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

121–130 of 162 posts

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#121

Post by epicureanideal »

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're right, I cannot call the milkman to open up the store and let me buy some milk at 3am, or better yet get milk delivered to my door with less than a 30 minute lag time.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#122

Post by dredmorbius »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #61
bmac27 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Countries where prostitution is legal still see organized abuses in the industry, like brothel owners not following regulations, etc." There are organized abuses in every industry, legal or not. We're not scrapping the insurance market because of the schemes that go on between doctors, lawyers & individuals looking to make a buck through phoney claims.

That is true, and while I used prostitution as an example, I personally don't see why it should be illegal. However heroin addiction is not the same as corporations and governments lobbying in cahoots. Drugs aren't really viable for an effective lifestyle - at least, not the ones organized crime profits the most on. Even prescription drugs like Vicodin were nearly pulled off the market because of how dangerous they a…

There are numerous substances and/or activities which are legally available whose addictive tendencies are comparable to controlled drugs. The combination of sugar, fat, and salt, for example, has been experimentally shown to be as addictive as cocaine (this is a central premise of the book The End of Overeating; its author, David Kessler, is a former commissioner of the FDA, and medical researcher).

While I don't condone drug use, I feel its criminalization has caused far more problems than it's resolved, and it certainly hasn't curtailed use. Criminalize the consequences (much as we do drunk driving), but decriminalize the use and commerce, tax the sales, provide ample treatment (possibly through the sales taxes), and eliminate an entire class of criminal enterprise.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#123

Post by potatolicious »

sliverstorm wrote: post #79
robotresearcher wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of these things is as profitable as drugs. Tens of dollars per gram, of stuff that grows in the forest and requires but a little processing. There's nothing so profitable to move on to.

Are you suggesting that the lower profits mean a crime ring can't be organized around them? Because history would disagree with you.

No, what he (and I, I suppose) is suggesting is that without drugs criminal organizations lose their primary source of funding. They can move onto other, smaller pies, but ultimately it means a dramatic downsizing of organized crime and a consequent loss of influence.

Which isn't to say that they won't run guns and traffick humans, but right now the problem in Latin America is that these criminal organizations practically run the government they are so large. Depriving them of the drug pie, the tobacco pie, the alcohol pie... they will have nothing they can turn to that will allow them to maintain their present level of governmental corruption.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#124

Post by epicureanideal »

sliverstorm wrote: post #51
Joakal wrote: post #25

Interesting that they would cancel when many other de-centralised organisations would be pretty resilient. In fact, losing a member to the enemy would cause an outcry and drive more to join the cause. eg Taliban, Al Qaeda, IRA, guerrillas, and more. Whoever cancelled the operation just confirmed to the adversaries that they're easy to squash and immediately put the cause at risk. Adversaries are now more confident to…

Anonymous is not a paramilitary group. I doubt their members are willing to put their life on the line for the cause. Decentralized paramilitary groups are hard to fight because you can track down & kill members without hurting the group- not because you cannot track down & kill members.

Perhaps they need an Armed Anonymous branch.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#126

Post by ulisesroche »

tsotha wrote: post #111
mdda wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

You don't need to tap all the fiber running through the US to track down someone. That would take too long. Much easier to put "Wanted" posters up with "$$$" on the bottom and wait for the head to come back.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#127

Post by rayiner »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #38
handelaar wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For values of 'worked for alcohol' that include 'moved world's largest criminal organisation into non-alcohol-related activity without impacting its organisational capacity one jot'.

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.

Everything reaches an equilibrium. Taking away a high-profit/low-cost activity like drug trafficking will shift activity to something else, no doubt, but this alternate activity will likely be less profitable and support a smaller organization.

We're seeing this with Wall Street. Dodd-Frank is raising the costs of doing business, causing the industry to down size.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#128

Post by Pheter »

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…

Because they need to earn money to buy the drugs. By your logic anyone with a hobby wouldn't bother going to work because they also have a legally acceptable ticket to happiness.

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#129

Post by VMG »

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,…

> it does cause damage to the liver

And to most other parts of the body

Re: Anonymous Cancels Operation Cartel as Los Zetas Track Hacktivists

#130

Post by xyzzyz »

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,…

In eastern Europe there are plenty of cases of alcohol overdose resulting in death. On the other hand, there are no credible reports of marijuana or LSD being the direct cause of death.

Sure, alcohol is far less harmful than some of the illegal controlled substances. Still, there are other illegal substances which are less harmful than alcohol. It's not like ethanol is the safest drug out there.

Post reply on HN