91–100 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> given the glacial pace of constitutional law review OTOH, the SCOTUS has achieved a political supermajority and will probably move much faster with policy changes now.
The Supreme Court does not make policy, at most it stops other branches from making certain kind of policies, when presented an opportunity to do so when resolving an actual case or controversy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> given the glacial pace of constitutional law review OTOH, the SCOTUS has achieved a political supermajority and will probably move much faster with policy changes now.
The Supreme Court does not make policy, at most it stops other branches from making certain kind of policies, when presented an opportunity to do so when resolving an actual case or controversy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When purchasing a firearm, that is one of the questions in the Federal application, and you're not allowed to lie.
The federal application for a Federal Firearms License, the license needed to be a firearm vendor, not the (as far as I can tell) non-existent federal license to own one?
I would have advised him to stay quiet about this. Not out of fear of the North Koreans, but out of fear of our own security agencies seeing the activity as interfering in international relations. Also the vagueness of our hacking laws probably make what he did a crime. But I also am immensely proud that we have people willing to take things into their own hands when needed. Also, I feel like the 2nd amendment should…
We’ll it’s interesting in this case, because technically speaking a peace treaty was never signed and North Korea is in the state of war with the United States. So is it really a crime to attack a hostile state?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article says he’s exploiting known (ancient) vulnerabilities
Yes, he's exhausting their quiver of easy/cheap and instead they'd be forced to waste zero days right up front.
I would have advised him to stay quiet about this. Not out of fear of the North Koreans, but out of fear of our own security agencies seeing the activity as interfering in international relations. Also the vagueness of our hacking laws probably make what he did a crime. But I also am immensely proud that we have people willing to take things into their own hands when needed. Also, I feel like the 2nd amendment should…
The 2nd Amendment says the government can’t infringe your right to possess arms. It does not say that it’s legal for you to use your arms against others to make a point. “Digital arms” are legal to possess in the U.S. as far as I know. Again, that is not the same thing as legalizing any use of them.
One point that gets lost about the 2nd Amendment is that it should be considered an inalienable right. Meaning, it cannot be diminished by any law of man. Consequently, most of the gun laws can be viewed as fundamentally unconstitutional, and any attempts to enforce them are illegal.
Of course, this is a highly unpopular opinion, as most of the population has surrendered itself to creeping authoritarianism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When purchasing a firearm, that is one of the questions in the Federal application, and you're not allowed to lie.
The federal application for a Federal Firearms License, the license needed to be a firearm vendor, not the (as far as I can tell) non-existent federal license to own one?
I think it is a stupid law though. Imagine if we applied that logic to other constitutionally protected rights. "Anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance shall not have the right to vote" or "Anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance shall not have the right to due process".
I would imagine the intelligence services aren't happy he's providing them free pen-test services. He's taking potential tools out of their toolbox when they may need/want them in a future time of conflict.
So if the reds start parachuting down over your community you should just sit pretty lest you interfere with your military’s operations? The equivalence is not a false one in my eyes because a cyberattack against a US national’s systems should be seen as an attack on a US national’s property.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who knows. It seems like anything can be interpreted as a crime these days. Hopefully he's got good lawyers advising him.
Agreed. This is immensely foolish on his part. And he can rest assured that his identity is known. One crime does not justify another.