Good luck with that.
Best chances of them getting him is if we strap him to a bomb and send him on over but since that won't happen they're just making themselves look stupid on the world stage.
The crux of this case is that the punishment is hugely disproportionate to the crime.
But the punishment has not been determined, the case has not even gone to trial. People are assuming ridiculous sentences such as the "70 years of prison raping" mentioned by one commenter.
Right now, he has committed a crime and the US government wants him extradited so that he can be tried and a punishment determined (keep in mind he has to be convicted before that can even happen but given the facts in this case a guilty verdict can be safely assumed).
Frankly, the DoD was lucky to have been hacked by him. He is largely harmless, and watching how he got in was probably instructive, to some degree. They really ought to spend less time hounding him, and more time thinking about the fact that certain other hackers are much less harmless, and substantially less likely to be turned over for a stay in PMITA prison by their host governments...
Someone breaks into your house but doesn't take anything of value. You would think that's ok because the intrusion was largely harmless?
The fact is he hacked into government servers he had no business accessing. We can argue motives and harm done all we want but it doesn't change the fact a crime was committed.
Now how about we figure out a way to clean up the marshes that got fucked with an oil-slicked spiked baseball bat?
I fail to see how bad situation Y calls for sarcastic dismissal of a possible solution to bad situation X. Any developments in oil cleanup are good right now and if this can be scaled up quickly enough it could do a lot of good and help prevent even more oil from reaching the marshes.
How come it's always those who break the rules that complain the most about new techniques to uphold the rules?
"Speeding cameras are against the constitution" - so? Speeding is against the law and kills hundreds of people. Is your constitutional right more important than a hundred lives you endanger?
Just shut up and follow the rules!
Speeding doesn't kill anyone, driving beyond your ability to safely handle the car given the conditions does. Depending on the driver and car along with the current conditions that speed limit could be far too low or even too high. I would far prefer to see the limits raised and stricter training/testing required for a license, the things I see done on the roads are downright scary and a lot of these people shouldn't be driving.
From TFA: "Now it looks as though one Kelly M. Klaus (right) of Munger, Tolles & Olson, yet another RIAA posse, wants Wood to order LimeWire owner Mark Gorton to pay $1,500,000,000,000 for 200,000,000 alleged downloads, at $750 per."
$750 per song is absolutely ludicrous, not to mention Mark Gorton is not the one who downloaded 200,000,000 songs...
If you create conditions where someone makes an app for smartphones (open government data), and it only gets used by people with smartphones, this is a net gain for the society
Nonsense. The folk with smartphones are typically those who'd already interact with government. You are doing absolutely nothing to interact with those who are totally disenfranchised. You know - the ones who cannot afford the net, cannot afford a fancy phone?
Merriam Webster defines disenfranchised as: "to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote"
Last I checked those who could not afford smartphones were not being deprived of their rights, and certainly not the right to vote. In addition smartphones are becoming more and more affordable, some are given away as the free phones with a contract now and many people are replacing landlines with cellphones.
Smartphone apps are a viable way to reach a large audience currently and that audience is only getting larger. Considering that most dumbphones probably aren't capable of the task and the interface is awful even when they are what would you propose then? Keep in mind the pool of developers that are familiar with and have interest in programming for dumbphones is far smaller.
It collected unencrypted data that was being broadcast openly. If you are having a sensitive conversation with your neighbor by yelling at each other across the street, and someone happens to drive by who is filming their trip you would say that they have broken the law by recording your exchange of information?
Unencrypted wifi is just like shouting to your neighbor, anyone can easily see it and you are broadcasting it to them. This is not like someone hiding in a hedge by the road and using binoculars to read your lips through the window so they can know what you're saying.
I realize it's unheard of in this day and age but sometimes people need to actually take responsibility and not look for someone to blame (in this case big bad Google).
Glider may be a programmer, but that programming is both unauthorized, and counterproductive for the satisfaction of the network as a whole, and counterproductive for generating profit (from subscription payers) as a result.
How so? Blizzard is hurting their own bottom line by choosing to ban players. The players are perfectly willing to pay Blizzard for a game that they're going to have a bot play for them. The players are willing to pay MDY for a bot to play the game for them. Everybody is happy and making a profit here.
It's Blizzard's decision to ban people that's hurting them. Of course they're allowed to ban people if they want to. It's their servers, after all. But it's stupid of them to blame someone else for their own decisions. Glider is just providing a service for there is a demand, apparently.
Ignoring all the legalities for a moment let me see if I can shed some light here. Blizzard is not hurting their bottom line by banning players who cheat using bots. Yes they lose the revenue from that player's subscription, what you are ignoring here is the revenue they lose from players who actually play the game that get fed up with all the botters and quit.
I've played WoW on and off for quite awhile now, I can tell you firsthand botters ruin some of the atmosphere and people who use them to gather mats negatively effect the in-game economy. Someone who doesn't cheat will have a difficult if not impossible time making gold with a gathering profession as there are people using bots to gather constantly and selling at far cheaper prices than that mat would be worth if someone actually spent their time to get it.
People who use them to level are often terrible players when they hit max level and start joining groups because after 80 levels of the program doing it for them they have no idea how to play their character. The bots do have a negative impact on the game which is why Blizzard puts a lot of effort into getting rid of them.
If they don't want to be recorded, they may be hiding something.
Now now, be careful with that sword, it's double-edged.
It is indeed.
The distinguishing factor here is that the police are public servants. "To serve and protect." When they are on the job serving the public we have a right to know what they are doing. It is necessary so that we can independently verify they are indeed protecting us and not abusing a position of power.
Rather than unable to connect, let's try unwilling to connect. I have always kept my games separate from my real computer network because I deem game programmers and DRM programmers to be suspect. Because I am installing things more often on a games system, there is more chance of things going wrong and viruses being introduced. For this reason, I always keep this away from my real data. The easiest way to do this is physical separation. This then limits access to the Internet.
So you are paranoid enough that you don't want your gaming machines connected to your network of machines with personal data on them for fear of sneaky game and DRM programmers. You then go on to say the necessity of physical separation from your real network prevents you from hooking these machines up to the internet implying that your network with "real data" on it you care about is connected to the internet.
Am I the only one surprised that someone would view games as a larger incursion threat than being connected to the net?
On a side note, complete physical separation is not necessary, what you need is a good switch hooked up to your cable modem (or whatever your point of access for the internet is) set up with your gaming machines and "real" machines on separate VLANs.
It is far more than a motion controller and is actually quite innovative. I do think the price will hurt it though as an accessory that costs as much as an entire system from Nintendo. We'll see what the quality of games released for it are, ultimately that will determine whether it's worth the money.
You seem to be unaware that you are responsible for who is in government. Law is how a civilized society addresses grievances between it's citizens without resorting to violence or terroristic threats. You don't just throw the whole idea out because you're too lazy to participate.
"Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people.” -Lincoln
The largest problem with our system is that the politicians can outright lie to the public with no intention of following through just to get elected and a majority of the public will believe them. If you have a solution for either getting the politicians to stop lying or educating the public enough to see through the lies you could be a national hero. So far one has not been found.
I care equally about net neutrality. What good is all that speed if you can only utilize it when downloading an entire movie from your ISP's media arm and downloading from anyone else results in the download taking ages?
We need net neutrality, sadly Congress has once again shown their lack of understanding when it comes to technology and the public good.
Well Time/Warner, Comcast, and their ilk have done such a wonderful job building out infrastructure. The free market cannot work in this case because they hold (in many cases government granted) monopolies in most areas.
Not to mention as most are also content providers it is not necessarily in their best interest to provide faster internet speeds...
Slashdot Mirror
Are you trying to get Pakistan wiped off the map?
Good luck with that. Best chances of them getting him is if we strap him to a bomb and send him on over but since that won't happen they're just making themselves look stupid on the world stage.
The crux of this case is that the punishment is hugely disproportionate to the crime.
But the punishment has not been determined, the case has not even gone to trial. People are assuming ridiculous sentences such as the "70 years of prison raping" mentioned by one commenter.
Right now, he has committed a crime and the US government wants him extradited so that he can be tried and a punishment determined (keep in mind he has to be convicted before that can even happen but given the facts in this case a guilty verdict can be safely assumed).
Frankly, the DoD was lucky to have been hacked by him. He is largely harmless, and watching how he got in was probably instructive, to some degree. They really ought to spend less time hounding him, and more time thinking about the fact that certain other hackers are much less harmless, and substantially less likely to be turned over for a stay in PMITA prison by their host governments...
Someone breaks into your house but doesn't take anything of value. You would think that's ok because the intrusion was largely harmless?
The fact is he hacked into government servers he had no business accessing. We can argue motives and harm done all we want but it doesn't change the fact a crime was committed.
Now how about we figure out a way to clean up the marshes that got fucked with an oil-slicked spiked baseball bat?
I fail to see how bad situation Y calls for sarcastic dismissal of a possible solution to bad situation X. Any developments in oil cleanup are good right now and if this can be scaled up quickly enough it could do a lot of good and help prevent even more oil from reaching the marshes.
It's more like "To compensate for the pony, Limewire must hand over the Space Shuttle."
Perhaps we'll get lucky and it will turn out they feed on record executives...
How come it's always those who break the rules that complain the most about new techniques to uphold the rules?
"Speeding cameras are against the constitution" - so? Speeding is against the law and kills hundreds of people. Is your constitutional right more important than a hundred lives you endanger?
Just shut up and follow the rules!
Speeding doesn't kill anyone, driving beyond your ability to safely handle the car given the conditions does. Depending on the driver and car along with the current conditions that speed limit could be far too low or even too high. I would far prefer to see the limits raised and stricter training/testing required for a license, the things I see done on the roads are downright scary and a lot of these people shouldn't be driving.
It's been tried before.
Don't give them any ideas, next thing you know this will be in court.
From TFA: "Now it looks as though one Kelly M. Klaus (right) of Munger, Tolles & Olson, yet another RIAA posse, wants Wood to order LimeWire owner Mark Gorton to pay $1,500,000,000,000 for 200,000,000 alleged downloads, at $750 per."
$750 per song is absolutely ludicrous, not to mention Mark Gorton is not the one who downloaded 200,000,000 songs...
Nonsense. The folk with smartphones are typically those who'd already interact with government. You are doing absolutely nothing to interact with those who are totally disenfranchised. You know - the ones who cannot afford the net, cannot afford a fancy phone?
Merriam Webster defines disenfranchised as: "to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote"
Last I checked those who could not afford smartphones were not being deprived of their rights, and certainly not the right to vote. In addition smartphones are becoming more and more affordable, some are given away as the free phones with a contract now and many people are replacing landlines with cellphones.
Smartphone apps are a viable way to reach a large audience currently and that audience is only getting larger. Considering that most dumbphones probably aren't capable of the task and the interface is awful even when they are what would you propose then? Keep in mind the pool of developers that are familiar with and have interest in programming for dumbphones is far smaller.
It collected unencrypted data that was being broadcast openly. If you are having a sensitive conversation with your neighbor by yelling at each other across the street, and someone happens to drive by who is filming their trip you would say that they have broken the law by recording your exchange of information?
Unencrypted wifi is just like shouting to your neighbor, anyone can easily see it and you are broadcasting it to them. This is not like someone hiding in a hedge by the road and using binoculars to read your lips through the window so they can know what you're saying.
I realize it's unheard of in this day and age but sometimes people need to actually take responsibility and not look for someone to blame (in this case big bad Google).
Glider may be a programmer, but that programming is both unauthorized, and counterproductive for the satisfaction of the network as a whole, and counterproductive for generating profit (from subscription payers) as a result.
How so? Blizzard is hurting their own bottom line by choosing to ban players. The players are perfectly willing to pay Blizzard for a game that they're going to have a bot play for them. The players are willing to pay MDY for a bot to play the game for them. Everybody is happy and making a profit here.
It's Blizzard's decision to ban people that's hurting them. Of course they're allowed to ban people if they want to. It's their servers, after all. But it's stupid of them to blame someone else for their own decisions. Glider is just providing a service for there is a demand, apparently.
Ignoring all the legalities for a moment let me see if I can shed some light here. Blizzard is not hurting their bottom line by banning players who cheat using bots. Yes they lose the revenue from that player's subscription, what you are ignoring here is the revenue they lose from players who actually play the game that get fed up with all the botters and quit.
I've played WoW on and off for quite awhile now, I can tell you firsthand botters ruin some of the atmosphere and people who use them to gather mats negatively effect the in-game economy. Someone who doesn't cheat will have a difficult if not impossible time making gold with a gathering profession as there are people using bots to gather constantly and selling at far cheaper prices than that mat would be worth if someone actually spent their time to get it.
People who use them to level are often terrible players when they hit max level and start joining groups because after 80 levels of the program doing it for them they have no idea how to play their character. The bots do have a negative impact on the game which is why Blizzard puts a lot of effort into getting rid of them.
If it's CNN they just put up comments from Twitter.
If they don't want to be recorded, they may be hiding something.
Now now, be careful with that sword, it's double-edged.
It is indeed.
The distinguishing factor here is that the police are public servants. "To serve and protect." When they are on the job serving the public we have a right to know what they are doing. It is necessary so that we can independently verify they are indeed protecting us and not abusing a position of power.
He was the only thing that made it remotely tolerable when I was forced to watch it.
Since when did they care about user privacy? The only time they pretend to care is when it starts affecting their bottom line.
This man is a hero! You should link the addon in the summary.
Warning: Google has determined you do not have the necessary intelligence to walk anywhere, please remain in your home and call a taxi.
Rather than unable to connect, let's try unwilling to connect. I have always kept my games separate from my real computer network because I deem game programmers and DRM programmers to be suspect. Because I am installing things more often on a games system, there is more chance of things going wrong and viruses being introduced. For this reason, I always keep this away from my real data. The easiest way to do this is physical separation. This then limits access to the Internet.
So you are paranoid enough that you don't want your gaming machines connected to your network of machines with personal data on them for fear of sneaky game and DRM programmers. You then go on to say the necessity of physical separation from your real network prevents you from hooking these machines up to the internet implying that your network with "real data" on it you care about is connected to the internet.
Am I the only one surprised that someone would view games as a larger incursion threat than being connected to the net?
On a side note, complete physical separation is not necessary, what you need is a good switch hooked up to your cable modem (or whatever your point of access for the internet is) set up with your gaming machines and "real" machines on separate VLANs.
It is far more than a motion controller and is actually quite innovative. I do think the price will hurt it though as an accessory that costs as much as an entire system from Nintendo. We'll see what the quality of games released for it are, ultimately that will determine whether it's worth the money.
You seem to be unaware that you are responsible for who is in government. Law is how a civilized society addresses grievances between it's citizens without resorting to violence or terroristic threats. You don't just throw the whole idea out because you're too lazy to participate.
"Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people.” -Lincoln
The largest problem with our system is that the politicians can outright lie to the public with no intention of following through just to get elected and a majority of the public will believe them. If you have a solution for either getting the politicians to stop lying or educating the public enough to see through the lies you could be a national hero. So far one has not been found.
I care equally about net neutrality. What good is all that speed if you can only utilize it when downloading an entire movie from your ISP's media arm and downloading from anyone else results in the download taking ages?
We need net neutrality, sadly Congress has once again shown their lack of understanding when it comes to technology and the public good.
Well Time/Warner, Comcast, and their ilk have done such a wonderful job building out infrastructure. The free market cannot work in this case because they hold (in many cases government granted) monopolies in most areas.
Not to mention as most are also content providers it is not necessarily in their best interest to provide faster internet speeds...