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

Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 465 posts

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#141

Post by txru »

ENGNR wrote: post #135
txru wrote: post #128

Revealing unknown facts is a political act. It never occurs inside a vacuum. While it's frequently a good thing, the sort of broad statements you're making about politicians making criminals out of the 'good guys' just doesn't represent the political facts. Assange almost certainly had access to hacked information related to both the DNC and the RNC[0]. Only the DNC hacked info got released. Are we supposed to thank…

That linked article doesn't say that Assange had any RNC emails, only that Russia probably has some. Given that Russia is very pro-Trump it's not hard to imagine Russia only providing Assange with the DNC ones to publish. And he has said that if he had RNC emails he'd have published them

The Podesta leaks and the DNC emails came from Russia, and he must have known their intent. Either he's an active tool, or a passive and complicit one, but I think my point stands.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#142

Post by mikeash »

ENGNR wrote: post #135
txru wrote: post #128

Revealing unknown facts is a political act. It never occurs inside a vacuum. While it's frequently a good thing, the sort of broad statements you're making about politicians making criminals out of the 'good guys' just doesn't represent the political facts. Assange almost certainly had access to hacked information related to both the DNC and the RNC[0]. Only the DNC hacked info got released. Are we supposed to thank…

That linked article doesn't say that Assange had any RNC emails, only that Russia probably has some. Given that Russia is very pro-Trump it's not hard to imagine Russia only providing Assange with the DNC ones to publish. And he has said that if he had RNC emails he'd have published them

He also said that his internet access had been cut off “by a state actor” when the Ecuadorians kicked him off their WiFi. I wouldn’t trust what he says.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#143

Post by txru »

calhoun137 wrote: post #137
txru wrote: post #128

Revealing unknown facts is a political act. It never occurs inside a vacuum. While it's frequently a good thing, the sort of broad statements you're making about politicians making criminals out of the 'good guys' just doesn't represent the political facts. Assange almost certainly had access to hacked information related to both the DNC and the RNC[0]. Only the DNC hacked info got released. Are we supposed to thank…

I honestly feel like you comment is a perfect illustration of this point made in the OP, which was as much about citizens as it was about what politicians would like them to think: "just fathom the authoritarian mindset that would lead a citizen -- and especially a "journalist" -- to react with anger that these things have been revealed; to insist that these facts should have been kept concealed and it'd be better if…

Trust me, I'm aware of the thin lines that these things ride upon. I don't care that, in particular, the Podesta emails, the DNC emails, the Brazile questions, or anything else about the Clinton campaign were leaked. It was information, and it was illuminating to the nature of American politics.

What I have a problem with is, these sorts of leaks allow American elections to become a target of nation-state attacks. We shouldn't become used to making electoral decisions based on what the Russian state wants us to know about our politicians-- we need to make those discoveries ourselves, with investigative journalists that have skin in the game.

I understand that the request has nothing to do with the election, and likely would have happened without. Still, when inciting American citizens to break the law, I would hope that one would have some stronger backup than a single embassy's forbearance to carry you through to safety. Conspiracy isn't some newly made up charge, Assange didn't have to encourage Manning to do anything other than release what she had legal access to at the time.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#145

Post by uryga »

pytester wrote: post #35
apsec112 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, First Amendment protections apply to non-Americans. However, as you say, Assange is being prosecuted for conspiracy to hack computers, not for his speech.

He's being prosecuted for allegedly extracting a password from a hash value on behalf of Manning and encouraging him to leak more information (Obama's DOJ refused to make this charge because it's something all journalists do).

that'd be "encouraging her", unless you're not referring to Manning here?

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#146

Post by tomohawk »

belltaco wrote: post #3

What part of the first amendment exonerates knowingly attempting to crack NTLM keys of US military logins? Or is the reasoning that the law should give him special treatment and exemptions not given to others? Also, is the 1st amendment protection even applicable to foreigners on foreign soil?

The US Constitution protects US Persons regardless of where they may be. This is a broader category than US Citizens. It includes, for example, green card holders. The US Constitution also protects, to a certain extent, non US Persons, but only in the US or on US territory.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#147

Post by islanderfun »

txru wrote: post #143
calhoun137 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly feel like you comment is a perfect illustration of this point made in the OP, which was as much about citizens as it was about what politicians would like them to think: "just fathom the authoritarian mindset that would lead a citizen -- and especially a "journalist" -- to react with anger that these things have been revealed; to insist that these facts should have been kept concealed and it'd be better if…

Trust me, I'm aware of the thin lines that these things ride upon. I don't care that, in particular, the Podesta emails, the DNC emails, the Brazile questions, or anything else about the Clinton campaign were leaked. It was information, and it was illuminating to the nature of American politics. What I have a problem with is, these sorts of leaks allow American elections to become a target of nation-state attacks. We…

This line of thinking seems right and what I assume most would take away from this incident (Maybe I have to reevaluate my line of thinking?). I'm surprised to see so many people making this a black or white, 1 or 0 binary choice out of this whole ordeal.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#148

Post by overgard »

txru wrote: post #128

Revealing unknown facts is a political act. It never occurs inside a vacuum. While it's frequently a good thing, the sort of broad statements you're making about politicians making criminals out of the 'good guys' just doesn't represent the political facts. Assange almost certainly had access to hacked information related to both the DNC and the RNC[0]. Only the DNC hacked info got released. Are we supposed to thank…

Just because he prefers revealing truths about one side over another (which -- presumably a lot of entities are like that) doesn't mean those truths aren't important to reveal. Yeah it's a political act, but it's an extremely important one and one that deserves protection. Was Snowden obligated to reveal information about 3rd party hackers to make it fair for the NSA?

You seem to be under the impression that he's obligated to be fair. But outside of things like the New York Times what political speech is ever fair? The only obligation I think he has is to not lie or fabricate evidence.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#149

Post by roywiggins »

nocturnial wrote: post #134
belltaco wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assange wrote in a chat "No luck so far" to Manning. Where you are from, can you go around trying to pick locks on front doors and are only prosecuted if you succeed? And the same with cars?

This is a very poor analogy and I think you know it. Cracking the password isn't the same as using it to log in. There are still some extra steps required. In the case of picking locks there are no extra steps, you gain access immediately. I'm only critizing the analogy, what he did, or tried is still illegal but it's barely a hack attempt and it's obvious they are desperate to charge him with anything, no matter how…

That's how conspiracies work. Each participant does only a part of the overall conspiracy. If I forge a document and give it to you so you can sneak into a secure area and commit a murder, I am not just guilty of forgery, I am guilty of conspiracy to murder.

They guy who drives the getaway car is guilty of murder as much as the people who walk into the building.

This is the entire point of conspiracy law. Driving a car is not a crime! But it is if you're conspiring with other people who are committing crimes. Otherwise, you would be able to take part in a murder and be let off, because all you did was act as lookout.

If you and a friend plan to poison someone, and you buy the poison and give it to your friend who then poisons the target, you are guilty of conspiracy to murder, even though buying the poison may not actually be a crime. Prosecutors may legitimately not have anything else on you because that's "all" you did!

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#150

Post by thanatos_dem »

belltaco wrote: post #118
abugheratwork wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What part of the first amendment exonerates knowingly attempting to crack NTLM keys of US military logins? Is doing math a form of expression? Breaking a password amounts to thinking for a very long time about all the ways you could rearrange some bits, and choosing one. I'd call it an expression of preference for certain possible results over others, by way of saving one and letting the rest go. I know, I'm laughi…

>Is doing math a form of expression? Breaking a password amounts to thinking for a very long time about all the ways you could rearrange some bits, and choosing one. I'd call it an expression of preference for certain possible results over others, by way of saving one and letting the rest go. Isn't shooting a gun at someone a matter of depressing a lever? It's about applying pressure on a lever with your finger. >Sti…

> Are you deeply uncomfortable with the thought of govt jailing you for literally doing nothing?

Yes? I’d be concerned for anyone who isn’t. And to be clear... he didn’t crack it. I’ve run password hashes through rainbow tables for shits and giggles. Should I be dragged out of an embassy next?

Post reply on HN