No
Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
31–40 of 72 posts
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#32>Yet somehow many of us approve when the victims are wealthy and higher status, as is the case with the Panama Papers. Furthermore most of those individuals probably did nothing illegal, but rather they were trying to minimize their tax burden through (mostly) legal shell corporations. This is a scary thing that has been building over the last 10 years. Wealthy people are vilified for being wealthy even when they pla…
it really isn't scary. what difference does it make if they "play by the rules"? it isn't a game. the criticism is that the rules are damaging to many and beneficial to few. what's so scary about that? even if you think occupy wall street's and bernie sanders's criticism of the rich is off base, what about it is "really scary"?
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#33>Yet somehow many of us approve when the victims are wealthy and higher status, as is the case with the Panama Papers. Furthermore most of those individuals probably did nothing illegal, but rather they were trying to minimize their tax burden through (mostly) legal shell corporations. This is a scary thing that has been building over the last 10 years. Wealthy people are vilified for being wealthy even when they pla…
> Wealthy people are vilified for being wealthy even when they play by the rules. Playing within the rules is irrelevant when you're the one who gets to write the rules.
As if there existed some impartial authority to make rules.
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#34>Yet somehow many of us approve when the victims are wealthy and higher status, as is the case with the Panama Papers. Furthermore most of those individuals probably did nothing illegal, but rather they were trying to minimize their tax burden through (mostly) legal shell corporations. This is a scary thing that has been building over the last 10 years. Wealthy people are vilified for being wealthy even when they pla…
Deep down, we all want to be communists. That's what I've learned the last 5 years. Someone is rich and that's not fair. /s
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#35As George Soros. I'm sure he'll give you a NO.
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#36Slowly but surely, I'm coming to the position that "hacking and leaking" is never "wrong". It's a form of speech, and I'm a free speech absolutist. Let's stipulate that some things are illegal and not "wrong", just as others are legal and "wrong". It's not clear to me, however, that this case actually is a hack, in the sense that whoever released this material might have had legitimate access to it as a part of doing…
You don't mind posting a link to your girlfriend nude pics then? In the name and spirit of absolutely free speech. We will be waiting.
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#37If the net effect was good then the action was good.
Crime and Punishment is a thick book, there must be a Reader's Digest version somewhere. Try it.
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#38Slowly but surely, I'm coming to the position that "hacking and leaking" is never "wrong". It's a form of speech, and I'm a free speech absolutist. Let's stipulate that some things are illegal and not "wrong", just as others are legal and "wrong". It's not clear to me, however, that this case actually is a hack, in the sense that whoever released this material might have had legitimate access to it as a part of doing…
> Slowly but surely, I'm coming to the position that "hacking and leaking" is never "wrong". It's a form of speech, and I'm a free speech absolutist. Wow, a "free speech absolutist". How absolute? So if I am a voyeur, poke a camera through your window and put it on the Internet that's OK per my free speech rights? I break into your bank's website and leak all the usernames and passwords -- I can be prosecuted for the…
"Poking a camera through your window" is "hacking" now? Wow!
Sure, I would prefer that you not do that, or indeed that you not physically trespass in any way. A more interesting hypothetical would be for thousands of homeowners to install a bunch of IP cameras in their homes, and for you to hack those without the benefit of physical trespass. I don't think you'd have much of a leg to stand on if you were to publish John and Jane Doe's humdrum bedroom activities. However, you might also witness some truly awful shit, which I'd have no problem with your bringing to the attention of society.
The bank example is another aspect of our bending all rational rules and expectations in the banks' "favor". They shouldn't build such brittle systems, and the more we coddle them the worse they get. It would be possible to prosecute fraud without criminalizing security research.
Libel laws are most often used for the benefit of the already powerful, so yeah getting rid of those would be an improvement.
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#39If the net effect was good then the action was good.
Crime and Punishment is a thick book, there must be a Reader's Digest version somewhere. Try it.
The poster you are responding to is making a utilitarian moral argument. You are referencing a novel that explores the a common source of crime (poverty) and the chain of events that follows.
I don't see the connection. :-S
Re: Was it wrong to hack and leak the Panama Papers?
#40> probably did nothing illegal, but rather they were trying to minimize their tax burden through (mostly) legal Mostly legal and nothing illegal are contradicting.
Not when there's as much gray as exists in international tax law.