Re:GNU hackers discover HACIENDA government surveillance
by jessaustin on Friday August 22, 2014 @08:41PM
(#8214583)
I don't think even most prosecutors would have the balls to say something as fucked-up as that. One who scoffs at the threat of criminal court proceedings, in this nation, does so from a very privileged position. A more charitable person than I would hope you never have the misfortune to discover how wrong you are.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:GNU hackers discover HACIENDA government surveillance
by mpyne on Saturday August 23, 2014 @11:26AM
(#8216008)
What I'm saying is that you cannot have your cake here and eat it too.
Strong laws? Great, you'll have an Aaron Swartz every 5 years at least, especially as long as those laws continue to make common-sense computer crimes like breaking into a subnet (now matter how easy or difficult that was to do technically!) legal crimes as well.
Weak laws? That's fine too, but don't be surprised what a dedicated "advanced persistent threat" can do under a weak legal regime.
Re:GNU hackers discover HACIENDA government surveillance
by jessaustin on Monday August 25, 2014 @11:51AM
(#8222272)
That is not at all my interpretation of your other comments on this page, but let's go with it...
If APT were "real" instead of marketing/lobbyist bullshit, like "al Queda" and "the domino theory", what could we imagine "strong laws" doing to combat it? Does anyone suggest we pull a Baghdad in Shanghai or St. Petersburg? How strong is a law that can't be enforced, really?