Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 162 posts

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#111

Post by tsotha »

mdda wrote: post #49
tsotha wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're underestimating the reach of these cartels. I doubt they have the resources to find hackers, but they do have people feeding them information from inside the Mexican and US governments. Also, the Anonymous people have made themselves a pain in the ass to governments who have the resources to find them. Even if the cartels don't have ears in the right place it's not hard for me to imagine a list of prob…

> I doubt they have the resources to find hackers Hey kid : People tell me you're the smartest computer guy in your year. My friends know where your mother lives. Please help me find some of these "hackers".

Sure, but can they put a tap into all the fiber running through the US? That's what I mean by resources.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#112

Post by dylangs1030 »

burgerbrain wrote: post #95
dylangs1030 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legalizing something harmful because there are other harmful things that are ALSO legal isn't sensible. It just means more things should be illegal. And they are adverse because they are unhealthy for consumption. That a prison is unhealthy says more about the American prison system than the comparative health of narcotics. There are a lot of responses I can't cover individually, so here is a thought experiment to ex…

"Legalizing something harmful because there are other harmful things that are ALSO legal isn't sensible. It just means more things should be illegal." So. Would you choose to restart Prohibition if it were up to you?

No, there are degrees to which something is harmful, and mechanics to how they're deadly. Alcohol usually kills in car accidents. Heroin does not require a car to kill, and there is no such thing as moderation with drugs like heroin and cocaine. People don't exactly stumble about after drinking fine wine usually.

(Edit)

To clarify, alcohol does not need vehicular accidents to kill, it does cause damage to the liver, but my basic point was that while there are substances that are legal which are harmful, such as nicotine and alcohol, these are far and away much less harmful than other illegal controlled substances which have more overdose potential.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#113

Post by dylangs1030 »

mojotoad wrote: post #110
dylangs1030 wrote: post #21

The trouble with movements like Anonymous is that there is no centralized authority. Further, a group pushing for anarchy is either hypocritical if it's effective (because it will be organized) or ineffective because it's anarchical and disorganized. Anonymous is not a serious threat to large corporations. It may cost them a minor inconveniencr, but without centralized authority, the group has no real internal integr…

What does anonymity have to do with anarchy? I realize that they often go hand in hand, but that's a sad generalization.

I was just following a train of thought and making a comparison, not a real correlative relationship.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#114

Post by dylangs1030 »

Karunamon wrote: post #109
dylangs1030 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Crime would adjust itself, or find a new market. Compromising by legalizing something which has a purpose in being illegal is detrimental to solving the problem.

Thing is, there is no real purpose for many/most controlled substances to be illegal, unless you choose from the following list: * Excuse for government overstep of constitutional provisions * Money to the prison-industrial complex (i know, trite, but it's true) * One more step in the notion that you don't own your own body And those aren't legitimate reasons, IMAO.

I agree with you on libertarian grounds that, in principle, a person should be free to ingest whatever he likes. However, looking at civilized society as a whole, I don't see making most controlled substances legal useful. With the exception of marijuana and a few anxiolytics (which I'd encourage to be legalized), I think they'd be counterproductive to the working order of a society. Society needs someone to clean the toilets, and do other labor intensive jobs. But if you have a legally accessible ticket to happiness through drugs, why go to work?

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#115

Post by dylangs1030 »

robotresearcher wrote: post #105
dylangs1030 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legalizing something harmful because there are other harmful things that are ALSO legal isn't sensible. It just means more things should be illegal. And they are adverse because they are unhealthy for consumption. That a prison is unhealthy says more about the American prison system than the comparative health of narcotics. There are a lot of responses I can't cover individually, so here is a thought experiment to ex…

"they are adverse because they are unhealthy for consumption" Like rocks, thumbtacks, shampoo, too much aspirin, bacon-double-cheeseburgers and daytime TV. We do not ban everything that's unhealthy. The question is whether, on balance, the benefits of prohibition are greater than the costs. I think we agree on that, though we might disagree when we estimate the balance when it comes to narcotics. Unfortunately, stati…

So, correct me if I'm wrong, is your argument that it's better to choose the lesser of two evils? In other words, we should legalize drugs because they are obtainable anyway and we need to reduce the number of people in prison?

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#116

Post by potatolicious »

davekinkead wrote: post #107
sliverstorm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, on the other hand what are the costs of doing nothing in Mexico? What price do the Mexican people pay? This situation is a little different than the twin towers.

Wouldn't it be safer & a hell of a lot cheaper if drugs were regulated according to their harm? Grass is no worse than alcohol or tobacco, while cocaine doesn't cause any more social issues than those. The cartels only exist because the illegality of those drugs creates massive profit margins. Remove that and many of the problems are solved.

I'm going through a very good book right now that this reminds me of. It's more about the middle east than Latin America, but I think it applies:

"Poppy cultivation had become an agribusiness and the dealers for the Afghan drug barons now had technical advisers who were visiting Nangarhar to advise on the crop and the product, paying in advance, and so concerned about the health of their workers that they had given them face-masks to wear in the opium factories. Some said they even offered health insurance. This was capitalism on a ruthlessly illegal scale. And when I asked a European UN official how the world could compete with it, he drew in his breath. "Legalise drugs!" he roared. "Legalise the lot. It will be the end of the drug barons. They'll go broke and kill each other. But of course the world will never accept that. So we'll go on fighting a losing war."

-- The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East by Robert Fisk

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#117

Post by epicureanideal »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #114
Karunamon wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing is, there is no real purpose for many/most controlled substances to be illegal, unless you choose from the following list: * Excuse for government overstep of constitutional provisions * Money to the prison-industrial complex (i know, trite, but it's true) * One more step in the notion that you don't own your own body And those aren't legitimate reasons, IMAO.

I agree with you on libertarian grounds that, in principle, a person should be free to ingest whatever he likes. However, looking at civilized society as a whole, I don't see making most controlled substances legal useful. With the exception of marijuana and a few anxiolytics (which I'd encourage to be legalized), I think they'd be counterproductive to the working order of a society. Society needs someone to clean th…

Aren't you just making the argument that legalizing drugs would increase wages?

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#118

Post by burgerbrain »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #112
burgerbrain wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Legalizing something harmful because there are other harmful things that are ALSO legal isn't sensible. It just means more things should be illegal." So. Would you choose to restart Prohibition if it were up to you?

No, there are degrees to which something is harmful, and mechanics to how they're deadly. Alcohol usually kills in car accidents. Heroin does not require a car to kill, and there is no such thing as moderation with drugs like heroin and cocaine. People don't exactly stumble about after drinking fine wine usually. (Edit) To clarify, alcohol does not need vehicular accidents to kill, it does cause damage to the liver,…

"Alcohol usually kills in car accidents. Heroin does not require a car to kill"

You are entirely deluded.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#119

Post by epicureanideal »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #112
burgerbrain wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Legalizing something harmful because there are other harmful things that are ALSO legal isn't sensible. It just means more things should be illegal." So. Would you choose to restart Prohibition if it were up to you?

No, there are degrees to which something is harmful, and mechanics to how they're deadly. Alcohol usually kills in car accidents. Heroin does not require a car to kill, and there is no such thing as moderation with drugs like heroin and cocaine. People don't exactly stumble about after drinking fine wine usually. (Edit) To clarify, alcohol does not need vehicular accidents to kill, it does cause damage to the liver,…

Alchohol doesn't require a car to kill either. How many cases are there of spousal murder while intoxicated? Also, heroin generally kills when people try to rob others for money to get heroin, not when people are on heroin, because it is a strong depressant and people tend to just lounge around like with pot. If heroin were legal and cheap that problem goes away.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#120

Post by knieveltech »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #90
knieveltech wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you live anywhere in North America, you're already living in a society where they're freely accessible, so in that respect prohibition has clearly failed. I understand we've all been propagandized to believe that drug use is inherently evil, however it's a mistake to lose site of the fact that (at least in the US) the prison system is largely a subcontracted for-profit industry. An industry with a clearly vested i…

I agree that rehabilitation is more important that penalization for drug abuse, but towards the original point, drugs aren't accessible in the sense that they're not legal. You cannot get them as easily as you can a gallon of milk.

"you can't get them as easily as you can a gallon of milk."

I would have to say that's entirely dependent upon who you socialize with, the time of day, and to some extent your age. I can absolutely think of situations I've been in where scoring involved a lot less effort than acquiring a gallon of milk. See also: dorm life.

Post reply on HN