[01:33] what kind of furry bluefox are you? [01:33] i have a giant weevil costume [01:33] with fawn horns [01:33] to symbolize my malevolence
Why is this relevant?
Weev Needs To Walk
21–30 of 66 posts
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#22Weev needs to be in prison for attempting to blackmail and extort a company over private consumer information. Unfortunately, they put Weev into prison for hacking under CFAA, which on those charges, I agree - He needs to walk because they're utterly bogus.
> Weev needs to be in prison for attempting to blackmail and extort a company over private consumer information.
Can you back that up? I thought that Weev joked with friends about doing that but never took it anywhere or did anything that I would regard even as "attempting" to blackmail or extort instead just told Gawker.
Would be interested if there is something but in the absence of further information my view is that all these charges should probably be dropped.
Edit: From what I've read he isn't a good guy and there may have been a case to charge him on unrelated matter (stalking/harassment) but he should still go free on this stuff.
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#23Weev needs to be in prison for attempting to blackmail and extort a company over private consumer information. Unfortunately, they put Weev into prison for hacking under CFAA, which on those charges, I agree - He needs to walk because they're utterly bogus.
> Weev needs to be in prison for attempting to blackmail and extort a company over private consumer information. Can you back that up? I thought that Weev joked with friends about doing that but never took it anywhere or did anything that I would regard even as "attempting" to blackmail or extort instead just told Gawker. Would be interested if there is something but in the absence of further information my view is t…
> Can you back that up? I thought that Weev joked with friends about doing that but never took it anywhere or did anything that I would regard even as "attempting" to blackmail or extort instead just told Gawker.
There are words on an IRC transcript. Whether those words constitute a "joke" is a matter of interpretation, and that's something we leave up to juries. For various practical reasons, we do not just trust criminal defendants when they say they are "joking." Weev's jury, which returned a verdict after just a few hours, apparently did not think he was joking.
At the end of the day, this is the sort of thing that got Weev convicted, not some "corrupt prosecutor." If you do something at the edge of the law, and do it in a way where a jury of your peers is likely to find you unsympathetic or not understand what you did, you're going to have a bad time. Maybe this isn't fair, but it's a natural property of criminal law systems based on jury trials. The law isn't enforced by robots, it's enforced by people, and if people don't like you, that diminishes your odds.
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#24Weev is not a good guy imo. I'm not even sure I prefer him outside of prison walls for some of his past actions (although of course the solitary stuff is outrageous). But: He really must be acquitted for the actions he is now in jail for. There is just no way this should ever be punishable. Otherwise it would set a very bad precedent for corporation bullying of people that uncover negligence when it comes to customer…
> I'm not even sure I prefer him outside of prison walls for some of his past actions
I don't know what he did (heard his name for the first time today) but if it weren't crimes then he definitely should be 'outside of prison walls'. No matter how much you don't like him or how much his actions made you feel bad.
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t even understand what they are. Should a prosecutor be allowed to prosecute a case if he doesn't understand the actions taken by the prosecuted? How can he be sure that a crime has been commited? > He had to download the entire iOS system I guess the prosecutor has downloaded the entire iOS system to his Iphone. I guess he doesn't know that he has done that.
Shouldn't a prosecutor either recuse themselves, or at least consult subject-matter experts before proceeding with a prosecution over a subject about which they admittedly have insufficient knowledge? Is that not part of a lawyer's or at least a prosecutor's code of professional conduct?
[deleted]
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#26> The problem, in short, is that the Assistant U.S. Attorney Glenn Moramarco doesn’t understand what Weev did and instead compared his hacking to “blowing up a nuclear plant in New Jersey.” He said: >> We have a case here where…[the defense] is arguing that this was completely open to everyone. But you look at the testimony of Daniel Spitler and the steps he had to take to get to this wide open Web and I’m flabbergas…
> I don’t even understand what they are. Should a prosecutor be allowed to prosecute a case if he doesn't understand the actions taken by the prosecuted? How can he be sure that a crime has been commited? > He had to download the entire iOS system I guess the prosecutor has downloaded the entire iOS system to his Iphone. I guess he doesn't know that he has done that.
> Should a prosecutor be allowed to prosecute a case if he doesn't understand the actions taken by the prosecuted?
Yes.
There's no reason a prosecutor needs to understand the details of exploit development in order to prosecute a case related to it. A hyperbolic comparison would be to claim a prosecutor needs to be able to build a nuke if they were to prosecute someone who built one in their garage. A more apt comparison might be:
Suppose Weev was the first person to discover bleach+ammonia = toxic gas. The prosecution is trying to demonstrate that this was done intentionally, using techniques that are well beyond the average person. An equivalent quote would be
> "He had to purify the ammonia. He had to use a centrifuge. He had to do all sorts of things—I don’t even understand what they are."
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, when the state can't even articulate the act, much less why it is wrong, it is really hard to respect their jurisprudence. EDIT: And before anyone counters with "Whether you respect it or not, it's the law (and they have the power to enforce it).", do consider that such an argument is basically saying that the rule of law boils down to men with guns. I don't think that that is either noble or desirable--for a c…
The rule of law does boil down to men with guns. http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm
The rule of law boils down to men with guns listening to the judgment of twelve of the most ordinary people that can be found. If you're unlikable, or if you're acting outside the social norms, that creates a problem for you.
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#28The article conveniently leaves out that he was convicted on one count of identify fraud in addition to the CFAA count: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/11/att-hacker-found-gu..., by a jury. If it had just been the CFAA count, he would've gotten just a misdemeanor.
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Weev needs to be in prison for attempting to blackmail and extort a company over private consumer information. Can you back that up? I thought that Weev joked with friends about doing that but never took it anywhere or did anything that I would regard even as "attempting" to blackmail or extort instead just told Gawker. Would be interested if there is something but in the absence of further information my view is t…
> Can you back that up? I thought that Weev joked with friends about doing that but never took it anywhere or did anything that I would regard even as "attempting" to blackmail or extort instead just told Gawker. There are words on an IRC transcript. Whether those words constitute a "joke" is a matter of interpretation, and that's something we leave up to juries. For various practical reasons, we do not just trust cr…
Whether a joke or a real suggestion there seems to be nothing suggesting it was taken forwards and it isn't like they didn't get chance to go through with something because the police knocked down the door that minute.
Without further evidence of any concrete action I don't see how it could be regarded as an "attempt" at anything. That he was convicted on the basis of that[0] strikes me as a failure of the system (including the prosecutor, the court and the jury) and that hopefully an appeals court would correct the error.
[0] Assuming that was the extent of the evidence in this aspect as there may be other evidence of which I am not aware.
Re: Weev Needs To Walk
#30Weev is not a good guy imo. I'm not even sure I prefer him outside of prison walls for some of his past actions (although of course the solitary stuff is outrageous). But: He really must be acquitted for the actions he is now in jail for. There is just no way this should ever be punishable. Otherwise it would set a very bad precedent for corporation bullying of people that uncover negligence when it comes to customer…
> I'm not even sure I prefer him outside of prison walls for some of his past actions I don't know what he did (heard his name for the first time today) but if it weren't crimes then he definitely should be 'outside of prison walls'. No matter how much you don't like him or how much his actions made you feel bad.
I agree, of course.
Some context about weev. (And of course regardless of my preferences he should be free unless convicted of a crime)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/magazine/03trolls-t.html?p...