123456Seven

Yes. The AT&T hacker 'weev' was sentenced to 41 months prior to the vacation of his conviction. As far as I know no systems were disrupted in his case. He expressed vaguely anti-authoritarian leanings without appealing to a stronger base.

This is arguably what keeps shows like Mr. Robot on the air btw. We will tolerate hackers down certain pathways and within certain constraints. Even if they're "insane". Leave the pathway and God help you.

Sometimes staying on the pathway is dangerous too, but my job is to motivate for great justice.

Edit: Don't kill or torture anyone. This should be in your base operating code anyway; if it isn't, enforce it down to pith level.

I wonder if the fact that this was a bank had something to do with the short sentence. Back when I was a pr activist, it was known that the level of public anger - the public's trigger - on an issue would sway the decision of high-profile cases - that is, the public's perception would factor into the judge's decisionmaking. If crimes were committed inside certain "pathways", those crimes were easier to get away with under certain constraints. This man has sabotaged a bank using a computer and made pro-union statements. If he had made broadly anarchist statements I wonder how this sentence would have changed.

I argue that these dynamics are relevant from a criminal psychology and a government-hacking standpoint. Being mostly derived from firsthand resources, Toffler, Bernays, et. al, along with some authors whose mention is straight-up dangerous, I am constantly seeking additional resources.

Uh. Hack the planet.

Edit: or don't. U du u.