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

How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

community.livejournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 113 posts

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#91

Post by acgourley »

stcredzero wrote: post #44
acgourley wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you equate doing harm to another person with reducing revenue for a collection of entities (Amazon and its sellers)? Consider the small startup eating an established business's lunch; surely the startup isn't liable for the losses of the larger company.

Reducing income by out-competing another company in a transparent and open marketplace is one thing. Reducing income by manipulating information in a deceptive fashion (thereby making the marketplace less transparent) is another thing entirely. There were ways Weev could've made his hacking skill known without such negative impacts. He cared more about the notoriety than preventing harm to bystanders. (Though to be f…

The post I was referring to said: "But I can't think of a single reason he shouldn't be sued. There's no way he didn't forsee loss of revenue for Amazon."

I never said what he did was ethical, but I'm trying to say that just because an event reduces revenue doesn't mean its something that can be sued over. IANAL but it would have to be on the grounds of libel. (Which is likely, but parent never brought that up)

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#92

Post by kingkongrevenge »

ibsulon wrote: post #64
tdavis wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He could also be seen as a free security consultant. What he did basically amounted to a victimless crime, but could have possibly been used for something worse. If Amazon has one CSRF vulnerability via an improper use of GET, there may well be more. This incident may help them tighten their systems against more malicious attacks.

Amazon is losing a lot of business in the GLBT community, historically a reliable demographic group in both online spending and books. (This actually wouldn't be so bad if they had been more forthcoming, and quickly made a statement apologizing profusely. However, just saying that there's a "glitch" after customer support had suggested that much of the material was indeed adult in various posts hovering around, this…

Oh come on. They'd lose way more money if it were widely trumpeted that they're making a buck off what I'm assuming is literary homo smut.

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#93

Post by sdurkin »

tdavis wrote: post #27
sho wrote: post #19

Wow. Anyone who owns, or hopes to own, an internet-based community of any type should read this, just to get a sense of the sophisticated methods and the lengths trolls will go to. While I have to hand it to this guy for deviousness and persistence, he is, after all, the "enemy" as far as the Web Site Owner is concerned. It boggles the mind that anyone would do this, but they evidently do, and you may well have to de…

He could also be seen as a free security consultant. What he did basically amounted to a victimless crime, but could have possibly been used for something worse. If Amazon has one CSRF vulnerability via an improper use of GET, there may well be more. This incident may help them tighten their systems against more malicious attacks.

Analogous:

Someone breaks your car window with a brick, but doesn't steal anything.

You thank them for showing that car windows aren't brick-proof.

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#94

Post by madair »

People are so gullible to believe a troll saying "I did it". Spend 15 minutes catching up on any military conflict and you'll quickly find that any unconventional attack has several groups claiming responsibility. It's just how it goes.

And getting so highly rated on HN is that time-honored tradition known as _feeding the trolls_. Please don't feed the /b/ trolls.

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#95

Post by stcredzero »

sho wrote: post #63
stcredzero wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dear god, not this argument again. Sometimes that's a sign that your point of view is out of whack. (And being able to realize this is a mark of true learning. And yeah, it is painful sometimes.) What happened here is more like Whole Foods setting out free samples. If someone concocted a scheme to walk out the front door with all of the free samples, I would not be at all surprised if the perpetrator were taken off t…

"Sometimes that's a sign that your point of view is out of whack." Same goes for you, of course ; ) Unfortunately, regardless of who is ethically right or wrong, my view will retain the upper hand, for the simple fact that the network is global, and whatever laws you pass in any country will not, nor ever, apply to all. For this simple reason you must continue to consider security the sole responsible of the propriet…

If someone is going to alter my storefront sign, it's vandalism, intent as a prank or no. If they leave it that way for a few days, then I have every right to seek redress, especially if it affects my livelihood in some way.

It's not the intent as a prank that's the problem. It's the intent to have the particular effect that he did. I'm sure Amazon's Terms of Use would preclude what he did.

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#96

Post by stcredzero »

Retric wrote: post #90
DeCarabas wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Libel and Slander are well-established legal concepts that have been around for ages. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

Yes, yes, but the question assumed that the poster had told the truth. With a criminal complaint there is an assumption of innocence such that you have significant legal protections even if you fail to show up. With a civil suit no such evidence is required to file and if you fail to show up you the default is you lose without any party trying to defend you. I would suggest that a reasonable demonstration of evidence…

In the case discussed in the headline, the guy is admitting -- nay bragging -- that he deceived a number of parties on purpose.

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#97

Post by stcredzero »

sokoloff wrote: post #73
stcredzero wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"counter-intuitive" is your code word for "I can't justify it but I like it anyway?" If his hack involved writing an innocuous demo script and presenting it to Amazon or at a conference, this would be one thing, and society is better off for the freedom to make such discoveries and talk and write about them. Society is certainly better off when it accords freedom of speech. But academic freedom ends where you start t…

Let's be clear here. Weev didn't censor Amazon listings. If what Weev claims is true, the most you can say is that he helped trick Amazon into choosing, via automated means, to censor those titles. But ultimately, it was Amazon who took the action to remove the listings. (Unnecessary disclaimer: I'm a huge fan of Amazon, and hardly a week goes by that I don't buy something or other from them.)

Your logic simply doesn't hold. If some guy repaints highway signs to cause a car crash, then, if anyone dies, he should be up for murder, not the driver. The guilty party is the vandal in both cases, not the driver or the computer operator.

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#98

Post by jordyhoyt »

sdurkin wrote: post #93
tdavis wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He could also be seen as a free security consultant. What he did basically amounted to a victimless crime, but could have possibly been used for something worse. If Amazon has one CSRF vulnerability via an improper use of GET, there may well be more. This incident may help them tighten their systems against more malicious attacks.

Analogous: Someone breaks your car window with a brick, but doesn't steal anything. You thank them for showing that car windows aren't brick-proof.

And also, less people want to ride in your car. How nice!

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#99

Post by stcredzero »

sho wrote: post #68
stcredzero wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another's negligence does not justify being an asshole! If Mrs. Smith was running a bric-a-brac store and didn't know how to secure her display cases, then it's alright to shoplift from her? If Mrs. Smith was holding a big party at her house, then it's alright for a party goer to steal her life savings? If I hand a firearm disguised as a jelly donut to a random bystander, then they shoot someone with it, it's their f…

Guh. Here we are, about 3 steps into an argument, and already it's a quagmire of complexity, grey areas and sliding scales. I could now posit the example that it's actually more like Mrs Smith leaving the money in a bag on the floor of her store (or house) but seriously we could go on like this forever. My Infinite Biased Analogy Generator is in good working order and I can tell yours is in full effect also. The fact…

Uh, no you see the danger and are trying to weasel out of it by pleading "oh noes, the greys," but, "Mrs Smith leaving the money in a bag on the floor of her store," pretty much breaks the back of your argument.

Someone absconding with that bag is stealing. Period. They didn't pay for that bag, why are they leaving the store with it? The thief is wrong. Nothing grey about that.

The problem here is that Weev's intent was to deceive and have a particular group's books effectively censored. This fits in with Amazon's Terms of Use? I don't think so. There is no grey area. If Weev wanted to improve the world with his hacking, there are tons of ways he could've done this without hurting anyone (reduced income), deceiving anyone, or running afoul of the TOS.

Prediction: if you go any further, your analogy generator is just going to illuminate how far you have to grasp for straws. (And I'll also note that I have been careful to construct relevant analogies, usually 2 or 3 at a time, picking the best fit. Also, your feedback in the discussion has resulted in iteratively more damning analogies.)

Let's see it!

Re: How to cause moral outrage from the entire Internet in ten lines of code

#100

Post by clpimage »

ObieJazz wrote: post #5

If you're going to harass a group of people it's a lot more tasteful to target one that isn't already persecuted.

/Offtopic /Rant /Flag

Really? How are gays and lesbians persecuted? Gays now have more rights than most other people. I would rather be gay than be fat.

And they have that universal excuse ("you're firing me because I am gay?") that they use in any situation (almost as good as the “you're because I am black/a woman/Jewish/a vegetarian?).

Why don't everybody just leave everybody else the f*ck alone?

It is because gay people wants to force acceptance to all people that believe differently. If there is a church/religious institution that does not “accept” you, why don't you fucking start your own?

Why do you have to whine about “homophobia” (a misnomer). And why do you have to whine especially on the Internet? (you are getting almost as irritating as the Atheist Army (e.g. www.reddit.com/r/atheism)). NRA supporters do not whine on national television about NRA-phobia. Hunters do not whine about hunting-phobia. Yet they will be treated worse in liberal areas as liberals will be treated in conservative areas.

The most persecuted group is middle aged white males – they have to hear how bad they are from black people, feminists and gays. If they are successful in an area (such as engineering for example) it must be their fault for “disadvantaging” black people or women and that they are “overrepresented” (i.e. will not be promoted in favour of a “designated” group). I wonder when we will start seeing Gay Economic Empowerment!

Post reply on HN