That perspective is only relevant if you've already decided that skill and intelligence trump the legal and ethical implications of your behavior.

What I think you've missed from api's comment is the subtext that curious hackers are far more like explorers than criminals, and that their actions should be considered in the context of their mindset.

No, I understand that and I disagree completely. To the extent that you're not mentally handicapped and understand that your actions have consequences, what you think you're up to when you commit a crime is completely irrelevant.

Ah, I guess we'll have to disagree then, as I my personal philosophy tends to shun strict deontology. I consider frame of mind to be highly relevant.

I do have to take offense at the implication that disagreeing with your view is associated with mental handicap.

We are going to have to disagree but please reread my comment: I am not implying that you have a mental handicap at all. I'm saying that a person who does not understand the consequences of their actions due to mental handicap should be exempt from full punishment. I stand firmly by rationalization does not constitute failure to understand.