heroicjanitor Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 If the people don't want strict internet policies then they won't get them right?
Serebii Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 If the people don't want strict internet policies then they won't get them right? Essentially, no. Do we get a say in every law and policy they apply? Nope
ViPeR Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 I guess their records won't be among the ones released....
heroicjanitor Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 But this is bigger, this is a change to the right to privacy(if this is a right, it is at least implied by other rights) isn't it? If they attempt to change this it should go to a vote... Possibly. I amn't big on politics
ViPeR Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Check the news. A suspected Lulzwhatever has been arrested. Was quite funny watching the newsreader pronouncing it wrong. Joint FBI and Scotland Yard operation...
Aqui1a Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 This on the BBC News website.. A UK teenager suspected of being a mastermind behind a notorious international computer hacking group has been arrested in Essex xD Essex though?
Cube Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/office-of-national-statistics-no-evidence-of-data-compromise--968897 No evidence of any kind of compromise. Also, Lulzsec themselves haven't even confirmed it.
The fish Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 This on the BBC News website.. A UK teenager suspected of being a mastermind behind a notorious international computer hacking group has been arrested in Essex xD Essex though? Bare in mind that whilst the county is half boozy, slutty Essex, the other half is middle class, well educated (and potential nerd) Essex. It's kind of like if Romford and Surrey had a baby together. More seriously, shit just got real.
Serebii Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Maybe not lulzsec related, but this is a horrific thing http://www.theage.com.au/technology/security/4800-aussie-sites-evaporate-after-hack-20110621-1gd1h.html
Dan_Dare Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 but hackers are cult heroes sticking it to the man, man! oh, wait...
Ramar Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Maybe not lulzsec related, but this is a horrific thing http://www.theage.com.au/technology/security/4800-aussie-sites-evaporate-after-hack-20110621-1gd1h.html That's shocking. But first law of computing is to have a back up.
Emasher Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 It'll be similar to China. Its not going to go that far in the west in the near future. I expect censorship will be limited to blocking IRC channels/boards that have been used by groups like lulzsec, most of the chans will be safe as they have too large a user base to be taken down unnoticed. This of course will be annoying to any non-criminal users of such boards, and will also be counter productive as far as police investigations go as it will be more difficult to track down the actual criminals (who are more than capable of using more secure methods of communication). There will also be several freedom of information type sites (Wikileaks being the first example of this) attacked by various governments in order to keep the flow of important information restricted to government influenced organizations, this will be done by labeling these sites/groups as terrorists or whatever society's witch is at that point. What you can expect though is a lot more un-constitutional privacy violations. Its clear now that the Patriot Act isn't going anywhere in the US. Canada's currently implementing similar legislation (which the mainstream media hasn't even been reporting on), and the UK's been a nanny state for years and is only getting worse. Within the next decade, the police will likely be able to monitor all your web traffic at the ISP level without any sort of warrant, they'll also be given the power to demand any information about your online accounts without a warrant (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) Expect legislation to be passed that stops these services from notifying you before your account is subpoenaed as well. Also, new laws like the ones in Canada banning anonymity on the internet aren't going to be enforced on everyone, but they will be used as an excuse to arrest people who are outspoken against their governments in more extreme circumstances. For instance, if someone's planning a non-violent protest when it would be inconvenient for the government. For the most part, any protest that involves small groups of people who become violent will be treated as if the entire protest has become violent, and police will use everything they can short of live fire to terrorize innocent people, anyone arrested will also be denied their legal rights (see the CBC Fifth Estate documentary on the Toronto G20 protests).
Guy Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) These guys are like the annoying little brother of Anonymous who wants to be just like his older brother and copies him and his dickery, but he gets it all wrong and pisses everyone off. This stuff is funny for a while, but then it just gets old and inconvenient and annoying. The world needs to stop caring about/reporting on the exploits of these children and they'll eventually get bored and move onto something else. You can all start by unfollowing them on Twitter. Edited June 21, 2011 by Guy
Cube Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 You know leaks/hacks/whatever have seemingly increased since the PSN outage...have they actually increased? It's like reports of plane crashes after 9/11 or reports of flu after bird/swine flu - even though the amount of actual cases have pretty much stayed the same, they're reported much more because something pushed them into the public eye.
Caris Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Haha the FBI are after this guy and he just snitched on LulzSec, so they just found out where he lives along with all his other personal details and sent it to the FBI so they can hunt him down. Incredible.
Debug Mode Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 Haha holy fuck, they only just made a move on Ryan? /b/ managed to find out that he was hosting some lulzsec material on his server early last week. Even though it was found to be a loose association (which is still illegal, not like I'm defending the idiot), he was only hosting some IRC stuff. Kid needed to get in shit, he has done DDoS shit before.
Brian Mcoy Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13916090 Ban from using the internet on any devices. Internet unplugged from the home, plus he can't move out anyway. Let's hope this sentance goes through "for the lulz"
Cube Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jun/24/lulzsec-irc-leak-the-full-record Private chat logs from LulzSec's IRC channel.
Ellmeister Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 Putting Essex back on the map. Ooooooooooooooh yes! :awesome:
Goafer Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13916090 Ban from using the internet on any devices. Internet unplugged from the home, plus he can't move out anyway. Let's hope this sentance goes through "for the lulz" Quotes from the above article: His counsel told City of Westminster Magistrates' Court he suffers from the form of autism, along with agoraphobia. Being a complete loser and having no reason to go out is not agoraphobia. It's just being a loser. I could have figured out he had "agoraphobia" before ever catching the guy. The court was told he is of high intelligence but has difficulty interacting with other people. Again, a total fucking loser. This doesn't even need to be brought up in court, it's common fucking sense.
jayseven Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 Wow. Didn't think there'd be so much soap-box opera in here, as well as a sheer lack of understanding or perspective.
Ellmeister Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 Quotes from the above article: Being a complete loser and having no reason to go out is not agoraphobia. It's just being a loser. I could have figured out he had "agoraphobia" before ever catching the guy. Again, a total fucking loser. This doesn't even need to be brought up in court, it's common fucking sense. What? Autism can mean a person struggles to have act normally in a social situation, this is a bit more than him being antisocial and not wanting to make friends. Also he may have agoraphobia, your pessimistic dismissal of him could be completely off the mark.
Goafer Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 In all fairness, I didn't really mention the autism part. That part is unfortunate I agree. But difficulty communicating with others? He managed to communicate with LulzSec well enough. Sure that's on the internet, but why Lulzsec? Why not go and talk to people on the internet instead of stealing loads of peoples personal information? I don't see any of this as an excuse for a complete lack of morals.
jayseven Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 In all fairness, do you know whether the spectrum of autism covers the difference between social interaction and text-based communication? Do you know if this morality you speak of is altered in individuals who are autistic? Further; - He is not the 'mastermind' - Morals of holding/witholding/sharing/keeping personal information is a wobbly and complex area - Gah. Just loads. No point me pretending to know what I'm talking about, but at least I'm open to considering other explanations. I'd hate to see some people in this thread in actual decision-making positions, especially not in legal matters such as a Judge's seat. I don't understand what drive people have to be so vindictive in their arguments when they're so utterly distant from the matter itself. I don't see why one thinks expressing their opinion through fire and scalding-iron is in any way morally positive. I don't see how feeling the need to express one's opinion in even a subtly unchangeable way is in any way different to the behavior of those so many of us are willing to belittle - the chavs, the daily mail readers, the unemployed on jeremy kyle. The root of ignorance is lack of information. Ignorance is the root of misbehavior. Compassion, understanding and other such cheery pip-pip lovey-dovey nonsense at least provides an alternative. It's just so painful sometimes. - I wish to point out ahead of time; pointing out hypocracies in an attempt to belittle me into a "just as bad" as what I'm speaking against is, again, not furthering anyone's cause, nor forgiving the original maladjusted opinion. But perhaps I can use this to add weight to the above bullet point by skimming hyperbolic stones between the idea that you're fine with massive dynamic [lol] profit-driven organisations having a freehold on your 'private' and/or 'personal' information, tick-boxing away the rights to your oh-so-sacred user history/search preferences/address/email/password, and you're fine with them storing any sensitive information in ways which a well-minded terrorist could actually acquire - ways which a child can allegedly acquire them, then is the idea of seeing lulzsec as a 'lesser of two evils' perhaps glossing over the point of such 'hacking' activities? The recent 'fad' of anonymous/lolzsec/wikileaks and whatever other revolutionary embodiment you can think of is generally fighting for the distinction between revolutionism and terrorism. While extremists resort to actual violence, these 'organisations' resort to messing with the current situation - with the shape of our data-driven consumerist-'led' society. By focusing on the 'moral' act of 'theft' rather than being the devil's advocate and attempting to try to understand your 'enemy', to ask why they might do what they do, you are happy to continue and happy to see that current society is perfect and cannot be bettered in any way. - I also despise having to add clauses and conditions to my side of the dialogue, but I know that wall-of-text is an imperfect tool. It offers too many new points to an argument, often ill expressed and not thought through, leaving loop-holes and tragedies. It is my poor grasp of the english language, and my idleness with re-drafts, that means my ethos cannot transplant from my head to your head without being toned or shaded with my own emotions or ignorance. TL;DR: I'm trying to say that I think you're being ignorant about the full circumstances, and perhaps I am expressing my own areas of ignorance in this reply. I am also hoping you fight the desire to attack my larger, less refined points and continue to evaluate your own stance and defend/redefine them before perhaps continuing on to assault on mine. Otherwise the dialogue quickly steers towards one where neither side feels that they are being heard. Still TL;DR: I enjoyed writing that. It was fun.
Recommended Posts