11–20 of 50 posts
Poor bastard. He did something that is unquestionably highly unethical and illegal, but he was also an awkward, messed-up nerdy guy who arguably just needed some real friends and a chance. http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201205/chris-chan...
Wait, can't the same argument be applied to certain sociopaths?
Poor bastard. He did something that is unquestionably highly unethical and illegal, but he was also an awkward, messed-up nerdy guy who arguably just needed some real friends and a chance. http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201205/chris-chan...
Wait, can't the same argument be applied to certain sociopaths?
Does anyone in the US pretend that prison should be rehabilitative? I'm sure that this guy serving 10 years in prison is going to be a net-positive for our society. /not
I agree the punishment for hacking emails should be harsh, because your email is your life. But not 10 years... because reading or leaking someone's email is not akin to killing them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Didn't he also publicly release nude photos of her and three other women? Still maybe a bit extreme on the sentence, but it wasn't just "reading e-mail".
Exactly. It's the kind of thing that for a large portion of the internet seems to be OK if it's celebrities and not OK if it's your girlfriend. I cannot comprehend how people think what he did is OK. (note that I'm not arguing about the harshness of the sentence, or how it compares to each and every other sentence for each and every other crime. I'm just saying that what he did is not remotely OK ).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Didn't he also publicly release nude photos of her and three other women? Still maybe a bit extreme on the sentence, but it wasn't just "reading e-mail".
Exactly. It's the kind of thing that for a large portion of the internet seems to be OK if it's celebrities and not OK if it's your girlfriend. I cannot comprehend how people think what he did is OK. (note that I'm not arguing about the harshness of the sentence, or how it compares to each and every other sentence for each and every other crime. I'm just saying that what he did is not remotely OK ).
Yes you are -- albeit implicitly. You're arguing against a straw man that takes the extreme position that what he did was "OK". Very few people here (and certainly not "a large portion of the internet") believe that. Even the post that triggered this discussion didn't call his actions "OK", even though richforrester understated the severity of the "hacker"'s actions.
Now when we discuss the legality of NSA having wide open access to citizen emails and other personal data, we'll have a good reference point on what happens when regular people do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Didn't he also publicly release nude photos of her and three other women? Still maybe a bit extreme on the sentence, but it wasn't just "reading e-mail".
Yes he did. There is a strange cognitive dissonance between email and regular mail. If someone broke into an apartment lobby, picked the lock on the mailboxes, took out a set of film prints [1] from the drug store, made copies of the 'private and personal' pictures contained therein and then shared them with their friends for prurient reasons, what sort of punishment is deserved there? The "virtual" nature of email m…
Do you really face 10yrs for breaking into a hollywood apartment and releasing nude tapes you found?
I can see him going to a jail for a while, but 10 years is an awful long time for a crime that very likely didn't leave permanent damage of any kind (psychological, physical or otherwise).
10 years seems a bit steep. Wonder what Scarlett thinks of this; someone read her email, and is now in jail for 10 years.
Didn't he also publicly release nude photos of her and three other women? Still maybe a bit extreme on the sentence, but it wasn't just "reading e-mail".