6 ms·
Christopher “Moot” Poole's testimony in the Palin email hacking case
- nirmal 16y agoTypo on page 13. "Rickroll is a mean or Internet kind of trend..."
- nailer 16y ago'A. That is a misspelling, actually. It's Anime & Mango.' I don't think that's what Moot said. The more worrying one is where he's asked to explain what the significance of '.jpg' is.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- jrockway 16y agoWhy? The testimony is for a jury of laymen, and they need to understand as much as possible to properly render a verdict.
- a2tech 16y agoLots of internet misspellings in the testimony. Reading this really makes me think about how foreign the culture on the Internet is to most people-and how indecipherable.
- gwern 16y agoThat was incredibly dull and a complete waste of 10 minutes.
- powrtoch 16y agoI was about to ask why this is on HN, but really why is it anywhere except at the bottom of a stack of court proceedings? I have a hard time imagining anyone reading through this and not wanting those 10 minutes back.
- bdickason 16y agoI think the fact that some judge/prosecutor would be pulling up 4chan in a courtroom and pointing out pages fascinates me. 'Mr. Moot can you please verify that this hentai tentacle rape scene is in line with the 4chan rules' etc :) Not a big 4chan fan myself but the idea of website owners dealing with such questionable/taboo content in a court of law is quite interesting.
- powrtoch 16y agoI think if the article actually contained anything like 'Mr. Moot can you please verify that this hentai tentacle rape scene is in line with the 4chan rules', it would have been, while still not particularly relevant HN material, actually entertaining enough to be worth my time. Instead I just listened to a description of how to pull an activity log by IP address.
- steveklabnik 16y agoThere are a few gems in there. "What does 'newfag' mean?" and "Rick Astley is a singer, is that correct?"
- steveklabnik 16y agoIt's interesting to see a world that I rarely interact with (law) interacting with a world that I often interact with (server logs, rickrolls, and /b/). While the actual content wasn't that interesting, it's the meta that is; how does a lawyer explain /b/ to a judge? What do they consider important? Where does the abstraction leak, what gets oversimplified, and how well is moot able to explain it?
- jrockway 16y agoYet another site that logs way too much information. I have a dream that some day, web logs won't include the remote IP address. In the mean time, use Tor. Also: Q: The last column, the user agent string, does that show which browser, operating system, and other information that this particular user and that date and time had on their computer. A: Yes. No. It shows what advisory string their user-agent chose to tell the web server. Please tell me that something like this is not evidence in the government's case.
- powrtoch 16y agoI'm betting that it can be evidence against anyone not informed enough to call them on it. And let's not forget that IP address evidence assumes, probably among other things, 1) No Tor 2) No Proxy (chains) 3) No one else under the same NAT umbrella 4) No ISP address allocation weirdness.
- jrockway 16y agoYeah. I read the cross examination and didn't think the guy's lawyer did a very good job It did inspire me to watch anime with mangoes, though.
- radu_floricica 16y agoToo much information? Given the muddy waters moot swims in, I'd say it was nothing unexpected, and less then feared. Much more interesting is that he didn't provide the IP address... but the FBI requested activity logs for that particular IP. Wonder how they got to know it?
- Marticus 16y agoIt wasn't as interesting as I thought it was. But still kinda cool - as someone else said the culture is so vastly different. Wanting a definition of "who" Rick Astley is cracked me up, even if only "for the record." But nonetheless, what gets me the most is, in fact, how vastly indecipherable some of this must be to the jury, regardless of explanations. And the explanations themselves might possibly require many minutes / hours of defining to accurately represent the case. Makes me wonder what they do about really complex technological cases.