Comment #42993533

Re: by ineptech on Sunday February 09, 2025 @03:22PM (#42993533)

What was the impressive and profitable part? The article makes him sound like a script kiddie who dicked around with some DDoS networks and formed a couple LLCs but didn't end up accomplishing much (either entrepreneurially or illegally). Not saying that makes him a terrible person, but in generation ago terms, he sounds less like a founding l0pht member and more like a Rusty n Edie's subscriber.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by JumpCrisscross on Sunday February 09, 2025 @03:31PM (#42993634)

> article makes him sound like a script kiddie who dicked around with some DDoS networks and formed a couple LLCs but didn't end up accomplishing much

I’d say that’s impressive for a high schooler. Initiative, follow through and results.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by cjaybo on Sunday February 09, 2025 @03:37PM (#42993681)

That’s a different thing than building “impressive tech” imo. And a far cry from what would qualify someone as one of society’s “future titans”.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by computerthings on Sunday February 09, 2025 @03:56PM (#42993888)

In context, I read that as describing the future he could have had in brighter terms to increase the contrast with the following description of the future he probably has. Like, being generous because it doesn't matter now anyway.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by lern_too_spel on Sunday February 09, 2025 @03:55PM (#42993875)

He's got enough hustle to get funded by a16z to build yet another blockchain scam if he so chose. You better believe he's siphoning your government records to use for his own purposes later. Ask for forgiveness, not for permission, as they say; but with this government, you don't even need to ask for forgiveness.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by intended on Sunday February 09, 2025 @04:28PM (#42994195)

Isn’t this being ‘overly positive’?

Why are we discussing the initiative in the first place? Isn’t this once again shifting deck chairs on the Titanic.

We live in the era AFTER stuxnet for crying out loud.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by watwut on Sunday February 09, 2025 @04:46PM (#42994385)

I do not find it impressive. It is not difficult technically. The reason others do not do this is that they have ethical and moral limitations, they wont DDoS networks because they are aware of harm. Maybe we should stop treating people who cause intentional harm as superior.

Not opening LLCs you do not know what to do with is also more of "good impulse control" sign.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by TeMPOraL on Sunday February 09, 2025 @06:41PM (#42995319)

Well, becoming a titan in tech industry hasn't required doing any difficult tech since... idk, at least the 1990s. Tech is just business now, and being a business titan requires a different particular set of skills, skills this guy apparently has.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by watwut on Monday February 10, 2025 @03:38AM (#42998089)

He is not titan in tech industry nor on the path there. Your typical script kiddy does not become tech titan. What it takes to be tech titan is actually irrelevant to whether DDoS is impressive.

> being a business titan requires a different particular set of skills, skills this guy apparently has.

Just about the only thing he has is lack of ethics and morals. Lack of care for harm he causes. Yes, those are necessary to be a tech titan, but not nearly sufficient.

There are many low level guys without much ethics that never ever become tech titans.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 on Sunday February 09, 2025 @06:03PM (#42995049)

You have a point. Way back when digital presence was still something new, I remember entertaining the idea of running an org that would fake reviews on Amazon and other spaces, but I dropped the idea, because it seemed unethical. I will never know what could have been, but I also know there were people who followed that path.

To your point, as a society, we have an actual filter for people like that, but that filter was not been uniformly applied.

[ Parent | on HN ]