3 ms·

.

• zitterbewegung 9y ago
  So, if I paid someone $1 to commit murder then it wouldn't be egregious? People are judged on the crime they committed not how they benefitted off of it. EDIT: Note the parent used to claim that $2000 for Malware isn't worth going to Jail for 40 years because its only $2000.
  • eatitraw 9y ago
    > So, if I paid someone $1 to commit murder then it wouldn't be egregious? A straw man. Stealing $1 is certainly isn't as serious than stealing $100k. And creating malware is closer to theft rather than murdering people.
• _Codemonkeyism 9y ago
  Why do people in discussions base the punishment on the $2000 he is accused of having earned not on the act of selling a cyberweapon? If I sell someone Anthrax for $1, my punishment should be based on the $1 amount?
• nowo 9y ago
  The "facing 40 years" is a quirk of the US justice system. While still often out of proportion he's not going to get 40 years. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/41-months-weev-understanding-how-sentencing-guidelines-work-cfaa-cases-0 https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/41-months-weev-underst...
• cm2187 9y ago
  $2000 is what he sold the malware for from what the post says, not the damages that the malware caused.
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
• Fnoord 9y ago
  It was ~$2000 per sale, not total amount of sales worth $2000. I also question if the conversion of BTC worth was based on what it was worth back when the alleged crime was committed.