Slashdot Mirror


Fake Hacker Found Guilty Following Gutsy Mitt Romney Extortion Scheme (softpedia.com)

An anonymous reader writes: "Michael Mancil Brown, 37, of Franklin, Tennessee, faces up to thirty years in prison, a fine up to $250,000, and orders of restitution to victims, because of a daring stunt he pulled off in 2012 that involved fake hacking the PricewaterhouseCoopers consulting firm, and US presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Back in 2012, Brown had the bright idea to write a letter alleging to have hacked PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) servers and stolen tax documents prior to 2010 for Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann," writes Softpedia. The "hacker" asked for $1 million in Bitcoin, and after publishing details about his fake hack online, he almost received it from a "third-party," but not before the FBI arrested him and then uncovered his lie. Last Friday, Brown was found guilty and then convicted of six counts of wire fraud and six counts of using facilities of interstate commerce to commit extortion.

108 comments

  1. sentencing (in August) will be interesting by raymorris · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'll be curious to see what kind of sentence he gets in August. The "faces up to" maximum theoretical penalties are less useful than Comcast's "up to 50 Mbps*" advertising.

    * speed may be significantly lower during peak periods, business hours, evenings,nights, weekends, maintenance windows, and other times.

    1. Re: sentencing (in August) will be interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It makes more sense when you change "up to" to "not more than".

    2. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The password to the encrypted files were posted on pastebin 4 years ago, if anyone still has the encrypted files, why not open them up again and let us know what the tax returns actually said. The password was qGre452ohxb0JptvQIzvA7wdCS9r0vP54iVefEynM10ApLnfw6HgB9QTkR0MMRP for the files, did anyone ever write a story about what was in them? I think the password is still cached in search engines today.

    3. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      * speed may be significantly lower during peak periods, business hours, evenings, days, nights, afternoons, weekends, maintenance windows, and all other times.

      FTFY

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    4. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by raymorris · · Score: 0

      > You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office

      Isn't it interesting that Alzheimer's Reagan was one of the best presidents of the last 50 years. People complain about presidents Obama and Clinton not doing anything, but I'm starting to really think that's a good thing in a president; just not screwing things up and causing problems. Clinton came into office as the economy was starting to grow nicely and rather than mess with it, he spent his time chasing women. Worked out pretty well - the economic growth didn't slow much until his last year or two.

    5. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by Grunschev · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Reagan was one of the best presidents of the last 50 years"

      You can't be serious. I'd put him in the bottom three of that period.

      His was the most corrupt administration in my lifetime. Have you forgotten Ollie North's conviction for destruction of evidence? Have you forgotten all the pardons George H. W. Bush granted for Reagan's people, including the Secretary of State?

      When he wasn't corrupt, he was just horrible. His AIDS policy ("let the queers and drug addicts die") resulted in the poisoning of the blood supply, killing thousands.

      Then he went and laid a wreath at the burial plots of the Waffen SS. He couldn't be bothered to even visit any concentration camp sites.

      I'm hoping you're just ignorant.

    6. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by publiclurker · · Score: 2

      the fact that you consider Reagan to be one of the best presidents in 50 years actually shows the downside to Alzheimers and other mental problems.

    7. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His was the most corrupt administration in my lifetime.

      Sorry to hear you passed away in 1993.

    8. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Isn't it interesting that Alzheimer's Reagan was one of the best presidents of the last 50 years.

      You're either ignorant, stupid or a troll. There is no other reasonable conclusion.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    9. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of the above?

    10. Re:sentencing (in August) will be interesting by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      I believe, sir, that you many be onto something.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  2. You can't be a fake hacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The term doesn't mean squat. A fake "vague doer of vaguely bad things possibly involving a computer maybe"? That's really a bunch of mostly empty words strung together.

    But that figures, for down at softpedia, fake journalism is all there is to be had. Chinesely cheap fake knockoff breathless fake journalism.

    1. Re:You can't be a fake hacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      By your repeated use of "fake", you've demonstrated that you can be a fake-anything. Just because "hacker" is precious to you, it's not uniquely un-fakeable.

      captcha: nipple. Those, my friend, are real.

    2. Re:You can't be a fake hacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not even "don't use that term unless you mean it my way", it's "You've made it mean nothing so stop talking nothing. In fact, might as well stop talking entirely since you just admitted you have nothing to say". Sure you can then quibble that you can have fake nothing as well as Nothing Genuine Advantage, but at the end of the day you're still wasting both your and all your readers' time when you could've been informative instead. A pernicious and insidious kind of clickbait, which just happens to form the bedrock of what passes for the "computer security industry" these days.

      There's also that slashdot really shouldn't even try the aggregating the aggregators thing. Too often the articles are too much from the same source, meaning you could just as well drop the currently half-dozen popular ones in an rss fetcher, should you be interested in reading TFA to the summaries. And of late the quality of those bulk sources has gone down; less original content, more badly regurgitated or outright copied content, possibly laced with malware. And with less and less actual content. Including the computer security side of things, where hacking, hacker, and hack are nothing but code words for "we don't know and we like it that way". Well, no, I don't like knowing nothing. I'm here to get informed. But it seems I'm in the wrong place, eh.

    3. Re:You can't be a fake hacker by JustBoo · · Score: 2

      captcha: nipple. Those, my friend, are real.

      Not for most of slashdot, my friend, no they are not. They are as foreign and fake as a cosplay girl who is actually pretty. (And an actual girl.)

  3. Gutsy? by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gutsy would imply an act of bravery, what we have is an act of stupidity.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Gutsy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Pretty much a given that the "third party" was an FBI agent.

    2. Re:Gutsy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, kids. The vast majority of crimes are not committed by criminal masterminds, but by the idiots that believe themselves to be so.

    3. Re:Gutsy? by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      Bravery and stupidity are not mutually exclusive, despite the fact that bravery has a much better connotation.

    4. Re:Gutsy? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, especially seeing as these extortion attempts have no real way to ensure the payoff actually buys silence. There's no way to hand over the "originals" of the documents.

      "Pay me 1 million dollars in Bitcoin equivalent, and I totally promise to not immediately turn around and release the data anyway. No really, I totally won't!"

      Any real operative on the Romney side would probably stall for time while they try to get a strategy together for some spin, but they wouldn't believe that they "make it go away" with a payoff. They'd know that a payoff would only make their side look even more guilty when this "hacker hero" turns around and releases it because "he can no longer sit back and let Romney get away with his crimes".

    5. Re:Gutsy? by shanen · · Score: 1

      Ballsy is the correct word for the title. Confronting Romney doesn't require any intestinal fortitude.

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  4. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Losing a million dollars to a fake hack is Bush-level stupid.

  5. Re: Hasa Diga Eebowai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think firstposting has become quite the oldschool thing to do, actually. 2003–2005, the golden age of firstposting. Never forget!

  6. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He'll just write it off. The taxpayers spy him for the loss.

  7. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All their kind does is use people.

  8. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And so many sons will never return home because of his warmongering.

  9. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even worse is that he asked a fortune teller if it was true.

  10. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And nothing ever bothers their kind.

  11. Re:Why does this matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What I find interesting is that you could almost get $1M without proving anything.
    That's definitively a game changer for my career.

  12. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And believe that if a shaman pills a little water on them then they are without blame.

  13. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And so many sons will never return home because of his warmongering.

    When he was governor of Massachusetts, and they invaded Vermont?

  14. Tax documents worth $1 million? by janinl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm wondering what the "victim" had to hide, to be willing to pay $1 million for it...

    1. Re:Tax documents worth $1 million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too, but not the police though.

    2. Re:Tax documents worth $1 million? by wiredog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From the sound of things ("he almost received it from a "third-party,"), the victim wasn't willing to pay anything for it.

    3. Re:Tax documents worth $1 million? by tomhath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm wondering what the "victim" had to hide, to be willing to pay $1 million for it..

      Apparently nothing, since Romney refused to pay and the "third party" was almost certainly an FBI trap.

    4. Re:Tax documents worth $1 million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idk, but how many years does Romney get for faking a cop?

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/07/classmates-mitt-romney-im_n_1575680.html

      Or for being a general piece of shit?

    5. Re:Tax documents worth $1 million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering what the "victim" had to hide, to be willing to pay $1 million for it...

      That's like, what, 1% of what Crooked Hillary! would pay to get her illegal email server back from the FBI?

    6. Re:Tax documents worth $1 million? by rhazz · · Score: 1

      The article mentions he "entertained" offers from the "Romney-PwC", but that could easily have been part of the FBI sting or even just self-interest to find out how he got in.

    7. Re:Tax documents worth $1 million? by Bartles · · Score: 1

      What makes you think Romeny was willing to pay? The "third party" was almost certainly an FBI agent.

  15. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And blaming his man in Atlanta for this is even more stupid.

  16. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    xians are superstitious.

  17. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of our lives are on the line and if the SCOTUS had selected him, we could all be dead right now.

  18. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Corporations now make more money in write offs than on actually selling products.

  19. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you ever get a call from a republican, don't answer it.

  20. Thirty years? Holy shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America's justice system is wimpy. Behead him, I say! Need to send a strong message! That's how the IS is winning! We gotta be better! Yee-haw!

    1. Re: Thirty years? Holy shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Down here in Oz it is rare for first degree murder to get 30 years...!

    2. Re:Thirty years? Holy shit! by dwye · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. Beheading, despite looking spectacular, is usually about as quick and painless as possible short of being next to an exploding nuclear device (where the victim is turned into plasma faster than pain nerve impulses could travel). Now, the Blood Eagle, THAT was a good method of execution!

      OTOH, too much work involved. Just feed him to pigs. That will result in a smarter class of crook, as well.

  21. You are forgetting the news here is usually crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It said a "third party" almost paid him. That could be anyone including a wealthy member of the opposite political party.

    But the news here is always misleading baiting crap these days.

    There are precious few articles here these days that you can really trust the headline or summary to be exactly what it sounds like.

  22. Fake trial and fake jail would be fitting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Getting caught pulling a fake extortion would natural mean a fake negotiation followed by fake money (oh yeah, Bitcoin), and then a fake trial with a fake jail sentence.

  23. Re:You are forgetting the news here is usually cra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why I usually follow the link to the article, and often google around to find some more about it.
    So that's how I now know that Forbes says he faces up to twenty years, not thirty.

    And after that, I'm still wondering what presidential candidate (or one of his supporters) would cough up $ 1M to keep his financial data secret, when other candidates publish their tax returns to prove that they can look their voters in the eye.

  24. But it was just a prank! by Overzeetop · · Score: 2

    Maybe he should have filmed it and put it on his youtube channel. Then it wouldn't have been a real crime, right?

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:But it was just a prank! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snapchat... even better... it's all forgiven after it's deleted

    2. Re:But it was just a prank! by ripvlan · · Score: 1

      I think his real mistake was the attempted extortion. Had he claimed that a copy of the tax records fell in his lap and "boy are they juicy" - wait ... I suppose that is slander (or is it?)

      "oh yeah sure I stole them" would make somebody nervous. But demanding money is still a crime.

  25. Re:You are forgetting the news here is usually cra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oops, 25, not 20.

  26. Probably nothing to hide by digitalderbs · · Score: 2

    In the grand scheme of an election--and the fact that Mitt Romney's net worth is 250 million--1 million isn't a lot of money. It would likely be worth paying that sum just to have control on when and how the tax information was released.

    1. Re: Probably nothing to hide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that's what I would do if I was a filthy Republican hiding my money on Tortola to evade taxes.

    2. Re:Probably nothing to hide by dwye · · Score: 1

      I thought that his net worth was supposedly $520 million, putting him on an inflation adjusted value about half of JFK's worth and just over Washington's estimated worth.

  27. Friend in Banking tried to repeat Mitt's 240mil in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a friend in Banking, who tried to repeat the supposed method Mitt used to put 200+ mil in his 401k, even talked to a few folks at Bane Capital that he knew. After 2 years he gave up as he could find NO legal way to repeat this "Putting 200+million" in his 401k and void taxes.

  28. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget he also forced health care on everyone. Some of those people may have been foolish enough to get vaccinated.

  29. Re:You are forgetting the news here is usually cra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So that's how I now know that Forbes says he faces up to twenty years, not thirty.

    That may be, but Forbes probably infected you with so much malware that someone can hack your PricewaterhouseCoopersDingleheimersmith account if you have one.

  30. Re: Friend in Banking tried to repeat Mitt's 240mi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your "friend" might have had better luck if he were literate.

  31. Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't slashdot.

    Get your shit together, this recent submission trend is appalling and you will lose what's left of this shell of a great website if you carry on like this.

    Honestly, I think it's too late. Feels like this will dribble on for a few months then dry up completely and die.

    Noticed the number of comments recently?

    1. Re:Sorry by scourfish · · Score: 1

      Slashdot isn't dead until Netcraft confirms it.

  32. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Available now from Flint, Michigan.

  33. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you do not answer we will rape and kill you. If you answer we will rape and kill you. Whatever you do we will rape and kill you. That is the way of our kind. Our kind.

  34. Clinton 2016 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Clinton is a square shooter

    1. Re:Clinton 2016 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hey, SuperPAC man, you're going to have to try harder than this.

  35. Twenty Five years for this by humptheElephant · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This guy is facing a 25 year prison sentence and yet banksters who took down our economy by their playing in the casino got no prison time. We have 2 kinds of justice in this country, one for the uber rich and one for the rest of us.

    1. Re:Twenty Five years for this by schwit1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The economy going to hell had a lot of help from the government. Chris Dodd and Barney Frank should be in cells next to the banksters.

    2. Re:Twenty Five years for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You weren't aware of that? There are dozens of IRS fraud schemes going around, most of them target hapless seniors who believe that the man on the other end of the phone is a real IRS agent, and that they have to send them money so go down to the local grocery store and pop it off.

      Of course, there's a fee for that too.

      How many of those do you think are really investigated? We're lucky to get warnings that say "This is not the way the IRS does things" but I'd like to see some trials and convictions. Or some money seized from profiteers in the money transfer industry.

    3. Re:Twenty Five years for this by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Please list the names of bankers who committed crimes, and the specific crimes they committed (it would be helpful if you mentioned the actual statutes they violated). Then point out when the DoJ became aware of these specific crimes but refused to indict. Thanks for the details. If you're aware of specific financial crimes that the DoJ does NOT know about, why aren't you making phone calls?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:Twenty Five years for this by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Extortion is a pretty serious crime. Just because someone else got away with a crime doesn't mean this guy should. He should go to jail and the law should be adjusted so the bankers do go to jail next time. The reason the laws aren't being changed should be reason for you to realize who's in the pocket of the bankers because there is a large number of politicians who defend those bankers for additional oversight and legal responsibility for their actions.

    5. Re:Twenty Five years for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're mad at the bankers? Fine. Take it out on them by investing in bitcoin, not using it as a weapon to extort people. But that requires actually producing something useful and then risking your money on something that might be better than banks, so we'll continue to hear justifications for why extortion is OK.

      The irony is that people like you are making banks more powerful by sabotaging our best bet at eliminating them. "A money supply where the bankers are optional? Isn't that just used for extortion and drugs?"

  36. Re:You are forgetting the news here is usually cra by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

    And after that, I'm still wondering what presidential candidate (or one of his supporters) would...keep his financial data secret, when other candidates publish their tax returns to prove that they can look their voters in the eye.

    Trump

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  37. Not just "Gutsy" by mi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gutsy would imply an act of bravery

    Committing a crime in a country with robust law enforcement takes bravery...

    But this extortionist is not merely "gutsy" — the "stunt" is also described in the write-up as "daring"... Carefully selecting terms and adjectives for (not so) subtle spin — while remaining factually correct — is what they teach in journalism classes. But some people are just natural — Vladimir Putin's weaponized propaganda organization would be most interested.

    When the subject is described as "gutsy" and "daring", the punishment seems excessive — even if only to subconsciousness. Were it "plucky" and "outrageous" and a "crime" (or, better yet, a "felony"), rather than a "stunt", you'd be less likely to develop any sympathy for the criminal.

    It also helps prevent any sympathy for the victim of the crime — see, it is Mitt Romney's own fault, according to many posters here, not all of them anonymous. (Should not have worn so short a skirt, if he did not want to be raped.)

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Not just "Gutsy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Robust law enforcement? White collar crime is routinely evaded. This guy's mistake was not being rich already.

    2. Re:Not just "Gutsy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If he had done this to a Democrat candidate, the press would not use such nice words.

  38. Re: Hasa Diga Eebowai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlike you!

  39. Reminds me of Joe Biden talking by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I remember how Joe Biden, in describing the huge undertaking by hundreds of intelligence and support people, along with the on-the-scene deployment of SEAL Team 6 to actually do the deed of killing Bin Laden in his Pakistani sanctuary ... Biden described Obama's decision to follow the intel team's advice as "the gutsiest thing I've ever seen." That word appears to be in danger of no longer meaning anything at all like it used to, and might be worth a second thought on the part of editors and public figures, if this is how it's going to be put to use. Thank you for reading this gutsy comment.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re: Reminds me of Joe Biden talking by jsh1972 · · Score: 2

      Just please don't link to gutsy.cx!

    2. Re:Reminds me of Joe Biden talking by Bartles · · Score: 1

      If you didn't know the names or government positions of anyone in this picture and I were to ask you who is in charge, how would you answer? This is the single most revealing picture of the entire Obama (the guy who showed up late to meeting he wasn't invited to) presidency.

  40. Point of Order| Define:hacker by laurencetux · · Score: 1

    Social Engineering is a very olde hacquer trick.

    In fact didn't somebody named Mitnick do a bunch of time with next to no programming skills??
    (but was barred from anything better than a 10 key calculator for another several years)

  41. Re:Friend in Banking tried to repeat Mitt's 240mil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously Romney is a crooked bastard, because with the 401k/IRA contribution caps, there is no way in hell someone could ever amass that much fortune inside one of those tax-sheltered retirement accounts. The only way this could ever be done is if purchases were made to vastly undervalued assets (like purchasing tens of thousands of shares of facebook for a penny each), and then 'realizing' the true value inside the tax-sheltered account to avoid all taxation on that 'growth'.

    That would/should be highly illegal and Romney (or anybody else with massive sums in a 401k/IRA) should be audited.

  42. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Losing a million dollars to a fake hack is Bush-level stupid.

    Please note that a "third party" offered to pay the blackmail. At least read the summary before attacking because of party affiliation.

  43. Re:Friend in Banking tried to repeat Mitt's 240mil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a friend in Banking, who tried to repeat the supposed method Mitt used to put 200+ mil in his 401k, even talked to a few folks at Bane Capital that he knew. After 2 years he gave up as he could find NO legal way to repeat this "Putting 200+million" in his 401k and void taxes.

    I can legally put as much money in my 401(k) as I want, with the caveat that I pay a higher tax rate for anything about the maximum annual limit. Not to mention, he has his maximum limit plus his wife's before paying any penalties.

  44. Richer and meaner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never mess with somebody who is much richer and meaner than you are.

    Seriously, you thing they made their money by being nice and not being well connected?

  45. Slashdot link? by slapout · · Score: 1

    Didn't slashdot cover this when it happened? Where's the link to the original slashdot story?

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
    1. Re:Slashdot link? by neo-mkrey · · Score: 1
  46. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Losing a million dollars to a fake hack is Bush-level stupid.

    I'd go even further -- it's Obama-level stupid.

  47. Re:You are forgetting the news here is usually cra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Politicians publish their returns to prove they haven't benefited financially from their time in office. Trump hasn't been in office, so there is no reason to see his returns. There will be in 2020.

  48. Pulled, not pulled off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > stunt he pulled off in 2012

    He pulled it, but did not "pull it off." Subtle difference in language.

    If he had pulled it off, we wouldn't be hearing about it now.

  49. Pothead crime at work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With Brown's extensive history of marijuana use it seems likely he just wanted the bitcoin to buy more drugs. Amazing that he'd put his life on the line just to get high instead of trying to be productive, functioning member of society.

    What a fucking idiot.

  50. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by laie_techie · · Score: 1

    Plus the whole cannibalism thing. They eat bread that they lie and claim is human flesh. They are so violent. Imagine forcing children to be cannibals and telling them you're going to burn them if they refuse to be cannibals b

    Hyperbole much? Get your denominations right. While Catholicism believes the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of Christ, most denominations don't believe in transmogrification. Mitt Romney belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We believe the bread and water of the Lord's supper are emblems of the Lord's Atonement.

  51. Re: Wow, Republicans are stupid. by laie_techie · · Score: 1

    Republicans don't trust anyone that doesn't splash themselves with Holy Ghost water.

    Mitt Romney belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The LDS Church does not make use of "holy water"; instead when our elders give blessings we anoint with consecrated olive oil.

  52. What is a fake hack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can someone explain this to me? I'm trying to understand what exactly he did. How did he convince them that he hacked their servers? Don't they have some kind of security team to look into this? Did he provide some additional data to them or did he just tell them he did it, in which case, how much of a threat is a lie?