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

Weev Needs To Walk

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#31

Post by gamblor956 »

6cxs2hd6 wrote: post #5

> 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…

When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred.

By that logic, when a programmer is illiterate with regards to the law, they should be barred from programming forever if they make an app/SaaS/whatever that breaks any law, any where, for whatever reason.

Prosecutors, especially US Attorneys, are self-aggrandizing, attention-seeking political whores, but technical illiteracy by itself is not a justification for disbarring them from the practice of law.

Weev's attorney can, and should, [edit (past tense)]have sought[/edit] Moramarco's removal from the case based on his statements. Prosecutor's don't need to be fully technically literate when it comes to prosecuting a crime, but they do need to at least understand the basic details in order to maintain their ethical obligations to their position, the court, and the defendant.

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#32

Post by gamblor956 »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #17
eCa wrote: post #12

Earlier 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?

It is, though defense attorneys and judges rarely call them on this since it is a bridge-burner. Once you do this, you can be pretty sure they're acting within the rules/ethical obligations in future dealings, but you're also less likely to get good deals from them since they're much less willing to negotiate. This matters since most criminal defendants actually are guilty (and admit it!) and don't want to go to trial.

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#33

Post by gamblor956 »

angersock wrote: post #6
6cxs2hd6 wrote: post #5

> 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…

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…

In this country, the citizens have guns too. This is actually a pretty big reason for why the police are so heavily militarized here as compared to gun-prohibitionist nations like France or Germany.

But the law does not boil down to men with guns--it boils down to our voluntary consent to live by the laws by choosing to live here (immigrants) or to remain here (everyone else) as opposed to somewhere else, like the wonderfully law-free nation of Somalia.

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#34

Post by Zigurd »

bishnu wrote: post #16

I'm glad the tech industry has been able to come together in a defense for weev that they couldn't seem to for Aaron Swartz.

Better late than never. The same would go for ensuring that Stephen Heymann and Carmen Ortiz don't wreck other valuable lives.

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#35

Post by runako »

I think the author makes a poor analogy here:

>> This would be as similar to blowing up a nuclear plant in New Jersey only if the nuclear plant were stupid enough to put a button on their website – hidden, obviously, through a feat of minor obfuscation – that said “Press Here To Blow Up Nuclear Plant.”

Not having experience in nuclear plants, I would not be surprised to learn that there's a lever/button/etc. that would destroy the plant if pressed at the wrong time. Maybe the button to remove all the control rods or something. Airplanes, cars, computers all have a similar button (e.g. steering wheel, rm -rf, etc.). In any case, it's not obvious to me that a power plant couldn't be destroyed by someone actively trying to do so, especially if that person thinks he's special because he can see through the "minor obfuscation".

So I think this was a really bad analogy.

I don't know enough about weev to have an informed opinion.

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#36

Post by gamblor956 »

watwut wrote: post #11
DoubleMalt wrote: post #3

Weev 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…

Criminal courts should not evaluate whether accused is good guy or a bad guy. The only possible exception is when the guy is found guilty and court is looking for sentence. Courts should evaluate whether the guy broke the law and whether the law is consistent with constitution. His trolling activities and personality should not play much role when determining guilt.

Criminal courts aren't allowed to evaluate whether the defendant is good or bad. It's actually one of the basic federal rules of evidence. Character evidence is relevant and admissible only if the defense first makes the defendant's character a part of the defense.

Courts should evaluate...whether the law is consistent with constitution.

This seems to be a big misunderstanding in the tech world. Courts already do make sure laws are consistent with the Constitution; that is one of their primary jobs. But they primarily do this when the law is challenged--usually when it is first introduced or on its first application to a novel set of facts. The courts do not re-determine the constitutionality of a law every time a criminal case proceeds, and especially not when the constitutionality of the law has already been addressed in prior cases.

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#37

Post by glesica »

gamblor956 wrote: post #31
6cxs2hd6 wrote: post #5

> 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…

When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred. By that logic, when a programmer is illiterate with regards to the law, they should be barred from programming forever if they make an app/SaaS/whatever that breaks any law, any where, for whatever reason. Prosecutors, especially US Attorneys, are self-aggrandizing, attention-seeking political whores, but te…

  > need to at least understand the basic details in order to maintain their ethical obligations to their position, the court, and the defendant.
So, if he didn't do this, and knew he didn't do it, couldn't one argue that he should be disbarred, or at least be subjected to some sort of professional sanction?

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#38

Post by RealGeek »

This is ridiculous. We have a legal system where murderers like George Zimmerman get away for ridiculous defense like "following someone with a gun is not illegal", "shooting is not illegal" etc. But downloading iOS is illegal?

We are hounding people like Aaron Swartz & Weev and threatening them with 30 yrs in jail time for downloading a few files with wget.

I guess hackers should shoot a computer with a gun after hacking and use affluenza in their defense to get away. /s

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#39

Post by glesica »

skolor wrote: post #26
eCa wrote: post #12

Earlier 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.

> 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 compar…

But if he doesn't know what a centrifuge is, then how does he know that most people wouldn't know how to use one? Maybe he's an outlier...

Also, I don't think anyone is saying the prosecutor should be an expert at infosec, but he should at least know enough about the supposed crimes committed to know whether or not they are crimes.

To extend your nuke analogy, he needn't know how to build a nuke, but he should know or learn what a nuke is and he should know or have someone tell him whether the garage nuke was actually a nuke and, if so, how dangerous it was.

Re: Weev Needs To Walk

#40

Post by gamblor956 »

glesica wrote: post #37
gamblor956 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred. By that logic, when a programmer is illiterate with regards to the law, they should be barred from programming forever if they make an app/SaaS/whatever that breaks any law, any where, for whatever reason. Prosecutors, especially US Attorneys, are self-aggrandizing, attention-seeking political whores, but te…

> need to at least understand the basic details in order to maintain their ethical obligations to their position, the court, and the defendant. So, if he didn't do this, and knew he didn't do it, couldn't one argue that he should be disbarred, or at least be subjected to some sort of professional sanction?

Disbarment? No. Sanctions? maybe. It depends on how relevant the misunderstanding was to the actual prosecution of the case. While the prosecutor was very technically illiterate, based on available records that illiteracy wasn't relevant to the elements of the crime itself, namely that he "impersonated" (within the meaning of the law) someone else's identity to access protected information.

The id theft charge is the biggie here--it actually imposes more criminal time than the underlying offense itself, because as other posters have noted it changed a misdemeanor to a felony.

Post reply on HN