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

21–30 of 113 posts

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

#21

Post by potatolicious »

dlytle wrote: post #18

I'm mainly wondering if he can get his face sued off over this. I've got NO doubt that this is going to have a noticable negative impact on Amazon's profits. Not world shaking, but more than enough to make the lawyers angry. As another commenter mentioned, he's been in a NYT article, with his face and full name displayed. Amazon won't have any trouble finding him.

I for one hope he does. He's not some internet freedom fighter going up against the man, nor is he a legitimate security expert in any way. He did it for the lulz, I hope he gets his ass sued off.

He's like the kid dropping rocks off the overpass for shits and giggles - pathetic.

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

#23

Post by tjic »

sho wrote: post #20
dlytle wrote: post #18

I'm mainly wondering if he can get his face sued off over this. I've got NO doubt that this is going to have a noticable negative impact on Amazon's profits. Not world shaking, but more than enough to make the lawyers angry. As another commenter mentioned, he's been in a NYT article, with his face and full name displayed. Amazon won't have any trouble finding him.

I should certainly hope not. While he's certainly mischievous and possibly malicious, he didn't actually do anything that I think should be illegal. He merely used Amazon's flawed system against them, at considerably personal expense. He hacked them, in other words. I can't agree with his aims in this case but you've got to hand it to him really - you don't have to like trolling in general to admit that was an amazin…

> he didn't actually do anything that I think should be illegal.

Registering multiple false user names?

Giving false feedback?

Restraint of trade?

I'm not a fan of government prosecuting someone for registering on Facebook with the user name "Joe Schmoe" in order to blog anonymously about their crappy job at Microsoft.

...but I have no problem at all with the government enforcing laws against using aliases to log into a system and inject bad data in order to create a public relations firestorm?

> He merely used Amazon's flawed system against them

I'd be somewhat pissed if someone used my flawed front door lock (pickable by anyone with a set of picks, 60 seconds to spare, and decent picking skills) against me.

"Oh, all I did was hang a sign in the window saying 'A child molester lives here' - what LOLZ!"

Yeah, OK, great, that's a wonderful "hack".

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

#24

Post by davidmathers »

allenbrunson wrote: post #11

the alleged perpetrator is 'weev', one of the people featured in that NY Times article that everybody was talking about awhile back, "The Trolls Among Us." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=263673

weev interview: http://www.corrupt.org/act/interviews/weev

What a whackjob. Quotes:

"I contend that trolling is the chief moral arbiter of the Internet. I see little difference between the methods performed by trolls on the Internet when they ruin the lives of furries and pedophiles and the methods used by Moses when he ordered the idol worshippers killed. Martin Luther contended in his tract "On the Jews and Their Lies" that if Moses were alive today he'd be busy burning synagogues. I'm inclined to agree; the only thing keeping us deriding furries on the Internet instead of going to their furry conventions and rapidly exterminating them is the Jewish influence upon society."

"I used to be for the mass extermination of the physically disabled, but my business associate Claudia reminded me of how the ancient greeks made an effort to find means of living for their disabled; Homer was blind but still managed to become a defining influence upon Western civlization. I believe that without the narcotic of state welfare these people would find a positive means of living."

"Upon some timeline Protestants are going to have to stand up and admit that it is their belief system that made their nations so great, and that without their persistent influence they will degrade into the third world shitholes from which they began."

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

#25

Post by allenbrunson »

davidmathers wrote: post #24
allenbrunson wrote: post #11

the alleged perpetrator is 'weev', one of the people featured in that NY Times article that everybody was talking about awhile back, "The Trolls Among Us." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=263673

weev interview: http://www.corrupt.org/act/interviews/weev What a whackjob. Quotes: "I contend that trolling is the chief moral arbiter of the Internet. I see little difference between the methods performed by trolls on the Internet when they ruin the lives of furries and pedophiles and the methods used by Moses when he ordered the idol worshippers killed. Martin Luther contended in his tract "On the Jews and Their L…

keep in mind, he probably doesn't believe a third of that. if he'd do what he seems to have done to amazon for attention, then you know he's willing to make up inflammatory lies for an interviewer.

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

#26

Post by philh »

sho wrote: post #20
dlytle wrote: post #18

I'm mainly wondering if he can get his face sued off over this. I've got NO doubt that this is going to have a noticable negative impact on Amazon's profits. Not world shaking, but more than enough to make the lawyers angry. As another commenter mentioned, he's been in a NYT article, with his face and full name displayed. Amazon won't have any trouble finding him.

I should certainly hope not. While he's certainly mischievous and possibly malicious, he didn't actually do anything that I think should be illegal. He merely used Amazon's flawed system against them, at considerably personal expense. He hacked them, in other words. I can't agree with his aims in this case but you've got to hand it to him really - you don't have to like trolling in general to admit that was an amazin…

Laws exist to deter people from doing things that are possible, so the fact that their system allowed him to do it is irrelevant.

The quality of the troll is also irrelevant. The fact that you commit a crime really well doesn't make it any less illegal.

That said, I'm not certain what he did should have been illegal. 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. If you deliberately cause harm to another person, even if you work out how to do it without technically breaking the law, they should absolutely be able to get their loss back from you.

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

#27

Post by tdavis »

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.

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

#28

Post by chime »

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.

How is it a victimless crime? The authors and publishers of all the books that lost sales rank were directly harmed by it. By not showing up in searches or bestseller lists, their sales were affected.

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

#29

Post by axod »

tjic wrote: post #23
sho wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should certainly hope not. While he's certainly mischievous and possibly malicious, he didn't actually do anything that I think should be illegal. He merely used Amazon's flawed system against them, at considerably personal expense. He hacked them, in other words. I can't agree with his aims in this case but you've got to hand it to him really - you don't have to like trolling in general to admit that was an amazin…

> he didn't actually do anything that I think should be illegal. Registering multiple false user names? Giving false feedback? Restraint of trade? I'm not a fan of government prosecuting someone for registering on Facebook with the user name "Joe Schmoe" in order to blog anonymously about their crappy job at Microsoft. ...but I have no problem at all with the government enforcing laws against using aliases to log int…

All he did was enable Amazon to be sent some data.

Amazon shouldn't just blindly accept data and trust it is legitimate.

Same with creating false accounts.

You can't really compare it with breaking and entering a house.

Post reply on HN