Live data from Hacker News

Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

harpers.org

101–110 of 465 posts

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#101
post #74
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying he... conspired to do something illegal?

Yes, but where I'm from you need to actually do something in furtherance of the conspiracy to face prosecution. I'm not trying to make a legal argument, this just feels fundamentally wrong to me.

I suppose Assange's defense will be that he never actually even tried to crack the password- if he was lying or bloviating, he would not have actually done anything in furtherance of the conspiracy. If that turned out to be the case I'd be with you. But if you have chat logs saying "I will do the thing to try and help you commit a crime" then that sure seems like evidence that you did the thing, or at least tried to.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#102
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not aupposed. The court's job is not to enforce ryanlol's idea about what the law should be. The court's job is to enforce the actual existing text of the actual existing laws. The actual existing laws say that attempting to break into a computer to which you do not have access is a crime, even if your effort alone is not the lynchpin. And that conspiring to help someone else attempt is also a crime.

>The court's job is not to enforce ryanlol's idea about what the law should be. Ah great. Did I ever suggest that? >The actual existing laws say that attempting to break into a computer to which you do not have access is a crime, even if you do not succeed. And that conspiring to help someone else attempt is also a crime. This is correct, but doesn't mean that it's right .

> Did I ever suggest that

You called it a "supposed criminal act". Usually "supposed" used in that way means something similar to ostensible. That's why I started my post with "It's not supposed". In fact, that's the first definition Oxford gives for supposedly...

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#103

First, I want to say I'm not dismissing the validity of the sexual assault charge. That's a serious change, and it should be addressed via proper legal channels. That said, having watched (the film) "Untouchables" for the Xth time, it's certainly possible given the powers involved he could be getting the Al Capone treatment. Put another way, how or why he ends up in jail isn't nearly as important as him ending up in…

I think we have a lot of growing up to do regarding the Swedish law concerning equality. My suspicion is that Sweden are 50 - 100 years ahead of the UK and the rest of the English speaking world when it comes to treating women with respect as a society and in law.

In our own mis-spent youths we assume some laws don't apply to us, it can be a simple thing like riding a bicycle on a pavement (sidewalk). Then we might flatten an elderly person as they step out their door, putting them in hospital and to no longer have their health. Only then does the penny drop and that the law is not a petty thing. Before that happens we might assume the policeman ticking us off for riding on a pavement is a 'jobsworth' who should be 'out catching murderers'. But no, the law - even this small one does matter.

I am hoping that aside from the Wikileaks circus that something good can come from this regarding how we see women. 'Well, she was asking for it' attitudes should not wash, regardless of how big the ego is. There was no evidence that the original charges were a pretext to nab Assange and send him off to some US courtroom. Assange should have faced the music and apologised for his conduct, then moved on as a free man having paid whatever fines/community service/prison spell the judged deemed appropriate.

If you are in a hole, stop digging. Assange kept digging.

Much has been made of the benefits of the Wikileaks sideshow but I don't see it that way. If someone had some important information to leak they might easily be discouraged to do so given how Wikileaks had monopolised that 'business' (and made it into a monetized business).

It is not rocket science to create a web page and post documents online, the idea you need Wikileaks for that - to filter it for you - is ridiculous. But Wikileaks created a black hole where any secret documents had to go to in order to be perceived by journalists and the public as a legitimate scandal worthy leak.

The idea that Assange has a 'dead man's switch' is also interesting. Imagine that he did have the crown jewels of leaked information stashed away, let's imagine it was something like the identity of the killer in a murder case, withholding that information from the family of the deceased would put him on the same side as the murderer, harbouring them in effect. This would be morally wrong. So we will see what the leverage he has turns out to be.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#104
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not aupposed. The court's job is not to enforce ryanlol's idea about what the law should be. The court's job is to enforce the actual existing text of the actual existing laws. The actual existing laws say that attempting to break into a computer to which you do not have access is a crime, even if your effort alone is not the lynchpin. And that conspiring to help someone else attempt is also a crime.

>The court's job is not to enforce ryanlol's idea about what the law should be. Ah great. Did I ever suggest that? >The actual existing laws say that attempting to break into a computer to which you do not have access is a crime, even if you do not succeed. And that conspiring to help someone else attempt is also a crime. This is correct, but doesn't mean that it's right .

So if someone tried to poison you to death, but failed because he mistakenly bought sugar instead of poison, there was no crime committed? Is that how it works in your country? Is that right?

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#105
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The court's job is not to enforce ryanlol's idea about what the law should be. Ah great. Did I ever suggest that? >The actual existing laws say that attempting to break into a computer to which you do not have access is a crime, even if you do not succeed. And that conspiring to help someone else attempt is also a crime. This is correct, but doesn't mean that it's right .

> Did I ever suggest that You called it a "supposed criminal act". Usually "supposed" used in that way means something similar to ostensible. That's why I started my post with "It's not supposed". In fact, that's the first definition Oxford gives for supposedly...

Assange has not been convicted yet, has he?

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#106

I use to go back and forth on Julian, but at this point I think he should be punished, but what that punishment should be I don't know. I think Manning stealing the cables was an absolute wrong, and Assange facilitating that shows a level of culpability. He should not be afforded American protection. Crimes were committed, even if they were done with the best intentions, it was still a crime. We all count, or no one…

I would like to know what the Mueller report and US intelligence has on him and his involvement with Russian interference is US elections. Assange was pretty active during the 2016 election and I'd like to see what his involvement was.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#107
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The court's job is not to enforce ryanlol's idea about what the law should be. Ah great. Did I ever suggest that? >The actual existing laws say that attempting to break into a computer to which you do not have access is a crime, even if you do not succeed. And that conspiring to help someone else attempt is also a crime. This is correct, but doesn't mean that it's right .

So if someone tried to poison you to death, but failed because he mistakenly bought sugar instead of poison, there was no crime committed? Is that how it works in your country? Is that right ?

That's not at all similar to what happened here.

In my country we have separate laws which specifically criminalize the act of preparing to murder someone, so yes that'd be illegal. I think that's right

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#108
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Assange didn’t succesfully crack the hash, it’s questionable if he even did anything with it. So if someone tried to break into your home and failed, that means they never committed a crime? >At best his crime is agreeing to help hack into the DoD network, not actually doing anything in furtherance of that. That's why the maximum sentence is only 5 years.

>So if someone tried to break into your home and failed, that means they never committed a crime? If someone acquired the same lock as me, tried to pick it in the privacy of their own home and never actually broke into my home I would sure hope that they wouldn't face criminal charges. >That's why the maximum sentence is only 5 years. 10 for what he's being charged with, no? I could very well be wrong here, but I tho…

>If someone acquired the same lock as me, tried to pick it in the privacy of their own home and never actually broke into my home I would sure hope that they wouldn't face criminal charges.

Acquiring the same lock is bad phrasing, since the same model has different keys.

So what you're implying is that people who go around cloning locks to crack them at home, and generate keys, with the intent to break into homes or military installations, have committed no crime?

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#110
post #3

What part of the first amendment exonerates knowingly attempting to crack NTLM keys of US military logins? Or is the reasoning that the law should give him special treatment and exemptions not given to others? Also, is the 1st amendment protection even applicable to foreigners on foreign soil?

> What part of the first amendment exonerates knowingly attempting to crack NTLM keys of US military logins?

Is doing math a form of expression? Breaking a password amounts to thinking for a very long time about all the ways you could rearrange some bits, and choosing one. I'd call it an expression of preference for certain possible results over others, by way of saving one and letting the rest go.

I know, I'm laughing at the thought of framing a cracked password because you're so proud of your expressive art. Still, I am deeply uncomfortable with a government having the authority to say, "You may not run that program."

Post reply on HN