Slashdot Mirror
'Anonymous' Hacker Indicted As His Hunger Strike Continues (newsweek.com)
Eight months after being rescued at sea near Cuba and then arrested, Anonymous hacker Martin Gottesfeld now faces prosecution as well as death by hunger. Newsweek reports:
A member of Anonymous has been indicted on hacking charges while on the third week of a prison hunger strike protesting perceived institutionalized torture and political prosecutions. Martin Gottesfeld, 32, was charged this week in relation to the hacking of Boston Children's Hospital in 2014 following the alleged mistreatment of one of its patients. Gottesfeld has previously admitted to targeting the hospital, though says he did it in defense of "an innocent, learning-disabled, 15-year-old girl"...
Since beginning his hunger strike on October 3, Gottesfeld tells Newsweek from prison he has lost 16.5 pounds. He says he will continue his hunger strike until two demands are met: a promise from the presidential candidates that children are not mistreated in the way he claims Pelletier was; and an end to the "political" style of prosecution waged by Carmen Ortiz, the U.S. attorney for Massachusetts.
The indictment claims that the hospital spent more than $300,000 to "mitigate" the damage from the 2014 attack.
Since beginning his hunger strike on October 3, Gottesfeld tells Newsweek from prison he has lost 16.5 pounds. He says he will continue his hunger strike until two demands are met: a promise from the presidential candidates that children are not mistreated in the way he claims Pelletier was; and an end to the "political" style of prosecution waged by Carmen Ortiz, the U.S. attorney for Massachusetts.
The indictment claims that the hospital spent more than $300,000 to "mitigate" the damage from the 2014 attack.
Could there be a more infantile group wannabes?
Yeah, the Trump campaign and his followers
I was highly skeptical of the whole thing until I read the words "Carmen Ortiz". Now I am forced to look at this knowing a corrupt, unrepentant career criminal (Ortiz) is involved.
Save yourself from hunger and indictment by not being a jerk. Not being a jerk to people has many benefits.
I don't think Anonymous went about things the right way but they appear to be right about the problem with BCH. A BCH psychiatrist (usually the bottom of the med school barrel) invoked invasive legal provisions to kidnap a child with a medical condition diagnosed and treated by internal medicine doctors at another Boston hospital. The kid became a multiple cash stream and an injured experimental subject of BCH, as well as hostage. Both Mass and Conn became complicit in the kidnap.
After a year, BCH essentially proved the other drs right by almost killing the kid. The parents and kid were damaged far more than $300,000. The kid's health then had to be restored as best as possible by the parents' previous drs... By a jury, the actual damages would be over a million.
The real issues here involve the state "antiabuse" powers against competent and caring parents, corporate greed and persistent misbehavior (BCH), involuntary experimental subjects, medical corruption, and gunpoint medicine. BCH got off lightly, the favored historical response to kidnapping and torture is death.
IT writers, popular press and especially Holywood have been getting the definition of "hacker" wrong for over 25 years.
It's a lost battle. The word "hacker" has pretty much been redefined to mean someone who breaks into computers. That's how language works.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
The Cracker/Hacker battle was over more than 20 years ago, time get over yourself and move out of your parents basement.
You are confused about how word defintions are canonized. Check the Oxford English Dictionary: words are defined by their current language and practical usage. This is why "cleave" today means "separate" when in the past it meant "join".
Nostalgic tinkerers from yesteryear cling to the earliest, now extinct, definition of hacker, which was indeed innocuous. That definition dates from the 1950s, when consumers seldom used technical means for electronics or computing. Today's usage of "hackin", in an era when most consumers are much more technical than in the mid-20th, refers almost exclusively to illegal intrusive technical means.
I only have Wikipedia and news to go on, but it seems the hospital went to court to take her from her parents. They stopped the heart medicine she was on, stopped a lot of other medicines...... and they were correct. She was being medically abused by over anxious parents demanding medicines for problems that weren't real.
A year later the same judge returned her to her parents and she was alive and well. WITHOUT ALL THAT MEDICINE THEY'D BEEN SHOVING INTO HER.
So surely time showed the medical professionals in the children's hospital were correct.