News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Call of Duty gaming community points to ‘swatting’ in Wic... by icebraining on Friday December 29, 2017 @02:39PM (#16031446)
If I were to threaten to kill someone if you didn't stop posting on the web, and you didn't, and I followed through, would you consider yourself to be guilty of homicide?
Re:Call of Duty gaming community points to ‘swatting’ in Wic... by hbosch on Friday December 29, 2017 @02:55PM (#16031573)
What? Is that equivalent?

Swatting involves sending anxious humans with military grade weapons to an innocent person's house. Those anxious humans are trained to kill. If you Swat someone, and that person ends up dead, you're the reason they died -- and I fully agree it should be treated as a homicide, manslaughter at a minimum.

In your scenario, you are a hostage taker. You've taken both me and the other person hostage with the threat of murder...

Re:Call of Duty gaming community points to ‘swatting’ in Wic... by baybal2 on Friday December 29, 2017 @05:54PM (#16032573)
American policemen lack moral fibre. They are too anxious to be entrusted their duties
Re:Call of Duty gaming community points to ‘swatting’ in Wic... by brucephillips on Friday December 29, 2017 @06:02PM (#16032623)
Anxiety likely has more to do with how dangerous their job is than their moral fiber.
Re:Call of Duty gaming community points to ‘swatting’ in Wic... by icebraining on Friday December 29, 2017 @03:02PM (#16031618)
Fair enough, but I read the previous post as saying that simply knowing that your action could lead to someone else committing a crime made you guilty.
Re:Call of Duty gaming community points to ‘swatting’ in Wic... by barrkel on Friday December 29, 2017 @02:45PM (#16031492)
The institutions of the state act a lot more like a machine, because the people in it are punished if they don't follow orders. While "just following orders" has been established in the past as no excuse, I think we've also shown through Stanford and Milgram experiments that human psychology does act that way. Thus, I don't think it's trivial to convert it into a moral agent problem. It's more of a systemic issue.

Ensuring there are consequences for people who act immorally may help address the systemic issues, of course.