Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

He took specific steps (cracking a hash) with the clear intent of helping break into a government owned computer system.

I'm not sure what the gray area is supposed to be here.

If I teach you lock picking skills as a fun hobby, that's clearly okay.

If I teach you lock picking skills knowing you aspire to be a house robber, that is grayish legally and wrong ethically.

But if I break into a specific bank vault for you to help you steal stuff, and we talked about stealing the stuff before I helped you, then I'm clearly involved in a criminal conspiracy.

Assange committed a crime, and if he played the same role in helping to empty your bank account you'd want these laws to exist.

The ethical question here is about whether that crime was ethically jusified. I.e., it's about civil disobedience, not about whether blatant conspiracy should be legal.




>Assange committed a crime, and if he played the same role in helping to empty your bank account you'd want these laws to exist.

But for your bank account comparison to make sense Manning would've already have emptied your bank account before JA broke the law.


How do you know the Administrator account wouldn't have yielded more documents compared to a user account?

Regardless, imagine two independent people trying to murder someone. The first shoots a fatal bullet and the victim is about to imminently die, even if the best medical aid were to be immediately provided. Then the second murderer comes on the scene, does not realize that the victim is fatally wounded, and shoots another bullet, instantly killing him.

Both these people would be fully responsible for the murder, not just attempted murder. Arguments from them saying "no, the other killed him, I did not", do not fly in court.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: