aware of computer software viruses. *ALL* businesses operating networked computers are aware of computer software viruses. Therefore any business who's computers become infected by computer software viruses are to blame for any software their computer executes even if that software is not desirable. They are more to blame than non-business owners because they have more capital and more to lose by having their computer systems malfunction. *ALL* home computer owners with Internet connections are to blame if they do not take steps to protect their computer from computer software viruses AND take the time to remain educated about steps they need to take. By now, everyone who owns a computer knows that their computer requires certain maintenance to continue operating normally in a networked environment. The failure to take steps to either educate themselves in protecting the computer OR enlist the help of someone who DOES know how to protect the computer means the home computer user has only themselves to blame for a malfunctioning computer. Finally, the computer industry is somewhat to blame for presenting computer networking as a "safe" place to do business, banking and for babysitting your kids. The industry also knowingly produces products which are incomplete at the time of sale. Fortunately, people know that automobiles have intrinsic dangers. Microwave ovens are dangerous too, but have sufficient limitations to prevent MOST accidents - yet accidents can still occur. But the general purpose home computer represents a new area of risk that should be recognized and treated with similar efforts. Just as a microwave oven manual includes a prominent warning against using metal utensils or containers - so should a computer manual include prominent warnings about risks in a networked environment.

      From both a logical and physical perspective, networked computers are simply responding to patterns of electrical signals. That the law has been interpreted to believe that certain sequences of signaling constitute a criminal act is a SERIOUS misapplication of criminal law. Much as though restrictions exist on "practicing medicine" or "legal advice" when someone who is not accredited by the Bar Association or Board of Medical Examiners decides to give you advice seem reasonable - the truth is that certification programs exist and the consumer of that advice should be burdened with the requirement to verify the adviser's credentials before accepting the information - and the same should hold true in the Computer world.

      In sum, your laziness i

    8. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by MP2030 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Read the parent before flaming off into oblivion. He's not advocating script kiddies. He's railing against the fact that it is illegal to even POINT OUT that security holes exist.

      Let's say for example that you experience some persistent bug in your web server software, that is triggered whenever a user hits your site and does not have IE or Netscape/Mo'. This bug causes the server to crash whenever it reads the line that would contain the alternate browser's id... for whatever reason it cannot handle the 'malformatted' line that says 'browser=Opera'.

      Gee, that's a pretty frickin' annoying bug. Now, normally when you buy a defective product, you can sound off on it, and give a bad review of the product for example.

      Not so with BigIP's software. Sure, you can write a non-flattering review about how their server software crashes. But, just mentioning that carries very little weight. Prospective buyers, even if they SEE your review, are comparing your personal review with against the massive onslaught of the company's marketing machine. The marketing machine is going to say that the server software has records for uptime, and is fully compliant with all standards, and works with all sorts of end user tech, etc.. How is the end user to know you just aren't some jerk who didn't know what he was doing and is now pissed off because he misconfigured his web server?

      The answer is, you post the conditions of how the software misbehaves and you dispell the notion that you simply incompetent. People will be able to see that the 'malformatted' line of code is actually something that could plausibly be sent to the server, and that the server will crash as a result. NOW... you've got something. Now your words have some force behind them as it is provable that your bad review of the software is not just spite, it points out legitimate flaws in the software.

      HOWEVER.... posting this information can now get you into all kinds of trouble. The company that produces the web server product can now look at it in a couple of ways... one, how much will it cost us to fix the problem (Soft. Eng.s cost money, you know), and two, how much will it cost us to silence the problem (Lawyers aint free either). If one is cheaper than two, the problem gets fixed. If two is cheaper than one, the site owner gets a letter telling them to remove infringing materials from their site, that they are culpable for any hacking that occurs as a result, and that they are liable for any damages resulting from the offending review.

      And that, to me, is the problem. Rather than fix the security holes, companies try to silence people who point them out. The theory is that by making exploitive information go away, they can make the problem go away. This is the "weak lock" theory. However, the problem DOES NOT go away simply because it is more difficult to find the flaw in the lock. The flaw still exists and dedicated theives will still find it. The weak lock with the widely known flaw will be exploited by the casual thief. The weak lock with not-so-widely known flaw will be exploited by the professional thief. This does not make the lock any better at protecting you against theft by those equipped to take advantage of it. Studies of whether or not casual, script kiddie type hackers do more damage picking a thousand locks than a few dedicated hackers using the picks on several dozen machines, and then using those machines to commit further crimes is another topic entirely. (My bet is on the dedicated types doing more. Reinstalling windows across 2000 machines is time consuming. Having a few hundred machines to run identify theft out of, is incredibly damaging.)

      By using the weak lock theory, BigIP can market software as a strong lock when in fact it is a weak lock. They are free to state this and anyone who disagrees is written off / sued. Whenever it is against the law to hurt a company's revenue, by making truthful statements... well, I don't want to complete that thought, as it leads to all sorts of horrific ramifications.

    9. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by Copid · · Score: 1

      And then watch the person GO TO JAIL for stealing your stuff. The fact that it was easy doesn't make it any less wrong or illegal.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    10. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by Zico · · Score: 1

      Are people getting sued for posting flaws on Bugtraq or something? A malicious kid who released a worm is going to jail, who are these people being silenced?

    11. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by lime1304 · · Score: 1

      If there is any culpability here, it is lazy sys admins who don't patch their machines. How can one blame Microsoft when they had released a patch for the issue more than a month before it's first iteration? There's plenty of blame for M$ to take, but when the resolution to a problem is clearly out there, that's one they shouldn't.

    12. Re:Microsoft's Culpability by fingerfucker · · Score: 1

      And that, to me, is the problem. Rather than fix the security holes, companies try to silence people who point them out.

      I think that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and yet you keep talking about in paragraphs and paragraphs of boring blabber.

      Go look here and notice that all vulnerability discoveries are not just published, but also credited. And they are not only credited, but proof-of-concept exploit code examples are often included (and credited).

      And there are a lot more other sites/companies/projects who are in the business of discovering and publishing vulnerability warnings.

      Where are those companies that "try to silence" them? Or that such practice is (or is becoming) an industry trend?

      Please think (and do research) before you talk.

  22. Not Healthy ... by I+don't+want+to+spen · · Score: 1
    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'

    Instant thought (which I'm sure you've all had too!): Isn't that what all creative artists (writers, painters, programmers etc.) actually do?

    Plus I guess we can assume that the punishment of locking him away in a room is also not healthy?

    --
    Don't go to a brothel if you want to buy broth
    1. Re:Not Healthy ... by lakeland · · Score: 1

      So flows the poster's thoughts... "It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality" ... "[but] isn't that what all creative artists (writers, painters, programmers etc.) actually do?"

      Yes, that is exactly what all creative artists do. But creative artists generally have lousy lives, especially the brilliant (=misunderstood) ones. Oh, sure, we may love the fruits of their labour (Ulysses, The Potato Farmers, Linux) but it is pretty rare to actually want to live their lives...

  23. At least he got a sentance. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  24. It's a joke by jon1986 · · Score: 1

    18 months is a lot for a guy who took the code of a worm wrote by somebody else. He just did what anybody who knows how to code could have done. What about the guy who wrote the first worm, he didn't even got sued.

    1. Re:It's a joke by ebyrob · · Score: 1

      Ya, its almost as bad as putting someone away who merely pulls the trigger on a gun somebody gave them.

      I mean really, we all know *average* people can't be expected to control themselves. The fault obviously lies with the gun manufacturers. They should know better than to create such damaging objects.

    2. Re:It's a joke by repetty · · Score: 1

      That's a child's reasoning.

      He did what he did. That someone else hasn't been caught doesn't make him innocent.

  25. Not good be alone all day with machine friends? by sugapablo · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Which means most slashdotters basically have a get out of jail free card."

    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
    <head>
    <voice id="Homer Simpson">
    WooHoo!
    </voice>
    <voice id="Mr. Burns">
    Excellent!
    </voice>
    <voice id="Ralph Wiggum">
    I think I broke my wookie.
    </voice>
    </head>

    1. Re:Not good be alone all day with machine friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehe! You said head.

    2. Re:Not good be alone all day with machine friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BENT! Ralph Wiggum BENT his wookie, not broke it!

      -1, Ungeeky!

    3. Re:Not good be alone all day with machine friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perfet example of why XML should be banned from the universe.

  26. You knew by tacokill · · Score: 4, Funny

    You knew this was coming as soon as you saw his picture...

    Behold the comparison.

    1. Re:You knew by Linux_ho · · Score: 1

      I think this is a better comparison.

      --
      include $sig;
      1;
    2. Re:You knew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An even more apt comparison

    3. Re:You knew by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 1

      Worst... comparison... ever!

      -tCBG

      --
      Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
    4. Re:You knew by Scaz7 · · Score: 1

      Ahhh he'll be hurtin in prison...

      I suppose all the "action" he's gonna get in prison means he won't wanna "sit" at the computer anymore...

    5. Re:You knew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is that, and why does he have testicles on his chin?

  27. Well... by game+kid · · Score: 1

    ...he might still become one.

    After all, we all know what they say about prison and dropping soap, right? (Advice to Mr. Parson: Don't.)

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    1. Re:Well... by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 3, Informative

      Geeks are prime targets. 18 months is more than enough time, heck 18 hours is more than enough time to be victimized. Some people get abused before they are even tried.

      See this website http://www.spr.org/

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    2. Re:Well... by dasunt · · Score: 1

      Geeks are prime targets. 18 months is more than enough time, heck 18 hours is more than enough time to be victimized. Some people get abused before they are even tried.

      Female rape isn't funny, in or out of prison.

      Male prison rape is funny.

      (And I think our culture's sick.)

    3. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Female rape isn't funny, in or out of prison.

      Hmm, I swear I've heard female rape jokes. In fact, I've heard Irish nun rape jokes. Let's face it - doesn't matter what happens, someone somewhere will be offended by it, and someone somewhere will joke about it.

      But yes, humanity in general is sick.

    4. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      After all, we all know what they say about prison and dropping soap, right?

      "That thing about dropping the soap is true! You really can't hold on to that thing. It's slipping and sliding everywhere." --Peter Griffin

    5. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Luckily it seems he will spend the time in a minimum security prison, which AFAIK are somewhat safer.

    6. Re:Well... by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      It's ironic, but true, prisoners are safer in "lower" security prisons.

      Makes you wonder.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  28. Parents? by jspoon · · Score: 2, Funny

    I should have known they'd be good for something. Too bad I had them killed all those years ago.

  29. what a lil fattie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/01/28/intern et.attack.ap/

    maybe they will make him excersize and work some of that blubber off and actually build some muscles...

  30. Odd punishment by Malestyr · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "Parson had been out of jail on a $25,000 pretrial bond pending sentencing. He was not allowed to leave his home in Minnesota except to go to work, or if supervised and preapproved by the court." So it's not healthy to lock yourself in a room and make your own reality, but it is ok to force you to stay at home. Amazing.

    1. Re:Odd punishment by Blutarsky · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a general rule I think that the idea of prisons as a whole (which mind you are relatively new) are a very odd idea, "Wait we're going to put a bunch of criminals in the same building right?" "Yep" "We're not going to segregate them based on what they did?" "Nope" "And when they get out we're hoping that they turn into perfect citizens, after spending the last x number of years surrounded by criminals"\ "Ayup, that's the theory" I just don't get it, but I imagine that this kid might think twice before trying it again. Can't see it stopping anyone else though.

    2. Re:Odd punishment by Detritus · · Score: 1

      Prisons are progress. In the (really) old days, they would either execute you, flog you, brand you, chop off bits, or send you to the mines as a slave. Prisons cost money. It's cheaper to use instant punishment.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    3. Re:Odd punishment by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Can't see it stopping anyone else though

      Most intelligent people, if they give it even a moment's thought, and have recent (say, in the news) reminders that when people do a certain thing they go to jail, will indeed resist some tempting activities. Losing your physical freedom, your job, your dignity, and probably your ability to ever get back up to speed - that's a horrifying prospect. Most slashdot-type people don't know anyone that's been behind bars. If they did, a long conversation with that person would truly haunt the back of their minds as they contemplate polishing off that little piece of malware with which they're amusing themselves.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:Odd punishment by Blutarsky · · Score: 1

      I do volunteer work with children in the department of social services in MA, and I can tell you from personal experience there are very few instances where these kids, (the ones who have been through the legal system, not all of them are in that scenario) or with their family members who have had legal troubles, come back to society and BAM fit right back in. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating dungeons, torture, or execution like in the times past. But if you stop and think about it for a minute, prison systems are a bloody oddball idea!

    5. Re:Odd punishment by Blutarsky · · Score: 1

      Oh, don't get me wrong, I think they're a vast improvement over how things used to be done. but they are very much not perfect. and honestly when you get down to it, a very weird idea.

    6. Re:Odd punishment by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I actually wasn't referring to recidivism. I was referring to the deterrent effect of prison time when it comes to would-be techno white-collar criminals or cyber ne're-do-wells. It doesn't take much of a classic nerd thought experiment to picture being locked up with no net access, etc. The prospect of that, and the knowledge of what sort of (say, hacking) offenses can get you there... well, smart people get it, I think. Which is is why smart people should get it (jail time, that is - the deprivation of liberty) when they decide to use their brains to cause havoc.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    7. Re:Odd punishment by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      You might be interested in Discipline & Punish : The Birth of the Prison by Michel Foucault. You might not like some of the author's theories*, as they're pretty heady stuff for your typical slashdotter, but the overall examination of the history of punishment is pretty good.

      I think imprisonment derives from exile. We can imagine a time when mankind was too mobile or didn't have the resources to imprison, and for whatever reason, a group might not want to kill a transgressor. So the group would kick the transgressor out of the group, and if they were a territorial group, out of that territory. I'm sure that in some cases this would amount to a death sentence, as it might be impossible to survive outside of a group for very long.

      Imprisonment is a type of internal exile. It's not quite so easy to exile someone and consign them to the wilderness these days.

      *On the other hand, you might like them a great deal.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  31. Prison Society by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

    Cellmate: So, whatta you in for? Kid: Uh... Killing a guy ('s computer)...

    Yeah, this kid is screwed.

  32. It doesn't seem fair to me by parrillada · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kids do stupid things. I know I did my fair share of stupid things when I was younger. Now I consider myself a highly moral, good standing citizen of society, with great future prospects. But if I had been put in jail for one of the silly things I did when I was younger, my life today would probably be a disaster, and to society's detriment.

    1. Re: It doesn't seem fair to me by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > Kids do stupid things. I know I did my fair share of stupid things when I was younger. Now I consider myself a highly moral, good standing citizen of society, with great future prospects. But if I had been put in jail for one of the silly things I did when I was younger, my life today would probably be a disaster, and to society's detriment.

      Wow - I can't believe the president posts to Slashdot!

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re: It doesn't seem fair to me by wwahammy · · Score: 1

      I think he's been to society's detriment anyway.

    3. Re:It doesn't seem fair to me by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But you, like probably most people reading this, were smart/lucky enough not to get caught. This kid/young adult wasn't. The 'stupid stuff' you (and I and everyone else) did wasn't big enough to affect tens of thousands of people.

      If, at the age of 17, you had your hands on this virus code....would you have released it into the wild? With your name on it? Not a chance.

  33. Ashcroft is gone. by chaffed · · Score: 0

    Now we see the benefits. John Ashcroft was an ardent supporter of mandatory sentences. With the recent supreme court decision that upheld the sovereignty of a Judge's judiciary powers in determining sentence. Had he been sentenced just three months ago he'd be looking at 5 years in pound me in the ass prison.

    --
    What could possibly go wrong?
    1. Re:Ashcroft is gone. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Oh, please. I call Non-Insightful-Partisan-BS-Spouting on you. The judge in this case operated directly within the bounds of the recommended guidelines. She opted for the lower end of range, and that's what he got. Neither Ashcroft, nor the recent Supreme Court decision had weight here. Now, the Supreme Court's decision will probably spare some crackers from a trial, because the courts are going to be totally crushed having revisit every damn high-end federal sentence from the last 20 years because of that ruling.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  34. Hmm? by benow · · Score: 1

    *cough* As opposed to locking yourself in a room and creating the reality of others?
    Kid shouldn't be making a worm, but who is he to criticize a personal situation?

  35. Now that would be interesting... by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...if he got sentenced for violating the copyright of the original myDoom...

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  36. "Light Weight?!?!?" by barfy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    18 months, a lifetime felony label, and having to recompense Microsoft.

    You really think this is worth wasting a productive life over?!?

    I guess the reason that I got rejected for this story is that I thought the sentance was oppressive, and this submitter felt it was lightweight. Get out of jail free card?? How about felony speech?!

    Surely, there was some ground that both got the point home to him well before prison. Were they worried about Anarchy breaking out all over?

    1. Re:"Light Weight?!?!?" by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      Would be still be ineligible to vote and would he still get a ten year sentence if he ever possessed a gun (18 USC 922(g) and 18 USC 924) or would those laws be considered to not apply since he was under 18?

      I don't see how he could be denied the right to vote, since when he committed his act he didn't HAVE the right to vote. How can you lose what you don't already have? It would be like ordering your car seized, but you don't own one, so one day when you buy one, the gov't takes it.

      But laws don't make sense.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    2. Re:"Light Weight?!?!?" by ebyrob · · Score: 1

      How about felony speech?!

      Hmm... did I miss something in the article where he talked about and/or posted source code for something without actually using it to attack computers?

      A DNS attack using compromised zombies is neither protected nor speech.

    3. Re:"Light Weight?!?!?" by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Hi. I'm the one the submitted the article. My reference to "lightweight" was specifically informed by the judge's decision to use the lower end of the recommended range. The judge, and the news source cited refered to it that way. I found some semi-dark humor in the judge's reasoning, and immediately thought of the thousands of other basement-dwelling game players that thrive (not sarcastic here) with an alternate reality playing a big part in their real lives. We all know the types. The "get out of jail free" comment was, if you haven't already thought it through, a reference to how many people are probably way, way more invested in their online alternate realities than this kid. You know: a little sarcastic extrapolation? Young guy just getting started in a non-real world of malware experiments and game playing gets the low end of the sentence... well, people who are two decades into that trip would surely be let off the hook entirely. Get it? A little humor? Huh?

      That said, this kid probably knew he was being an ass, and by the time the whole trial thing was over, he seems to be genuinely contrite. I'm guessing that realizes that he burned up more man hours of productivity among all of the people cleaning up the mess than he'll ever offset if he's white-hat IT dynamo for the rest of his life.

      If he'd walked up and down a business district in the middle of the night and smashed the front windows of several dozen businesses, while not directly, bodily injuring anyone... would he deserve the felony label then?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:"Light Weight?!?!?" by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 1

      Do you realize how much damage was done to how many people because of this guy? Take some time and reflect on the pain caused to others, because that's what REALLY matters.

      --

      eTrade SUCKS
    5. Re:"Light Weight?!?!?" by Changa_MC · · Score: 1

      Do you realize how much damage was done to how many people because of this guy?
      about fifty cents worth of damage. Come on, blaster was out there already, everyone who was stupid enough to leave their computer unpatched got it, with or without this kid's help.

      --
      Changa hates change.
    6. Re:"Light Weight?!?!?" by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 1

      Using your logic, if I go out and rob banks, it would be ok too?

      Come on, bank robbery is out there already, everyone who was stupid enough to leave their banks vulnerable got it, with or without my help.

      --

      eTrade SUCKS
    7. Re:"Light Weight?!?!?" by Changa_MC · · Score: 1
      You're confusing your metaphores.

      If I saw a bank robbery happening, and recognized the guys doing it, and didn't turn them in, I wouldn't get sentenced as a bank robber. Even if I scribbled my name on a bag of money.

      I mean sure, he's a "criminal" but he's not the one who created an OS with a security hole large enough to drive a truck through.

      --
      Changa hates change.
  37. Just read the article by Mr.+Cancelled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    before surfing to Slashdot to check the headlines.

    I remember seeing this kids picture when he was busted, and now that i've read his story, I've gotta say I feel sorry for him.

    Not so much for his punishment, as much as his life thus far. His parents did get blamed by the judge for being neglectful, but I don't think that begins to explain how bad it was.

    The guy was afraid to go outside. You can see in his photo that he's rather large, and not at all the typical 19 year old (He was what? 17 when he got busted?). It just looks like another case wherein a kid was an outcast, primarily due to a bad home situation, and rather than have friends or relatives to help him through, he retreated into his room, and kind of lived in his own world, which the parents did nothing to prevent, or try to help him outta.

    Just sounds like a sad story... Kinda like you feel after watching one of those HBO Specials like "Black Tar Heroin" or something. It sucks that he is where he is, but what sucks worse is that there's lotsa other people out there in similar situations.

    The Skatenigs said it best w/their debut album: "Stupid people shoudn't breed!".

    1. Re:Just read the article by wonderbar · · Score: 1

      CNN may have the pic you are alluding to here:http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/01/28/i nternet.attack.ap/index.html

    2. Re:Just read the article by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      He will have to be very lucky to not be abused in prison, especially since he is large and has socialization ("afraid to go outside", etc) issues.

      18 months confinement is bad enough, but he is at risk of much more:

      http://www.spr.org/

      Stop the abuse in our nation's prisons.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    3. Re:Just read the article by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean:

      If buttholes were peepshows, then the 'Nigs are the window to the soul of this fuckin ridiculous world.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    4. Re:Just read the article by Mr.+Cancelled · · Score: 1

      If buttholes are peepshows, then the 'nigs are the windows to this fuckin ridiculous world.

      Dude, if I'd have been drinkin' milk, it'd be comin' out my nose right now! 8)=

  38. uh, huh, by Hooya · · Score: 1

    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'

    so let's lock him in a room with someone else who will love creating a whole 'nother reality for him.

    one man's reality is another man's fantasy.

  39. Judges should spend time in prison by Baldrson · · Score: 1, Insightful
    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'

    If this Judge thinks having a taste of reality is a healthy thing, they should have themselves placed into the prison system with which they punish people and see if they have any better grasp of reality afterwards.

    1. Re:Judges should spend time in prison by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      I think what judges and law makers should realise is that the prison system is actually harming people;

      A) bad food causing bad nutrition
      B) bad environment causing mental instability
      C) being harmed by other psycho inmates because guards just dont care.

      I am not saying prisons should be a holiday camp, but prisons shouldnt harm people permanently.

      Just because a state has budget problems and gets the lowest bidder for crap $1.20 food per day doesnt mean people should be put through hell.

      Raw food ingredients in bulk are cheap, and prisoners can learn to make their own food rather than eat the same slop day in day out.

      Though the whole notion of prison is a very dated pre AD concept, why cant the human race grow up.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    2. Re:Judges should spend time in prison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention that various diseases in prison are so rampant that the prison system presents a signficant public health hazard.

  40. 18 months != 18 months by kaustik · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm not sure how it works is his state, but 18 months in California generally works like this:
    - 1-3 months in County jail awaiting transport
    - Remaining 15-17 months can actually be served as 1/3 time, given good behavior. That leaves about 5 -6 months left
    Total time: around 7 or 8 months.

  41. What is he talking about? by ajaf · · Score: 1

    It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality." Writing a virus variant is creating your own reality?
    And if it's true, is it worse than living others reality?

    --
    ajf
    1. Re:What is he talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the near future you will go to jell just when you talk about writing a virus, thats if gates.inc wins...

      ---
      U

  42. WAIT A MOMENT by ScytheBlade1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    WAIT A MOMENT.

    You've got a woman, and you're locking her out?

    I mean, I try, and try, and try, and for some reason I can't even get one to step in my house.

    And you're locking her OUT....I am so confused....

    1. Re:WAIT A MOMENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some guys just don't put women on pedestals.

    2. Re:WAIT A MOMENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And you're locking her OUT....I am so confused....

      Obviously, you've never been married.

    3. Re:WAIT A MOMENT by slashrogue · · Score: 3, Funny

      You'll understand when you're married. ;)

    4. Re:WAIT A MOMENT by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1
      You'll understand when you're married.

      It means being pwned in the most literal (and inescapeable) sense of the word.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    5. Re:WAIT A MOMENT by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 1

      Haven't you seen Married... with Children? Tells you all you need to know about life. :-)

    6. Re:WAIT A MOMENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I mean, I try, and try, and try, and for some reason I can't even get one to step in my house."

      Obviously women find you too trying.

  43. its MINNESOTA by deft · · Score: 3, Funny

    "18 months in a Minnesota prison may only seem like 2000 years."

    Yet oddly enough 18 months in a Minnesota prison will seen alot like 18 months in Minnesota.

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    1. Re:its MINNESOTA by tibike77 · · Score: 1

      I always wondered how much "18 months Minnesota prison in Salussa Secundus time" is... Google calc seems to reject my querry ;)

      --
      By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
    2. Re:its MINNESOTA by biobogonics · · Score: 1

      "18 months in a Minnesota prison may only seem like 2000 years."

      Add a regular diet of lutefisk to the sentence!

    3. Re:its MINNESOTA by thatiger · · Score: 1

      I live in minnesota you insensitive clod!
      Now where's my cheeze on a stick.

      --
      Nosce te ipsum! -- Know thyself.
  44. A useless person? by ebyrob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Like Kevin Mitnick?

    Yes, his crimes were a bit more on the border and less damaging, but he was in jail longer, convicted older, and still seems to have gotten on with his life pretty well. I'd hardly call the guy useless.

    I figure this kid has at least as good a chance of turning out a normal guy as Mitnick. (Though only time will tell if he has the moxie for it)

  45. lemme get this straight by fishbowl · · Score: 1

    They're going to lock the guy in a room where they create their own reality, to show him that locking himself in a room to create his own reality is wrong?

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  46. Months Seem Like Millennia by thelizman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When you're a fatty little weakling computer geek forced to toss the salad of a guy named Bruno who's been pumping iron since he was convicted of bashing his girlfirends skull in because he found out she was going cyber with some fatty little weakling computer geek.

    1. Re:Months Seem Like Millennia by kaustik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm completely in agreement with you. In fact, I don't think the punishment fits the crime. Jail is for violent offenders. Just trying to shed some light on how different terms work in the prison system.

    2. Re:Months Seem Like Millennia by bryanp · · Score: 1

      Read the article. He's going to a minimum security prison. Guys named bruno convicted of bashing their girlfriend's skull in don't go to minimum security. His cellmate will almost certainly be another non-violent offender. Real life prison is not all like Oz.

      --
      "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
    3. Re:Months Seem Like Millennia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd think nerds would understand this principle: "If we go by the book, hours would seem like days."

    4. Re:Months Seem Like Millennia by Peyna · · Score: 1

      In some cases, especially white-collar crime, a fine doesn't serve as a significant deterrant to someone with plenty of cash to burn. In those cases, jail time may be justified even if the crime is not violent.

      --
      What?
    5. Re:Months Seem Like Millennia by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      Yes, because of all those murderers in minimum security prison.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    6. Re:Months Seem Like Millennia by http101 · · Score: 1

      Back in the day, we'd just send them to Australia...

      --
      -- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
  47. Throw the book at him... by John+Seminal · · Score: 1
    The message has to get out that doing stuff like this will get severe punishments. He crippled 50,000 computers.

    The judge imposed three years of supervised release following his prison term, during which Parson can only use computers for business and education - not video games or file-sharing or hacking.

    The judge should have denied him any access to computers, to hell with the kids education. Would a judge allow a drunk driver to get back in a car if he caused damage to 50,000 cars? It is the same thing.

    I hope there is a federal law they can nail him on a second time. He needs a stronger punishment. I don't think telling kids that if they get caught doing this stuff all they will get is a year will deter them.

    The parents are not responsible for what the kid does. He knew what he was doing was wrong and did it anyways.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:Throw the book at him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would a judge allow a drunk driver to get back in a car if he caused damage to 50,000 cars? It is the same thing.

      What are you stupid? How much does your computer cost? Why dont we look at the amount of inconvenience he caused to an individual and give him an appropriate sentence.

      An no let's not do a summation?? It's ridiculous! The virus didnt delete files it merely caused a slowdown. No individual was maimed or injured by him.

      Fucking deal with it instead of taking out your own hatred on teenagers.

      He needs a stronger punishment. I don't think telling kids that if they get caught doing this stuff all they will get is a year will deter them.

      Gosh, you're really a moron. This kids life is now ruined .. You try geting a decent job with a criminal record. Unlike the rest of the civilized world, US prisons are not geared to rehabilitation. Not only that, everyone knows about sexual torture (carried out by fellow inmates with guards' knowledge/encouragement) happens in US prisons (and nobody cares it's a big joke to people). That's far worse than the inconvenience he caused to an individual. If you cant see that you're a hateful bastard.

    2. Re:Throw the book at him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All heed the words above. The Grim, Pedantic Overlord Poster Who Thinks He Knows What Justice Is has just spoken.

      On a side note, I would like to remind the viewers that the Grim Pedantic Overlord Poster encourages you to join him at the 8th Grade Prom this spring...that is, if you enjoy bloodshot eyes and an unusually harsh, raspy castrado voice.

    3. Re:Throw the book at him... by wwahammy · · Score: 1

      A drunk driver is much more likely to cause a death with damaging 50,000 cars compared to this kid damaging 50,000 computers.

    4. Re:Throw the book at him... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      What are you stupid? How much does your computer cost?

      Careful throwing around the word "stupid" if you think that the value of the computer hardware is even what's involved here. Do you have any idea the actual cost, in highly skilled, expensive manhours, that it took to mop up after this guy's little adventure?

      The virus didnt delete files it merely caused a slowdown

      Businesses that rely on a working high-speed internet lose millions of dollars when this happens. That costs jobs, productivity, raises, bonuses... stocks lose value, retirement plans lose ground. Can't you see past any sort of immediate gratification? People don't hate teenagers. They hate people that do their best to wreck their ability to make a living.

      You try geting a decent job with a criminal record

      You try running a decent business that provides decent jobs when punks are busy doing everything they can to cost you as much money as possible just for existing online.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:Throw the book at him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Then go and tell Mr. Gates to build a fucking OS that doesnt have 50-fucking million holes that the average script-kiddie can use and fuck up everyones PC.

      Dont get me wrong I know the business world, hell I'm in the business world. Some of what you said about businesses losing money is true. But just maybe its the company's fault that they use windows. Let's face it, sooner or later, the business world will eventually rise up and say "Fuck You, Mr. Gates" and switch to Linux. But until that time ,the fuck do you expect?

      For the Kid involved in this, yea hes basically screwed. Unfortunatly,hes considered a liability risk in the business world and a criminal risk by ewveryone else. He mind as well go to the Marines and die over in Iraq. Thats if he doesnt come out of jail gay and with AIDS.

    6. Re:Throw the book at him... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Then go and tell Mr. Gates to build a fucking OS that doesnt have 50-fucking million holes that the average script-kiddie can use and fuck up everyones PC.

      Dont get me wrong I know the business world, hell I'm in the business world. Some of what you said about businesses losing money is true. But just maybe its the company's fault that they use windows.


      I won't quote back the rest of your comment because it's just silly and terribly typed. However (since you "know the business world"), let's just take your line of reasoning and apply it to other things that businesses rely on.

      Most businesses are in buildings with glass windows (no pun intended). Should the manufacturers of those windows and the business owners be blamed when someone decides to take a sledgehammer break through that glass? How about when he brings a bunch of friends and they all do it? Is this something that every business should be expecting? And is it their fault when it happens?

      Do you drive a car? Or ever ride in one? There's nothing in between the 15 or so gallons of highly flammable gasoline you're running around with and the outside world except some thin sheet metal. So, if somebody (just to see if they can), decides to walk up next to your car at a red light, bash a hole through the sheet metal and light your car on fire... you're just asking for that, aren't you? I mean, why are you not driving an impossible-to-burn car? Shouldn't all cars be heavily armored, even if it costs more than most people can afford?

      Or maybe something more visceral. Do you know anyone female? Have you ever known one that was raped or otherwise assaulted? I supposd you blame them for not being adequately armed just in case that were to happen, right? After all, based on your reasoning, if it can happen, then the person it happens to is at fault. I mean, it doesn't take a smart person to vandalize a business, assault a person, or burn your car. Hell, even a script kiddie could walk up and throw acid on your car's paint job (pretty much like hacking your home page, right?). But I'm sure that you have a vandal-proof car. And I supposed that even a script kiddie could just keep dialing your cell phone over and over, driving you crazy and denying you use of the phone until you take extreme measures. But, that would be your fault for using a dial-able cellphone, right?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    7. Re:Throw the book at him... by kravlor · · Score: 1
      Would a judge allow a drunk driver to get back in a car if he caused damage to 50,000 cars? It is the same thing.

      Given the laws on the books in many states where you commonly see 5+ DUI confictions with repeat offenders, the answer would appear to be "yes."

      While damaging 50k computers is a true financial burden, the treatment afforded to repeat DUI offenders is by far too lenient. However, what's 50k computers or cars compared to the immense loss we have in DUI-related fatalities?

      Having had personal friends killed by a drunk driver, I'd be inclined to let them rot in jail -- or better yet, provide a first conviction with such stiff penalties (plus rehabilitation) that they'd never do it again.

    8. Re:Throw the book at him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      --- intro
      You know locks? Some are covered by warranty and some are not? You know why it is so? Because some of them are actually secure while other are not?

      --- the stuff
      You're a fucking dick without any common sense. There is a big difference between making glass that fits the job and making glass that is supposed to fit the job, but it does'nt.

      The second if Microsoft Windows that the businesses relies heavily on. The first is Mac OS X that the businesses are now starting to look towards.

      Microsoft Windows is selling itself as secure especially with SP2, but the patches are out too late (if at all!), the product is shipped with allot of known flaws, no warnings are also sent to people relying on the software in case a security compromising flaw is found, so that they cannot make their own defensive actions as there are no patches. no information, no nothing to be afraid of.

      -- repeat
      You know locks? Some are covered by warranty and some are not? You know why it is so? Because some of them are actually secure while other are not?

      --- and oh yes!
      You're a fucking dick without any basic logic, maybe Abu Gharib is the next workplace for you, monkey feces!

    9. Re:Throw the book at him... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Gosh, but you're an articulate fellow. What I particularly like is your inability to understand what an analogy is. It allows you to see the philosphical underpinnings of an argument while discussing it in another context - and thereby to sometimes expose a flawed point of view. You're too chicken to actually address the point (which is why you do it anonymously, you coward), but I'll ask again, just for fun:

      If someone thinks you should only have tempered glass windows on your house, should they be allowed to break your normal glass windows just to make a point? The glass you have is what you can afford (to buy, to maintain, to understand), and it's not bulletproof and you know it. But because someone else is amused by showing you that it can be broken, the break it. How is that your fault, and not the jackass with the hammer?

      Your razor-sharp, if cowardly, brain will probably still miss the point, but that's only because you want to excuse away a bunch of chicken-shit script kiddies. Is MS software perfect? No? Has there ever been a Linux vulnerability? Yes. Could I find someone who could crack the machine you're using right now? Sure. Should I? The difference between us is that I wouldn't.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    10. Re:Throw the book at him... by Happy+go+Lucky · · Score: 1
      Given the laws on the books in many states where you commonly see 5+ DUI confictions with repeat offenders, the answer would appear to be "yes."

      That's not so much the judge as the legislature.

      In my state (Colorado), DUI is always a misdemeanor, unless there's an accident with serious bodily injury. The judge doesn't even have the option to sentence the defendant to 12 months plus one day.

      It would take an act of the legislature, followed by Guv Owens signature, to change that.

      Now, our judges are still soft, but that's because the law allows them to be.

    11. Re:Throw the book at him... by loraksus · · Score: 1

      Stronger punishment? Well, to satisfy that little need for vengance of yours, how about this. He gets raped in prison and gets AIDS. Good enough for you?

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    12. Re:Throw the book at him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone thinks you should only have tempered glass windows on your house, should they be allowed to break your normal glass windows just to make a point? The glass you have is what you can afford (to buy, to maintain, to understand), and it's not bulletproof and you know it. But because someone else is amused by showing you that it can be broken, the break it. How is that your fault, and not the jackass with the hammer?

      If someone breaks my window, I would expect them to do many hours of community service. Not get ass raped in the US prison system.

  48. It IS partly the parents fault... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for giving him the middle name Lee. That name just seems to be trouble.

  49. Fark you.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to rip off the Fark headline

  50. Lenient by dmarx · · Score: 1

    How many dollars of damage did he cause? How much prison time would somebody who stole that much get? Hell, a member of DrinkOrDie got 41 month (three years and change). That's for just putting software on the Internet! This jerk gets about half that for deliberately causing harm! I hope the idiot judge gets every computer virus known to man.

    --
    "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
    1. Re:Lenient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm amazed at the number of people who seem to believe he got off lightly.

      What about the countless ignorants who left their computer unpatched when it's so easy. They're the ones who should be prevented to own a computer in the first place.

      What about that sad outfit that put out that swiss cheese of an OS? That the one that should be paying for the billions you're talking about.

    2. Re:Lenient by dmarx · · Score: 1
      What about the countless ignorants who left their computer unpatched when it's so easy. They're the ones who should be prevented to own a computer in the first place.

      You're right!
      And also, if someone's house gets robbed, why, it's their fault! They should have had the place locked up like Ft. Knox, and had a security system, and guards and not had breakable glass windows! They should be prevented from owning homes in the first place!
      Seriously, lawbreakers are always held fully responsible for their actions (under the law at least) in the real world. Why should it be any different in the virtual world.
      As for Microsoft, every OS has bugs. Windows just gets targeted more because it is the most popular.

      --
      "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
  51. New Quotation by sciop101 · · Score: 0
    "Basically, I was trying to do something teenagers wouldn't just throw away. ... I was extremely scared but I felt very good after it was done."

    Will Jeffrey Lee Parson remember these words in a year and half from now?

    Probably not, he will just blame his parents.

    --
    The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
  52. Slashdot got nuttin on the NBA by valkraider · · Score: 1

    Qyntel Woods was suspended from the Portland Trail Blazers (a losing team) because of legal and behavioral troubles. Including animal abuse...

    The Blazers suspended him for the WHOLE rest of the season, and then fired him.

    But he gets picked up by the Heat, who are a championship bound team, and given only a 5 game suspension.

    So not only is his sentence lighter - but he gets "promoted" to a better team.

    All while making obscene amounts of money for doing something most of us would consider "recreation" and some even pay for the rights to play (via gym memberships and whatnot).

    Slashdot has nothing to worry about...

  53. He should have gotten 20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't understand the folks saying that 18 months is "too much". Just how do you expect us to deter these little bastards at all if not with harsh sentencing? It's hard enough to catch them as it is, but if there are no penalties (or light ones, like this) then they have no reason not to keep doing it.

    Virus and worm authors should get 20 years minimum, and they should never be allowed to touch a PC again, for any reason.

    1. Re: He should have gotten 20 years by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > I don't understand the folks saying that 18 months is "too much". Just how do you expect us to deter these little bastards at all if not with harsh sentencing? It's hard enough to catch them as it is, but if there are no penalties (or light ones, like this) then they have no reason not to keep doing it.

      Doesn't the same logic apply to people who run insecure systems?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re: He should have gotten 20 years by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Doesn't the same logic apply to people who run insecure systems

      No, it doesn't! Come on! Do you even hear yourself? My house is not impossible to break into. So... someone who breaks in should be treated leniently? My wooden garage is not fireproof... so it's my fault when someone torches it just for the fun of watching it burn?

      If you run a prefectly patched, unassailable Linux box, and I use a backhoe to bust through your server room wall (just to see if I can, mind you) - is that your fault? By your logic, it is, unless you have armed guards, a concrete bunker, and... oops! This could go on all day! And that's the point. These are not naturally occuring phenomena. I do blame the guy that builds the flimsy house on the Florida coast (especially when he wants to use my tax dollars to rebuild, again). But I don't blame the business owner in Florida for having his business vandalized (electronically or otherwise) by some gloating punk and his friends. That doesn't mean it isn't wise to protect your business, but that's a matter of pragmatism, not a stroke of causal equity with the criminal deliberately looking to cause damage.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re: He should have gotten 20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lighten up Francis, I spent many hours on a Commadore 64 hacking hex code just for fun. It was always exciting when a program worked. This is just taking it to the internet level, the kid was expermenting with his code and released it without consideration. The jail time may be a deterrent for future script-kiddies but I believe this dude is already rehabilatated.

    4. Re: He should have gotten 20 years by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Lighten up Francis, I spent many hours on a Commadore 64 hacking hex code just for fun. It was always exciting when a program worked. This is just taking it to the internet level, the kid was expermenting with his code and released it without consideration. The jail time may be a deterrent for future script-kiddies but I believe this dude is already rehabilatated.

      He probably is rehabilitated (or, scared to death of ever getting caught again), but please let's not confuse your getting a program to work while hacking hex for fun with swapping out someone else's name on some malware and then launching it to see how far it could go. That's like saying I used to build rubber-band powered balsa wood airplanes when I was a kid, so I can understand why he likes to launch model rockets as gas stations.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re: He should have gotten 20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But here is the deal, many rapist gets of the hook if the girls is drunk or didn't dress herself properly or if the girl in any other way made it possible for the man to rape her ...

      The faulty logic behind this is that the girl should know that she might get raped, therefor avoid any situation which could result in it happening. If she didn't do this, she wanted to get raped ...

      Why is it, that you think, that the same faulty logic can't be applied to a case like this?

      I think the crime of a rapist is fare more worse then that of someone who, without the use of force, makes business lose a little money or people couldn't connect to the internet, all because they didn't patch their software ...

    6. Re: He should have gotten 20 years by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      That's a funny joke! Obviously it should be applied in NEITHER case. Just because some jury blames a woman for getting raped doesn't mean we should blame some business for getting a DDoS attack from Korea.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  54. Slashdot - the fountain of youth? by Fortran+IV · · Score: 1

    Which means most slashdotters basically have a get out of jail free card.

    Well, according to this poll from a while back, no more than 24% of slashdotters could be considered "teens." Is ScentCone implying that the longer we read Slashdot, the more childish we become?

    Not that I'm saying he'd be wrong, mind you. . .

    --
    I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
    1. Re:Slashdot - the fountain of youth? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Is ScentCone implying that the longer we read Slashdot, the more childish we become?

      I'm still pretty new to this forum. It is ruining my life. So yes, I think you've about got it right!

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  55. Soo .... by agildehaus · · Score: 1

    they punish him by locking him in a room. Smart.

  56. That gives me 3 cards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sigh,

    just another AC, cause no way would I admit this in public!

  57. Its Just not Healthy by hackus · · Score: 1

    I love it....

    I should have been committed a long time ago...

    LOL.

    -Hack

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
  58. Jail - the Anti-Slashdot? by cmholm · · Score: 1

    It's a shallow enough childishness that a few months in the pokey should slap us right back into adulthood.

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
    1. Re:Jail - the Anti-Slashdot? by Fortran+IV · · Score: 1

      Besides, as someone pointed out elsewhere, after 18 months in stir we probably wouldn't even recognize, much less understand, most of the topics on Slashdot.

      Of course, that wouldn't stop the deeply childish ones from posting comments anyway.

      --
      I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
  59. About reality by pojo · · Score: 1

    It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.

    A federal judge saying this makes the federally-mandated V-Chip seem kind of ironic, huh?

  60. Anyone know what firm? by Uebergeek · · Score: 1

    Just wondering if anyone knows what law firm represented Jeffrey Lee Parsons?

  61. Still not as bad as David L "Complete Idiot" Smith by gfecyk · · Score: 1

    Remember him? The guy who wrote the Melissa virus? He got twenty months for writing that critter.

    Prosecutors took pity on him because of his parents! His parents? Folks, I don't take pitty on a deadly cyber-terrorist who causes three-hundred-twenty million dollars of damage to the US economy. I for one hope he rots in prison for his heinous cyber-crime, right beside his predecessor.

    At least those one hundred community service hours won't be spent on a computer like his predecessor spent his. The judge had some forethought at least.

    Memo to "Complete Idiot II": If someone drops a bar of soap in the shower, don't pick it up. You might get infected by a virus!

    --
    Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa
  62. Microsoft? by p!ngu · · Score: 1

    Whats the difference between this guy and most people that work for microsoft?

    1. Re:Microsoft? by hairykrishna · · Score: 1

      You have to pay money to Microsoft before they'll screw up your PC. They also always get off with a fine.

      --
      "Physics is to math as sex is to masturbation." -R. Feynman
    2. Re:Microsoft? by slasar · · Score: 1

      It really is a shame MS are frowned upon, Gates and co maybe ruthless but they are pioneers in the field of computing.
      He has realised his dream and the opportunity for humanity to communicate inside a huge arena of creative design is now possible.
      Windows has faults but if you consider the value of pirated copies of the operating system that gives people even without much financial support the chance 'to play' he deserves some respect. The guy was born to succeed, it is his destiny.
      It must be a living hell keeping his family safe from kidnappers.

  63. Is it a white collar prison or by melted · · Score: 1

    federal "pound me in the ass" prison? I'm asking because I'm hoping it's the latter. These motherfuckers deserve _harsh_ sentences for what they do. I have no mercy towards them.

    1. Re:Is it a white collar prison or by Bambi+Dee · · Score: 1

      So prison is "mercy" if you're not raped by folks you can't escape from?

    2. Re:Is it a white collar prison or by Bambi+Dee · · Score: 1

      PS: Sorry, bad mood.

  64. Re:Odd punishment NOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it's not healthy to lock yourself in a room and make your own reality, but it is ok to force you to stay at home. Amazing.

    It's ok to get locked away by other people for creating your own reality that inflicts damage upon other people. If you stay within the bounds of your own reality without damaging other people, then you can impose whatever locking you like on yourself. That kid got what he deserves.

  65. Scale of punishment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Finland, when a lowlife celeb world champion and all tried to do a manslaughter when drunk, the punishment was 24 months. If he behaves, and he's a first timer, the actual punishment is 12 months. So, if you run hexeditor on a worm in America, the punishment equals to that if you stick a knife to someone's back in Europe.

    Nice.

    1. Re:Scale of punishment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      welcone to a new Reich..

    2. Re:Scale of punishment... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      In Finland, when a lowlife celeb world champion and all tried to do a manslaughter when drunk, the punishment was 24 months. If he behaves, and he's a first timer, the actual punishment is 12 months. So, if you run hexeditor on a worm in America, the punishment equals to that if you stick a knife to someone's back in Europe.

      Nice.


      Has it occurred to you that perhaps trying to take someone's life, permanently, rates more than 12 months in prison? Surely that's not how little the people of Finland value a life, that they'd make someone uncomfortable for only a year for trying to kill someone.

      And this: run hexeditor on a worm in America

      is only part of what he did. He then took the actions that resulted in thousands and thousands of lost manhours, millions in lost dollars, and all sorts of indirect damage to not just companies, but to charities, government, grandmothers, and other people that were impacted. To suggest that all he did was edit some code is like saying that your guy who tried to kill somebody "only picked up a knife." Some perspective, please. And, remind me not to get attacked while visiting Finland - there doesn't appear to be much disincentive to make criminals stop and think about the consequences.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  66. Staggered Majority is ridiculous by kaladorn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A key example of this from my old CF reserve unit: We had young men in there of 18 years of age who could go places and die for their country *but who could not have a beer in the mess!*. So, it was okay to give them a firearm and let them call in artillery, but Dear Lord don't let them touch a light beer. (Well, combining the two is a bad idea, but that's not really what I was getting at....)

    Of course, this just led to the 'blind eye'. Many of us felt if you were old enough to wear the uniform, take the oath, and kill and die for your country, you could at least have a beer from time to time.

    --
    -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
  67. Get off light? by defile · · Score: 1

    A YEAR AND A HALF is getting off light? I mean, it sure is for a hacking case, but jesus, a year and a half is not something you just sleep through.

    1. Re:Get off light? by jlanthripp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My 20-year-old former next door neighbor (a habitual criminal and the one person in the neighborhood I wouldn't gladly invite to brunch with my folks) was recently convicted on 4 counts of auto theft. The cars he stole were worth a total of about $25,000. He was sentenced to 5 years in prison (actually 4 5-year terms, but served concurrently). How does this compare to the kid who got a year and a half for releasing a worm that infected 50,000 computers? Let's do the math.

      For purposes of this discussion, I'll assume that the car thief totally demolished the cars he stole, for a total damage of $25,000. That makes his sentence one year for every $5,000 in damages.

      The LovSan worm infected about 50,000 computers. Let's assume that each computer cost $1,000. Let's also assume that the machines were out of service for 2 days as a result of the worm. Given an average PC lifespan of 4 years (1460 days), that's 1/730 of the computers' lifespans, or about $1.37 in damages per computer infected. Multiply by 50,000 computers, and you have $68,500 in direct damages.

      That doesn't count the costs of removing the infection, lost productivity, etc. etc.

      The kid got off light; a just sentence would have been 12 years or more, IMHO. Of course, that'd only be 4 years in jail before he got paroled.

      Then again, I think my punk-ass neighbor got off light, too. If I'd caught him trying to steal my truck, he'd be serving his sentence in a hospital bed, eating and crapping through tubes.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    2. Re:Get off light? by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      I slept through most of sophomore year of high school and the two summers surrounding it, does that count?

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    3. Re:Get off light? by defile · · Score: 1

      If you want to start totalling up dollars lost and costs to make things as they were, that's more appropriate for civil court. Dishing out punishment to scale against a dollar amount is just crazy.

    4. Re:Get off light? by jlanthripp · · Score: 1

      Using that logic, the Enron execs should be set free. After all, they didn't commit any violent acts - just fraud on a massive scale.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    5. Re:Get off light? by defile · · Score: 1

      It's easy to lose sight of this, but the criminal justice system is supposed to be rehabilitive. The focus should be on the criminal and finding a way to allow him to come back into society. It's absolutely wrong to point at the injured victim and say that someone must pay for this with their blood. It serves no useful purpose. It turns criminal justice into a spectacular freak show.

      If a slap on the wrist will prevent that teenager from ever writing a virus again, then that's all you need. If he goes back to his sinister ways (and most people who get a visit from the FBI sure won't), then you start stepping up the severity.

      You want revenge? Take it to civil court.

    6. Re:Get off light? by bob_herrick · · Score: 1

      This post and the others like it miss an important point. The justification of punishment includes, among others, deterrence and retribution. To be effective as a deterrent, and to meet our common views of fairness in retribution it seems right, IMO, to consider the reasonably foreseeable personal gain that the offender expected when the crime was committed. Grand theft has an easily foreseeable personal beneft. Scripting a virus or worm has a much different calculus - some form of personal self worth as opposed to dollar reward. This sentence seems fair to me, if not on the harsh side. Multiple offenses of car theft involve far more immediate personal benefit and suggest a much harsher punishmnet, to my way of thinking.

  68. Re:Community Chest? [winhat] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn! How embarrassing. I've totally forgotten what i did? Just now, over the river. Look again, i swear it was massive in its knowledge base a tiny number of features which somebody else has guaranteed to be safe.

  69. RTFA, people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "He will still have to pay restitution to Microsoft and to people whose commuters were affected in an amount to be determined at a hearing set for Feb. 10."

    Just in case anyone saw your exerpt but didn't RTFA, you might come to an amusing conclusion. The reason for the resititution to MS isn't that MS was one of the victims of the virus spread itself, but rather, because the virus' payload launch a DDoS attack against a MS server.

    If the restitution had been due to the virus going crazy at MS, people would be laughing their asses off in a legit case of "blame the victim." But that's not what happened, folks.

  70. Terrible by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

    Unfortunatly the creation of viruses is almost the most anti-social thing imagineable.

    These people deserve the greatest punishment our society can inflict because their crime has no purpose beyond destruction.

    Not to underestimate selfishness, but wanton hatred and destructiveness are terrifying vices in adults.

  71. RIAA are the real criminals! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy just lashed out at some bullies!

  72. Gotta Love it by merky1 · · Score: 1

    I was reading another story on this, and they talked about damages being paid to Microsoft. Why should Microsoft be paid because they wrote code that is vulnerable? What kind of precedent does this set?

    --
    --WooooHoooo--
  73. What a shame by old_and_gray · · Score: 1

    Probably 18 months more than Ken Lay will receive.

  74. What, no Microsoft bashing? by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm surprised nobody's commented about Microsoft being treated as the primary victim in this case. The worm attacked tons of machines across the entire Internet, not just ones owned by Microsoft, yet the offender is ordered to pay restitution to Microsoft. They're not the victim here! In fact, I'd go so far as to say that their shoddy programming and quality control contributed to the situation (as it has many times over for various other bugs since Blaster). Why are they receiving restitution when they could more easily be considered liable?

    1. Re:What, no Microsoft bashing? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Not liable, I suppose, in the same sense that the maker of your home's windows wouldn't be liable if someone use a big rock to break into your house. Not the best analogy, but the point is that without the person and the rock (or the dumb guy with his worm release), neither break-in would happen. The question in front of the judge was, who actually set out expressly to cause the problem, and was there malice/understanding of the type of results one might expect.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:What, no Microsoft bashing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft knew about this problem for a very long time and did not do enough to inform the public.

      If the software in cars made by GM or Ford had this type of problem, they would have been forced to recall vehicle and send recall notices to all its customers.

      Microsoft never sent any notices.

    3. Re:What, no Microsoft bashing? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Except, when a car has a problem, the notices serve the purpose of getting it to the shop. When software has a problem (security-related), a notice that goes out before the patch does serves to bring crackers into your network.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:What, no Microsoft bashing? by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about negligence here, not malice. A glass window manufacturer isn't negligent for their product being breakable - it's widely understood that glass will break when you hit it with a rock. But Microsoft purports their software to be reasonably secure, when it's actually not; and they often don't take sufficient measures to ensure that the flaws in their product aren't exploited, to the detriment of people too technologically unsophisticated to protect their own computers from tampering. (Or, to the detriment of people who can't get Windows Update to run quickly enough after a fresh install before their box gets owned.)

    5. Re:What, no Microsoft bashing? by MacWiz · · Score: 1

      This also shows the inherent danger of letting one company's product dominate so heavily, despite the obvious and ongoing (20 years, at least) record of being written so poorly that it can be hacked so quickly.

      What's Microsoft got for market share these days? 85%? 90%? All vulnerable by a single piece of code from a disturbed teenager, who has "shaken the foundation of the system."

      Ought to make you wonder what a college graduate could do. Doesn't say a lot for the system or its designers, either.

      Of course, I use a Mac, so we laughed at Blaster. And Y2k and Melissa and DaVinci and Michaelangelo, the Love Bug, and the other two million annoyances that Windows users fight daily.

      Y2K was absolutely the best sales con I have ever seen. Mysteriously, Microsoft fixed every computer in the world, just in time, mostly by selling new ones. Oh wait, you need new software, too! A new operating system!

      Whew! That was a close one.

      Attacking Microsoft, the MPAA and the RIAA is the greatest community service one can strive for. The hacker at least got their attention but they have still failed to wake up, otherwise Microsoft would have a secure operating system instead of one that involves the Patch of the Week.

      But if they do that, then your machine won't be reporting back to them, either. Can't let that happen.

      End of obligatory Microsoft bashing in response to subject line

    6. Re:What, no Microsoft bashing? by Changa_MC · · Score: 1

      but, Microsoft knew about the security hole before blaster actually existed, and chose to ignore it. So they're not victims, they're a criminally negligent manufacturer.

      --
      Changa hates change.
    7. Re:What, no Microsoft bashing? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      but, Microsoft knew about the security hole before blaster actually existed, and chose to ignore it. So they're not victims, they're a criminally negligent manufacturer.

      Actually, the patch for this vulnerability had already been released by Microsoft, and they had strongly encouraged their users to use it, with warnings about the consequences.

      As for "criminally" liable... please check your facts. No software publishers warranty their software to be bug free or foolproof - not one. Most liability in any sort of pursuit along these lines is for (and only for) the price that the person paid for the software (and, that's assuming that they're going to give up on using the product they say they don't like).

      Anyway, it doesn't matter in this case, because you're actually wrong about the order events. I have no sympathy for people who run mission critical systems exposed to the internet without good firewalling and patch practices, and I'm always glad when MS releases fixes to something that's been discovered. Just like *nix users were probably glad to hear that Sendmail had serious security flaws in it.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  75. Re:No, it isn't. by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

    We've had prisons since at least the Roman era. The idea also lies behind the slave galley, the road crew, and the continent of Australia.

    In all honesty, you're putting criminals in with a bunch of other criminals that got CAUGHT. What are they going to do, learn to be more incompetent? Besides, if living free and surrounded by mostly law-abiding citizens turned them into criminals, why wouldn't being confined with a bunch of incompetent criminals turn them straight?

    --
    ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
  76. Ooooh, Mod Parent Up Pls, K thx by thelizman · · Score: 1

    That was at least one of the two best ST movies EVER. I'm still deciding if it should be that, or First Contact. Lately, I've decided that neither is better or worse than the other, and since it's a different cast, crew, and story line, it'd be apples to oranges. But, nevertheless... your geek fu is goooood.

  77. Re:Productive life? by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

    The guy is dumb enough to release a worm... that affects thousands of his computers... with his NAME on it.

    I wouldn't trust this kid to tie his own shoelaces, much less contribute to society.

    --
    ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
  78. Re:No, it isn't. by Blutarsky · · Score: 1

    Throughout history, most societies have built places in which to hold persons accused of criminal acts pending some form of trial. The idea, however, of confining persons after trial, as punishment for their crimes, is relatively new. from ancient times till about the 15th century crimes were dealt with some sort of corporal punishment. from the 16th century onward convicted criminals were remanded to rehabilitation facilities known as workhouses which were much different then the prison systems. Prisons as they are today have only been around about ~200 years.

  79. Re:correction by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

    sigh. "thousands of computers", not "thousands of his computers". It appears I'm not that bright either.

    --
    ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
  80. locked in a room by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    This kinda shoots to shit the idea of reform-through-a-prison-sentance then, hmm?

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  81. Not Everyone In Min Sec by thelizman · · Score: 1

    ...is a good little boyscout. Having spent a few nights 'drying out' or 'cooling my heels' in my time, I can say you get the occasional badass who doesn't realize it's not supposed to be like Oz. And hey, even pansy ass offenders get lonely, start missing pussy, and their thought turn to driving up the exit ramp.

  82. Neo-Conservative Think Tank by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'

    Project for the New American Century.
    Need I say more? o_O

  83. Punishment Fitting the Crime? by thelizman · · Score: 1

    How much time have you spent cleaning virii, spyware, and worms from your systems? I use Linux, but I'll be damned if I can get all of my friends to switch, nor is it appropriate that they all do so, but invariably I find myself hacking registry entries and hunting down errant processes and doing stack trace greps, and more than once I've had to backup someones data and reinstall their OS all because of idiot fat fucks like this who pound their own pudd over the notion of writing software that rends other peoples systems apart. I guarantee you his time in jail is a far, far better fate than he'd have known if I had gotten to him first after one of my testing servers got corrupted.

    1. Re:Punishment Fitting the Crime? by kaustik · · Score: 1

      Why, what are you - the "Punisher" ?

  84. yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't exactly call Douglas Adams healthy either.

  85. Reality... by Tacky+the+Penguin · · Score: 1

    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'

    Hey, if the reality that they give you sucks, why not create your own?

  86. and the spyware makers??? give em castration by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    With all the machines infested with spyware and those 100000s of support calls and people spending hours cleaning their systems and reinstalling, whats thats worth? 1 day in prison * 1000000 counts?

    They should treat the spyware makers equally to the way teh FBI treated Kevin Mitnik since the spyware makers cause REAL resources drain, where the only resource drain mitnik caused was the dumb fbi wasting their time with him and years wasted in prison at tax payers expence.

    NOTE to the asian FED who hunted him down... what are you doing now you lazy ass, go after the 10000 spyware makers key logers and phishers. Or are you too scared the russian mafia will hunt YOU down like Tony Soprano?

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  87. except now he can get free education by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    He can now study law 7 days a week end comeout a lawyer or the skills of a lawyer and all 100% paid for , no debts and smiling away :) wicked

    So now in prison hes going to learn from all the other bad guys all new bad things too.

    Maybe on paper he can invent the next big virus that will steal everyones etrade accounts and seel all stocks and purchase everything on amazon and deliver it to cuba's poor.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    1. Re:except now he can get free education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe on paper he can invent the next big virus that will steal everyones etrade accounts and seel all stocks and purchase everything on amazon and deliver it to cuba's poor.

      Why not America's poor?

  88. just taking away a computer for 18months is jail e by nihaopaul · · Score: 1

    sucks to be him

  89. Get Out of Hell Free Card vs Get Out of Jail Cards by Olliver+J. · · Score: 1

    The author of the THIS IS TRUE ( http://www.thisistrue.com/ ) newsletter made these great takeoff of the Monopoly Get Out of Jail cards, called GET OUT OF HELL FREE cards. You can see them here: http://www.goohf.com/

  90. That kid by springbox · · Score: 1

    pwned

  91. The reality of the situation is that: by Ticklemonster · · Score: 1

    Reality is for people who can't handle Gaming.

    --
    Karma: Bad is the liberal way of saying this guy won't drink the kool aid here on slash dot. I wear my Karma with pride
  92. thats loser talk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why marry someone you don't get along with?
    People who tell jokes like that shouldn't have gotten married

  93. Oh the Irony. by 9mm+Censor · · Score: 1, Insightful

    'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.' But its ok for the judicial system to lock you in a room and create a seperate reality for you, please enjoy your 18 months in a Minnisoeta Pound me in the Ass Prison.

  94. Proteced Computer? by dynamic_cast · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Parson, 19, of Hopkins, Minn., pleaded guilty in August to one count of intentionally causing or attempting to cause damage to a protected computer." Protected computer? I thought his virus went after a Microsoft O/S?

  95. dude by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    that's way too much information about your sex life for us, k? thanx

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  96. Got what he wanted by c666hellchild · · Score: 1

    Guess he got what every teen-aged nerd wants: attention. And a full /. article and discussion about themselves, how cool!!

    --
    -Peace
  97. The irony by Lefty+Veggie · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Versions of the Blaster worm, also known as the LovSan virus, crippled computer networks worldwide. The government estimates Parson's version inundated more than 48,000 computers."

    That proves the efficience of Microsoft Service Packages.
  98. revelation!!! by torrents · · Score: 1

    there's a world outside of shashdot???

    --
    Get your torrents...
  99. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There has been enough violence already from people citing religious works (US ProLife, Islamic Fundies)

  100. No, but... by thelizman · · Score: 1

    ...I do have that shirt.

  101. Locking yourself eh? by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1

    Locking yourself up in a room? Is that another name for Think Tank?

    --
    ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.