Comments:British hacker may face Guantanamo, 60-year sentence

Hurray for "democracy"...


 * i'm an american, and want justice served for what this man has done, including the potential damage he has caused both myself and my fellow citizens. having said that, i hope to god our justice system does not get his hands on him, as i have no faith at this time that his rights as a human will be respected. - Imind (talk) 17:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I was born in the US, and I happen to live there still, so I guess that makes me an American. I agree with the principal of your statement Imind, that people who have caused harm for our citizens should be prosecuted, but in this case, the hacker is not to blame. It is almost guaranteed that it is in fact the US government who is hiding information from its own citizens. This is unacceptable to me, on a personal level. The idea that a government is allowed to hide stuff from its own people is absolutely disgusting. The hacker was doing the world a service. Rekov (talk) 17:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * do you have any evidence to substantiate this? - Imind (talk) 18:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * HAHA OH WOW, more proof that some people are just plain idiotic and will eat all the bullshit the government says and then some.. 124.188.171.7 08:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

What?
This hacker did nothing wrong. Consider this:
 * The government is supposed to be owned by the people
 * The people, therefore, have a right to see the information
 * The hacker aimed to allow the people to see the information

Also, what justification do they have to send this person to Guantanamo? Is he now a terrorist. If anything, he should begiven some form of award. Anonymous101talk 19:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * So breaking into Government computers and trying to sell the information to the biggest bidder is not iligal? Thanks Anonymous101 for clearing that up. So i can crack all the myspaces out their? Dumbass. I think he should not go to Gitmo. But he should still go to jail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.229.12.186 (talk) 20:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Illegal differs from unethical. In New Hampshire, (I think) it is illegal to hold a puppet show in public without a license. Oliver Cromwell made a law banning people from eating mince pies on Christmas Day (and that law has never been repealed). I am not suggesting you engage in illegal activities, I am just saying that this particular man does not deserve to be published. Anonymous101talk 20:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I disagree. I think he deserves to be punished, but I also think that the punishments being brandied around are way out of proportion for the crime committed. It is a simple break and enter with intent to steal (and destroy property if he actually did irretrievably delete files); whether a break and enter occurs on personal property or public property should make no difference, and neither should the fact that it was a computerized break&enter instead of a physical one. 70 years in prison is a lot for such a paltry crime, especially when no one was in any danger. Even 4 years makes me go 0_o. Gopher65talk 22:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Look, the US government was hiding information from its people. In my view this is one of the greatest crimes a government can commit. It is not up to the government to decide what its people can and cannot know. I do not know if he intended to sell the information, or just leak it, and the fact that some files were deleted is also unfortunate. If there was a crime, it was the deletion of information. Releasing information that the government was hiding from its people deserves a medal. The government is not for the people of the people, because it was created by people 200 years ago who's morals are nonexistent by today's standards (i.e. slavery, death penalty, gender discrimination ect.), and is currently controlled by corporations who would like nothing more than to use every person as a slave in their profit engines. Rekov (talk) 00:29, 1 August 2008(UTC)


 * rekov, perhaps you did not see that i had asked before if you had any evidence of what you speak. is there a link or something you can point me to?  thanks.  - Imind (talk) 00:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The whole point of my argument is that information is being hidden. I propose that I will give some examples where concealed information can be considered general knowledge, and if this is not acceptable I will attempt to find some concrete evidence. It is common practice for the government to keep military information secret. The example I find most blatantly offensive is that the government is disallowing pictures of dead troops in the Iraq war. Another example: I was investigated by the FBI during that whole Anonymous vs. Scientology because I know that putting baking soda and vinegar together creates an explosive reaction, and I posted a video of it online. Now they wont tell me what information they have on me. I am not allowed to read my own damn file that the FBI has on me. Rekov (talk) 01:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Justice
How can a Hacker get 60 years, and murderer gets 20 years, and a rapist gets 2 years,and so on. It doesn't make sense. If a hacker doesn't kill/rape, or otherwise hurt a human or an animal, then he shouldn't be punished. If I were NASA I would have congratulated the guy for finding holes in the system, and attempted to convince him that all this UFO conspiracy theories are nonsense.

Computers, cell phones, the internet, cars, and even money are toys we humans have invented, so why in the world do we punish people for these?!

Without hackers we would have no internet, no linux, no bsd, no e-mail, etc.

Look up the hacker ethic, and read books like Hackers Heroes of The Computer Revolution, or 2600 Magazine, you will that hackers are not evil people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.57.113 (talk) 22:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, it is hackers who care about your privacy, that is why they give you GPG and Tor, and EFF, because they care about privacy. If a corporation would care about your privacy they wouldn't collect information about you. I know I won't collect information with my company.

But then again there is a big difference between individual privacy and group privacy, as there is between individual freedom and group freedom. Personally I want to have privacy as individual and to communicate privately with my friends, but when a big entity such as a corporation or church has privacy bad things could happen, remember the dungeons of the Inquisition, even after they supposedly stopped? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.57.113 (talk) 22:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the Government should reveal as much information as possible, however Military information is different. Strategic information gives an advantage in any military conflict and is therefore closely guarded; his breaking into that does endanger human lives. What really irritates me is that it's such a profoundly stupid reason. UFO coverups indeed, even with all the information that exists to show that little green men aren't collaborating with the US government to probe their citizens; people STILL believe that. I've entertained the notion that the belief that the government is collaborating with aliens should be a prosecutable offense simply because it's so silly. But yes, he endangered human lives by tampering with military systems and I see why the prosecuting lawyers are so very upset. Also, while all those hackers that have been set as examples did PGP and whatnot, NONE of them hacked and tampered with military systems. None. Because it endangers the lives of one's countrymen if you're a citizen and it provokes international incidences if you're not. I think this is an excessive punishment but I find it hard to really work up indignation on this guy's behalf. --131.181.251.66 01:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 131.181.251.66, here's an idea, they don't get involved in a military conflict, this wouldn't be a problem. Anonymous101talk 06:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

i can't believe im reading this.so he hacked into a few computer systems big deal its not like he embezeled large amounts of cash or killed someone so whats all this talk about guantanamo and severe jail time.nonsence they should offer him a job in security!
 * It's because all governments are full of paranoid faggots who keep trying to one-up each other at the expense of the people. 124.188.171.7 08:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hackers have been given a bad name, and it is by governments overreacting and the tabloids exaggerating that had given them such a bad name. Most of the computerised systems we have in the modern world wouldn't exist without hackers. 12:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)~

Consider This Anonymous101

 * The people elected the leaders.
 * The leaders chose not to show some documents that would cause unnecessary public stress and mayhem.
 * The people reelects these leaders.

Did the hacker really expect to get away with this? Hacking into secret files puts not only soldier's lives in danger, but the public's as well. There is a reason these files are secret! -- Poe Joe (Talk) 03:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So? It's the government's fault that their security systems are ultimately nothing compared to the power of the internet. YOU DO NOT MESS WITH US, KTHX. 124.188.171.7 08:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the US government were trying to hide something. He was going to make public files of UFOs. UFO information being revealed will not cause harm. Anonymous101talk 06:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

If this happened in Russia, China or Iran...
It was another proof that the country in question is Evil, and;

Must be invaded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.165.236 (talk) 07:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfair and other options:
I believe that he does not deserve a jail term. He was obviously highly interested in UFOs and believed that the United States were doing a cover up. He used his inititive and intellect to find information out. It is of course, a matter of national security, however, the law against hackers is new and hard to define. Has he actually stolen anything, has he harmed anyone? A possible reason for his high amount of sentencing, as with many hacker cases, is the embarresment caused. The fact that one person can discover the secrets of hundreds of government databases protected by thousands by simply sitting at a computer. Perhaps some justice should be used, however, throwing him in prison is a waste of intelligence. Recently, the U.S. and South Korea came under cyber attack. Would it not be much more beneficial for everyone to simply offer him the alternative of having to help the United States uncover the culprit behind these cyber attacks and help to reinforce the governments security? 12:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)~