News U.S. Hacker Sentenced to Five Years Following Crypto Lessons in North Korea

[JohnDon9]

"...for aiding North Korea in avoiding U.S. sanctions."

A definition of a traitor!

 

[Endymio]

The state department DENIED him transit to North Korea.

Now you're starting to get it. Your strongest point is the denied travel permit -- and yet, that's not what they charged him with. And, despite the common misconception, the State Department lacks authority to ban someone from traveling to a specific country. They can only ban you from using a US passport to that effect -- which is why Griffith did not use his. Instead, the DOJ charged him not with breaking a congressional law, but with two violations of an executive order, and claimed he was "exporting technology" by doing nothing but restating knowledge easily found by a ten-year old clicking on their first Google hit.

So I ask once again -- if you tell a Russian that one computer chip is better than another, or that a GPU can make video games run faster -- are you exporting technology and conspiring to evade sanctions?

 

[JohnDon9]

The reason behind punishment here is to deter other hippies from doing unacceptable things.

I agree, and the right move!
And lets not forget he was advising to members of the administration that threatens US (and others) with nuclear war! A bit different than speaking at a conference in San Francisco.

Fascinating how some can completely ignore the information that is in the very first sentence! to fit their narrative... 'Oh, he just explain what bitcoin is... Not fair!'.

 

[digitalgriffin]

Now you're starting to get it. Your strongest point is the denied travel permit -- and yet, that's not what they charged him with. And, despite the common misconception, the State Department lacks authority to ban someone from traveling to a specific country. They can only ban you from using a US passport to that effect -- which is why Griffith did not use his. Instead, the DOJ charged him not with breaking a congressional law, but with two violations of an executive order, and claimed he was "exporting technology" by doing nothing but restating knowledge easily found by a ten-year old clicking on their first Google hit.

So I ask once again -- if you tell a Russian that one computer chip is better than another, or that a GPU can make video games run faster -- are you exporting technology and conspiring to evade sanctions?

When you apply for an application to a hostile nation, you state what your intent is. He didn't list "tourism" that's for sure. The guy was a dumb ass. But if you think this guy was unfairly accused, why don't you advocate for him with one of the many free defense funds. Maybe the ACLU. But nothing personal, you are deluding yourself if you think what he did was harmless and without common sense.

 

[Endymio]

When you apply for an application to a hostile nation, you state what your intent is. He didn't list "tourism" that's for sure.

Actually he listed "speak at a crypto conference." After the State Department denied the application, he sent the denying official a photo of his passport-number devoid visa, to show he hadn't broken US law to obtain it.

The guy was a dumb ass.

Absolutely. He was dumb enough to believe that he wouldn't go to prison for thumbing his nose at an offensive bureaucrat. If you think I'm defending him, I'm not -- I disagree sharply with his motivations. What I'm actually doing is criticizing the breakdown of the rule of law in US society. Since critical thinking is a bit of a lost art these days, I'll lay out what that process should be:

1. A legislative body clearly defines that a specific act is illegal, and places this in written form, not subject to interpretation.
2. A person violates that law, and is charged and convicted.

But what happened here was:

1. An offended non-elected bureaucrat decides to retaliate against someone, and searches our million-page legal code for a vague statue they can redefine to their purpose.
2. A person who did not violate the actual statute as written is then arrested, held without bond for years, then given the choice to plead to time served(*), or risk taking the issue to trial and receiving a life sentence.

Did Griffith "export technology"? No. You cannot stamp top-secret classified the fact that 2+3=5, or that electricity can power motors. They both are technically technology, but they've been "exported" around the world long ago. Public knowledge is public.

"Ethan Lou, a journalist who also attended the same conference that Griffith spoke at, said that Griffith’s presentation provided no information that could “not be found on page one of a Google search.” Testimony submitted from blockchain expert Andreas Antonopoulos, who reviewed video of Griffith’s presentation in Pyongyang, said the content was publicly available and could be accessed by anyone with an internet connection. "

if you think this guy was unfairly accused, why don't you advocate for him with one of the many free defense funds. Maybe the ACLU.

Sorry, but it's been decades since I was a member of the ACLU. Their mission today is almost exactly the opposite of what their name purports, and what it once was.

(*) Technically, Griffith pled to the nearly four years he'd already served before trial, plus another year and a half.

 

[cryoburner]

He didn't. He gave one talk at a public crypto-conference, hosted in North Korea.

The fact you think North Korea would host a "public crypto-conference" shows that you should brush up on your knowledge of the country. The public doesn't even have access to the Internet there. Only high-ranking government officials do. And anything on the country's local Intranet is heavily restricted and monitored. The public certainly isn't going to be benefiting from cryptocurrencies there.

And even he "pled guilty", fully admitting that he did something wrong, and his own lawyer described his actions as "arrogant and naive". He knew he could get into trouble by doing what he did, but took the risk to do so anyway, all to assist some bureaucrats with laundering money.

On the positive side, at least he didn't do anything their government judged as wrong, and ended up imprisoned there and eventually dead like that tourist who was accused of taking down a propaganda poster a few years back...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Warmbier

 

[Endymio]

The fact you think North Korea would host a "public crypto-conference" shows that you should brush up on your knowledge of the country.

Perhaps. It's been over 20 years since I was in Pyongyang. When were you there last?

The public doesn't even have access to the Internet there. Only high-ranking government officials do.

In other words, the same officials who Griffith supposedly helped -- by "giving them access" to what they already had. Seems you've inadvertently made my point for me.

And even he "pled guilty", fully admitting that he did something wrong,...

Numerous studies have concluded that up to 8% of those who plead guilty to a federal charge are innocent, due to the draconian sentencing penalty of going to trial. I also note that you were unable to answer the question I posed. I'll ask once again: if you tell a North Korean, or a Russian, or a Chinese PRC official that GPUs make games run faster, have you "exported technology" to them? A simple yes or no will suffice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Warmbier

By the way, Otto Warmbier pled guilty also. By your logic, he deserved what he got.

 

[ex_bubblehead]

Time to close this before it goes any further down the rabbit hole and we have to start sanctioning people.