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

How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

maia.crimew.gay

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 677 posts

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#551

Post by rib3ye »

xyst wrote: post #521
mkl95 wrote: post #318

TIL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maia_arson_crimew > In March 2021, crimew was indicted by a grand jury in the United States on criminal charges related to her alleged hacking activity between 2019 and 2021. The charges were unrelated to the hack of Verkada. Her home and her parents' home were raided by the Swiss police at the request of United States authorities, and her electronic devices were seized. People used…

Laws are written to protect multibillion corporations and billionaires. Prove me wrong. If we truly lived in a sane society, companies with lax security and god awful security policies would be punished.

Surely this comment does not fit HN comment guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#552

Post by [deleted] »

landemva wrote: post #134
jeffchien wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you may not be reading the parent comment correctly. They're saying that those on the list have a right to privacy, therefore outright leaking the list is wrong. Being able to find out whether or not you are on the list is not incompatible with maintaining others' right to privacy.

> those on the list have a right to privacy, therefore outright leaking Those Americans on list have a right to question their accuser in court before a right (to travel) is restricted. When did we agree to suspend due process, 14th amendment?

[deleted]

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#553

Post by eropple »

SoftTalker wrote: post #195
eropple wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Singular-they constructions have been in English for literally hundreds of years.

Tell it to my English teachers from grades 3-12

Sure, point me to them.

I learned a lot of wrong things in school. One could say I have spent most of my adult life unlearning them. Welcome to the club.

Consider also James Loewen's classic book, too: https://www.amazon.com/Lies-My-Teacher-Told-Everything-dp-16...

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#554

Post by uiri »

Jerrrry wrote: post #531
uiri wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does your citizenship status matter? The right to domestic travel within the United States is enjoyed equally by everyone within the US.

That's a constitutional right, and rights belong to citizens, not persons...

The Bill of Rights makes no distinction between citizens and non-citizens in its text. It says that rights belong to people, not exclusively to citizens of the several States.

The Equal Protection clause protects citizens and non-citizens alike, e.g. Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365 (1971)

The first amendment protects aliens once they are admitted to the US, Bridges v. Wixon, 326 U.S. 135 (1945)

There is a right to travel that is an extension of the first amendment rights to freedom of association and freedom of expression.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#555

Post by uiri »

notch656c wrote: post #349
uiri wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does your citizenship status matter? The right to domestic travel within the United States is enjoyed equally by everyone within the US.

Are you sure of that? Rights attributed generally to "the people" in the constitution can be limited from being enjoyed based on immigration. For instance, "the people" have the right to keep and bear arms but god help you if you're here irregularly or on a tourist visa and do not meet one of the exemptions. Sure non-immigrants are persons but federal law doesn't give a fuck.

The second amendment is one of the few exceptions rather than the rule. It is difficult to argue for inclusion in "the people" who have the right to bear arms when excluded from selective service and from the definition of the unorganized militia.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#556

Post by notch656c »

uiri wrote: post #555
notch656c wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure of that? Rights attributed generally to "the people" in the constitution can be limited from being enjoyed based on immigration. For instance, "the people" have the right to keep and bear arms but god help you if you're here irregularly or on a tourist visa and do not meet one of the exemptions. Sure non-immigrants are persons but federal law doesn't give a fuck.

The second amendment is one of the few exceptions rather than the rule. It is difficult to argue for inclusion in "the people" who have the right to bear arms when excluded from selective service and from the definition of the unorganized militia.

By your logic women unaffiliated with service are excluded then. The unorganized militia, by US code, is (you can look up the code but this is pretty close) basically able bodied military age male citizens.

Throwing in all these constraint when the constitution clearly say "the people" without qualification which magically means basically everyone one place but not most everyone somewhere else seems kind of arbitrary to me, but then again the courts seem to have held up visitors aren't people so hey. This is why I'm not a lawyer because really such fuckery makes my brain melt. If I were the sole sitting justice of the supreme court I'd say the qualification is a person is one unit of people and thus they have the rights of the people. IMO if you're one of "the people" then when the constitution uses "the people" unqualified elsewhere that's you -- which by symmetry means if you can't own a gun you're not a person and have none of the other rights of the people.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#557

Post by howinteresting »

karmaMeansCool wrote: post #289
arp242 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is downvoted, but the homepage really does say "hello i am maia arson crimew (it/she)". I'd feel uncomfortable referring to anyone as "it" though, as there are some connotations with that :-/

It's not good that you are uncomfortable when it asks you to talk about it with its preferred pronouns. It's 2023, it's about time you try to do what it ask you to do. When it tells you its preferred pronouns, try as hard as you can to follow it.

As an older trans person who's been subjected to targeted hate speech in public, I used to be pretty uncomfortable with younger trans people using it/its pronouns. It's understandable, let's give people some grace.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#558

Post by yencabulator »

_cenw wrote: post #467
kazinator wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we only get to choose our pronouns? I want to choose my prepositions: in, up and above. Also, my conjunctions are: however, moreover, and whereupon.

Because we already arbitrarily assign different pronouns to different people, usually based solely on their appearance, and there is no harm in letting people pick which type of gendered (or less gendered, in the binary sense) association they'd rather have.

There's an easier fix for that, instead of having to memorize everyone's "unique" preference (xy/xor/xeps), change the language to avoid the issue. "They" for everyone is the only logical evolution.

My native language doesn't have a he/she differentiation..

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#559

Post by janmo »

account-5 wrote: post #451
qbasic_forever wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The laws around digital access to networks are archaic and very broad, they were mostly defined in the 80s and 90s. I believe any unauthorized access (i.e. not having consent from the owner/operator) to a private network is technically a crime. Even if the Jenkins server was open, I bet finding and using the S3 credentials would have crossed the line of the law. Those S3 buckets are private and if you didn't have per…

Regards the archaic laws I'm not convinced, they tend to just parallel real world crimes. For example if you parallel it to the real world then the crime of trespass covers the Jenkins server situation (you can trespass on land that is open and easy to access) and you still commit a crime if you enter a house where you found the key on the floor outside the door, which covers the S3 situation.

Just accessing could also be seen as just looking through the window. And the lack of safety as a lack of curtain.

Trespassing implies a presence, this could be seen as installing some software or code to maintain access on a system.

Now let's imagine the OP went to the airline office and found that the door was open, on a desk there was a printed version of the nofly list, he takes a picture of each page and leaves. He would face 20 times less prison time.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#560

Post by ripdog »

tpm wrote: post #488
ripdog wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this is just my autism speaking, but am I the only one who gets completely freaked out by sentences like the above? "It" refers to inanimate objects, things which can't have free will, do crimes, or be prosecuted. It's almost like you're talking about how a lawnmower decided to run a child over and then incriminate itself by boasting about it on social media. It makes no sense! I know she picked that pronoun…

> "It" refers to inanimate objects It may do so in English, but it is Swiss, so probably also speaks German, where 'it' - 'es' is Genus Neutrum, exactly meaning neutral gender. For example 'the child' - 'das Kind' is neutrally gendered. Hope this makes sense.

Makes sense, but we aren't speaking German here.
Post reply on HN