Anonymous Member Faces 10 Years in Prison

[g00fysmiley]

[citation][nom]scannall[/nom]So, if I don't hire armed guards to watch my house it's my fault if it gets broken in to, and all my stuff gets stolen?[/citation]

i'm of an opinion in between, in your analogy vs his i'd say you don't need armed security and to go all out but at least close and lock the damn door basic secirty isn't to expensive, hell its free in most cases program wise and takes an hour or two worth of research to figue out what to install to make your system at least margionally protected

 

[demonhorde665]

I'm astonished at all the people defending these jack a--es /, just go ahead and thumb me down .. but seriously the damage these attack can do to consumers NOT companies is horrendous. screw all you guys that defend these jerks .

 

[Guest]

this is far and away outright theivery of these young mens lives. Doing DNS is pure protest, pure and simple. The damage they are doing is justifiable in the same way going out and speaking your mind is justifiable. All you whom are saying they are damaging the 'consumer,' what is this 'consumer' you are speaking of. I only know of friends, neighbors, communities, artisans, and those who buy into this system. I lump all of those as people who are just messed. Messed because they are destroying our world. The empire will only live for so long off the dregs of monoculture and fossil fuels.

 

[unoriginal1]

this is far and away outright theivery of these young mens lives. Doing DNS is pure protest, pure and simple. The damage they are doing is justifiable in the same way going out and speaking your mind is justifiable. All you whom are saying they are damaging the 'consumer,' what is this 'consumer' you are speaking of. I only know of friends, neighbors, communities, artisans, and those who buy into this system. I lump all of those as people who are just messed. Messed because they are destroying our world. The empire will only live for so long off the dregs of monoculture and fossil fuels.

Doing a "denial of service" Is not a pure protest. It's taking someones business down and out for a period of time. Heard of the saying time is money? Well every minute they are down that's money lost. Its not a peaceful picket/protest outside of a shop. It is effectively blocking entrance to the shop not allowing anyone to use it for whatever period of time.

It is a crime. Does it deserve 10 years? I personally think that's a bit much.. Especially when rapists and such are out in the same or less time.

 

[razor512]

total idiot, why did he take a plea deal. When you take a plea deal, the government does not have to prove their side of the case, meaning they do not have to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt requirement to win the case. The reason why they do DOS attacks (completely useless form of activism as taking a site down for a few hours means nothing), is because of plausible deniability. When paypal gets a DOS attack, you are taking part in the attack every time you try to go to the page.

When a root DNS server is attacked, you are taking part when ever you go to any website.

What the government probably saw was traffic from his IP or traffic from him to multiple locations that were the source of DOS attacks. The most they would have had is correlative data and nothing that actually shows him specifically doing the attack.

If he had taken it to court, they would have had a case where the prosecution has no evidence.
That, due to the nature of the case he would have had a jury trial, and if he did not, he could appeal to get one (remember when in a bench trial there is a major conflict of interest since the prosecution and the judge and everyone who is not you in that room, is working for the same team. The jury is the check/ balance on that conflict of interest.

Only thing is that he would need a lawyer who can take part in the jury selection as if you rely on a public defender, they do not really take part is jury selection, so the state will select people who are likely to agree with them in light of any lack of evidence.

(this is why if you are selected for jury duty and don't want to be selected, if the person is a public defender and the case involved a victimless crime, then you have to show an interest in law and the constitution to not be selected as they do not want anyone who will apply their rules to a situation where their rules will not work out in their favor (eg victimless crime). Remember, everyone wants to get out of jury duty so pretending to be incompetent will not work as you will just blend in and be randomly selected. (especially since they like picking people who do not want to be there when a victimless crime is involved because people who do not want to be there will overwhelming find the person guilty regardless of lack of evidence as it gets you out faster)

 

[Guest]

Well that sucks -_-
How do you even get caught with a DDOS? Script kiddies should use this as a cautionary tale.

 

[chewy1963]

[citation][nom]Razor512[/nom]total idiot, why did he take a plea deal. When you take a plea deal, the government does not have to prove their side of the case, meaning they do not have to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt requirement to win the case. The reason why they do DOS attacks (completely useless form of activism as taking a site down for a few hours means nothing), is because of plausible deniability. When paypal gets a DOS attack, you are taking part in the attack every time you try to go to the page.When a root DNS server is attacked, you are taking part when ever you go to any website.What the government probably saw was traffic from his IP or traffic from him to multiple locations that were the source of DOS attacks. The most they would have had is correlative data and nothing that actually shows him specifically doing the attack.If he had taken it to court, they would have had a case where the prosecution has no evidence.That, due to the nature of the case he would have had a jury trial, and if he did not, he could appeal to get one (remember when in a bench trial there is a major conflict of interest since the prosecution and the judge and everyone who is not you in that room, is working for the same team. The jury is the check/ balance on that conflict of interest.Only thing is that he would need a lawyer who can take part in the jury selection as if you rely on a public defender, they do not really take part is jury selection, so the state will select people who are likely to agree with them in light of any lack of evidence. (this is why if you are selected for jury duty and don't want to be selected, if the person is a public defender and the case involved a victimless crime, then you have to show an interest in law and the constitution to not be selected as they do not want anyone who will apply their rules to a situation where their rules will not work out in their favor (eg victimless crime). Remember, everyone wants to get out of jury duty so pretending to be incompetent will not work as you will just blend in and be randomly selected. (especially since they like picking people who do not want to be there when a victimless crime is involved because people who do not want to be there will overwhelming find the person guilty regardless of lack of evidence as it gets you out faster)[/citation]

I guess you didn't read the part about a jury convicting him, huh?

 

[kjoz]

Rape, man slaughter, robbery... get a slap on the hand (light sentence...)

Do anything that falls into the VERY broad category known as "Hacking"... get a heavy sentence...

Crazy world we live in these days... Crazy world

 

[jackson1420]

Why aren't my comments posting!!!!