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

Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#851

Post by TomWhitwell »

x-yl wrote: post #843
philistine wrote: post #785

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (Seems to already be the case in the UK) [Citation needed]

I take it it's in reference to the convictions of those inciting violence on social media following the recent far-right riots in England. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/aug/09/two... I suppose in a way advocating for arson and hate crimes is an "illegal meme"..

This is what an illegal meme looks like: "Tyler Kay, 26, wrote a post... calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight. He responded to several comments posted by others following his post, adding that it was “100% the plan”. Kay also reposted... another message inciting action against a named immigration solicitors in Northampton" https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/man-jailed-just-two-days-aft...

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#852

Post by fsflover »

ranger_danger wrote: post #806
oceanplexian wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't it wiser to stop at some point, and find other stuff to do, even if all your nerves say otherwise? The problem is that government doesn’t have a line, that line is defined by the resistance it faces. Today it might be people sharing MP3s, tomorrow they will come after you for hosting a parody of mickey mouse. 10 years from now they’ll be busting down doors for sharing illegal memes (Seems to already be the ca…

> Sitting by passively and praying Curious what you have done instead?

Support https://eff.org?

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#853

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

jenadine wrote: post #824
liamwire wrote: post #814

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not nuts when you stop being intentionally obtuse and speak plainly: yes, child abuse material can be represented by a variety of mathematical means, but it’s abhorrent nature makes it morally correct for those laws to exist.

No child is being abused when someone play with weights on a model. "Abhorrent nature" is very subjective and relative.

For a multitude of reasons, both are evil and should be illegal. However, I do think they are significantly different severities of crime, and ought to be treated as such. Same for sex offenders; streaking should not be punished the same way as rape.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#854

Post by [deleted] »

aeturnum wrote: post #381
vander_elst wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you happen to have a link?

He's at Bloomberg right now[1]. His main output is his 4-times-a-week column Money Stuff, but he also has a podcast and writes in other venues. I love his writing! [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/ARbTQlRLRjE/matthew-s-levi...

[deleted]

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#855

Post by fsflover »

mike_d wrote: post #734
kaliqt wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the wrong position to take. The government is wrong, and a bully, the answer is not to give them what they want.

How is the government wrong? He is being charged with money laundering and wire fraud, both things that require pretty substantial paper trails to prove in court. I think enough time has passed that I can say this openly: I worked for an ad network that was used by MegaUpload. Most of the traffic from his site was fraudulent bot traffic. Mysterious advertisers would repeatedly rebuy ad placements that were clearly no…

How does this support extradition to an unrelated country?

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#856

Post by throwawaythekey »

josefresco wrote: post #427
throwawaythekey wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of our former prime ministers, Paul Keating, came out strongly against the submarine deal. IIRC two important dimensions are that Australia has shallow waters which are not a good fit for the chosen submarine technology and that tactically it makes limited sense for Australia to focus on weapons to be used on our largest trading partner. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/15/paul-... I am not an…

I'm no "submarine warfare expert" but I believe the purpose/value of nuclear submarines is not defense of close coastal waters, but rather as a deterrence that can come "from anywhere". I don't believe shallow waters would hamper the operation of a submarine launching ICBMs or similar. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. I also know nothing of Australian politics but Paul Keating seems to have some curious views…

A decent portion of the Australian population think the realpolitik of our situation means we should adopt a neutral approach towards China, even if it means a weakening of our relationship with the US.

The need to act as world police (re uyghurs, taiwan) can be a game for the major powers.

> Keating said the “great sin” China had committed in the eyes of the west was developing its economy to equal the size of the US

This is somewhat supported by some of the wikileaks releases, but it's a little hard to disentangle if the economy is the sin or just an intensifier.

> At the lunch, Mrs Clinton confided in Mr Rudd about America's fears about China's rapid economic rise and Beijing's multibillion-dollar store of US debt, asking Mr Rudd: ''How do you deal toughly with your banker?''

https://www.smh.com.au/national/explosive-wiki-rudd-cable-20...

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#857

Post by defrost »

josefresco wrote: post #427
throwawaythekey wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of our former prime ministers, Paul Keating, came out strongly against the submarine deal. IIRC two important dimensions are that Australia has shallow waters which are not a good fit for the chosen submarine technology and that tactically it makes limited sense for Australia to focus on weapons to be used on our largest trading partner. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/15/paul-... I am not an…

I'm no "submarine warfare expert" but I believe the purpose/value of nuclear submarines is not defense of close coastal waters, but rather as a deterrence that can come "from anywhere". I don't believe shallow waters would hamper the operation of a submarine launching ICBMs or similar. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. I also know nothing of Australian politics but Paul Keating seems to have some curious views…

> I don't believe shallow waters would hamper the operation of a submarine launching ICBMs or similar. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

The AUKUS submarines are conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarines.

ICBM's don't come into this.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#858

Post by jagermo »

preaching5271 wrote: post #24

I appreciate Kim Dotcom for running MegaUpload and later Mega, in a time when the internet was younger and wilder. Also for his pirate spirit and "stick it to the man" attitude. But everything has a limit, specifically his resistance against the law, even if he hid it behind virtues. I think it's clear for everybody that one cannot get away with this kind of stuff, once governments get involved. Isn't it wiser to sto…

> i'm the main character" personality

he always had this and has always been selling snake oil. He might gotten some clout with mega but he always has been a charlatan.

https://attrition.org/errata/charlatan/kimble/

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#859

Post by fer »

t-3 wrote: post #268
sandworm101 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> probably because a bunch of people dealing with their cases also start disliking them personally. More likely because those people remain naïve about the real world. In a past career I had some interaction with IP enforcement lawyers. They were stuck in the past then and have not really evolved. Their understanding of "the internet" extends only to those things discoverable via google search. Megaupload was knocke…

> Piracy is more alive now than ever, but as it is no longer visible via Google, the likes of the MPAA and IRAA cannot see it. How so? Google is a major distributor of most pirated material through YouTube and their search engine still makes finding stuff easy. I'd argue that p2p is nearly irrelevant nowadays and server-oriented distribution is the main model.

While having a sabnzbd+*arr setup isn't particularly difficult to a technical person, the general opacity of its underlying workings (NNTP? News articles, providers? Block accounts?) has kept lawyers outside of USENET for decades.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#860

Post by can16358p »

sam345 wrote: post #798
oceanplexian wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't it wiser to stop at some point, and find other stuff to do, even if all your nerves say otherwise? The problem is that government doesn’t have a line, that line is defined by the resistance it faces. Today it might be people sharing MP3s, tomorrow they will come after you for hosting a parody of mickey mouse. 10 years from now they’ll be busting down doors for sharing illegal memes (Seems to already be the ca…

Mp3s were yesterday literally long time ago. Parody is always legal. And Mickey mouse by the way is way past copyright. Don't you know at least the original.

I swim and my swimming headsets can only play MP3 as Bluetooth doesn't work at water.

Tell me a legal streaming service that I can use while swimming and I'd consider using it.

Until then, I'll stick to my MP3.

Post reply on HN