4 ms·

Do you maybe want to rephrase that last sentence? It looks like you just said unauthorized hackers deserve to die.

by PhasmaFelis 8y ago

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mayankkaizen 8y ago
I too was shocked. Then I thought may be I didn't get it because english isn't my first language.
- Symbiote 8y ago
  Unfortunately, there is one otherwise-modern country with mostly native English speakers which retains the death penalty. The language was clear, its America that's at fault.
matte_black 8y ago
I actually thought about leaving out “as it should” when I wrote it. I knew that stating my opinion was going to be taken badly, but then I thought why censor myself? I should say what I mean and mean what I say. Unauthorized hackers are not good guys: The type of guys who break into systems for personal gain or satisfaction without permission. I know around here we tend to romanticize these people but let’s not forget they are still criminals. There should certainly be prison time if they are caught, don’t know how anyone could disagree with that. Death is debatable, but in some cases fully warranted.
- alxlaz 8y ago
  It's not stating your opinion that's taken badly, it's your opinion that's taken badly. I think everyone in their right mind can agree that in most cases it's bad for society if you break into someone else's system. If you take it on a case-by-case basis, it's a little hard to make that statement. E.g. would it be bad if someone broke into a Chinese network and use the information to help/warn human rights activists? To break into a company that's conducting unauthorized experiments on unwilling or uninformed subjects and leak that to the press? It's easy to say that vigilante justice is never a good idea, but the victims who can't get any other kind of justice might very rightfully disagree. It's hard to even agree that it's always wrong to break into a computer system. To pronounce a minimum acceptable sentence of jailtime, and maybe even suggest that death penalty would be a good idea, too, is not something that's going to be taken well in the civilized world.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- codetrotter 8y ago
  > Death is debatable, but in some cases fully warranted. Myself and a lot of other people don’t believe in death sentence no matter the severity of the crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country The two main reasons why I don’t support a death sentence in any case are: 1. People sometimes get sentenced for crimes they did not commit. By at least letting them live in prison rather than killing them we give them a chance to fight the sentence. 2. The law is not objectively “correct” because there is no such thing as a single “true” morality. Multiple moral stances exist, and we should be somewhat tolerant of that. Amnesty International has some more arguments against death penalty as well. https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/ Finally I believe that the justice system should to the greatest extent possible exist to prevent crime and reform criminals so that they can be productive members of society, not primarily exist to punish criminals. In my country — Norway — this is reflected in how the police handle confrontational situations. The Norwegian police force always tries to deescalate, whereas in the US the police are very aggressive in a lot of situations that should not call for that sort of reaction. There are very many people that do bad things not because they are fundamentally bad people but because of their circumstances. Everyone deserves a chance. Some people cannot be helped and need to remain locked up because they pose a threat to the rest of society, but that should be what we do when we see that we cannot reform them, not how we treat everyone who breaks the current set of laws.
  - iosDrone 8y ago
    It's a bit rich for you to hold up Norway as a model for sensible attitudes towards punishment. This is the same country that sentenced a man who killed 77 people to 21 years in a resort-like prison. Regardless of your own philosophy, most people (even opponents of the death penalty) would view this sentence as so absurdly lenient that it verges on psychopathy towards the victims and their families. (I strongly disagree with the original commenter, by the way. I do think capital punishment is warranted in extreme cases.)
    - sgift 8y ago
      Yeah. Isolation cells are "resort like" now. Maybe you want to check in into such a resort for a few years? I mean it seems to be a great deal according to you.
- MaxBarraclough 8y ago
  > I knew that stating my opinion was going to be taken badly, but then I thought why censor myself? I should say what I mean and mean what I say. No, it's not being 'taken badly'. It's on you. What you're saying is an outrage. HackerNews isn't a YouTube comment thread; we expect better. Rather than complaining about how your readers misunderstood you, you might think to at least explain yourself when you go ahead and say that teenaged hackers deserve death.
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  Death is not "debatable" in any reasonable sense. If you'd just said "that road leads to prison, as it should" I could totally understand that, but there is no coherent moral framework in which death is an appropriate penalty for malicious hacking that doesn't kill anybody.

Do you maybe want to rephrase that last sentence? It looks like you just said unauthorized hackers deserve to die.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

mayankkaizen 8y ago

I too was shocked. Then I thought may be I didn't get it because english isn't my first language.

Symbiote 8y ago
Unfortunately, there is one otherwise-modern country with mostly native English speakers which retains the death penalty. The language was clear, its America that's at fault.

matte_black 8y ago

I actually thought about leaving out “as it should” when I wrote it. I knew that stating my opinion was going to be taken badly, but then I thought why censor myself? I should say what I mean and mean what I say. Unauthorized hackers are not good guys: The type of guys who break into systems for personal gain or satisfaction without permission. I know around here we tend to romanticize these people but let’s not forget they are still criminals. There should certainly be prison time if they are caught, don’t know how anyone could disagree with that. Death is debatable, but in some cases fully warranted.

alxlaz 8y ago
It's not stating your opinion that's taken badly, it's your opinion that's taken badly. I think everyone in their right mind can agree that in most cases it's bad for society if you break into someone else's system. If you take it on a case-by-case basis, it's a little hard to make that statement. E.g. would it be bad if someone broke into a Chinese network and use the information to help/warn human rights activists? To break into a company that's conducting unauthorized experiments on unwilling or uninformed subjects and leak that to the press? It's easy to say that vigilante justice is never a good idea, but the victims who can't get any other kind of justice might very rightfully disagree. It's hard to even agree that it's always wrong to break into a computer system. To pronounce a minimum acceptable sentence of jailtime, and maybe even suggest that death penalty would be a good idea, too, is not something that's going to be taken well in the civilized world.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
codetrotter 8y ago
> Death is debatable, but in some cases fully warranted. Myself and a lot of other people don’t believe in death sentence no matter the severity of the crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country The two main reasons why I don’t support a death sentence in any case are: 1. People sometimes get sentenced for crimes they did not commit. By at least letting them live in prison rather than killing them we give them a chance to fight the sentence. 2. The law is not objectively “correct” because there is no such thing as a single “true” morality. Multiple moral stances exist, and we should be somewhat tolerant of that. Amnesty International has some more arguments against death penalty as well. https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/ Finally I believe that the justice system should to the greatest extent possible exist to prevent crime and reform criminals so that they can be productive members of society, not primarily exist to punish criminals. In my country — Norway — this is reflected in how the police handle confrontational situations. The Norwegian police force always tries to deescalate, whereas in the US the police are very aggressive in a lot of situations that should not call for that sort of reaction. There are very many people that do bad things not because they are fundamentally bad people but because of their circumstances. Everyone deserves a chance. Some people cannot be helped and need to remain locked up because they pose a threat to the rest of society, but that should be what we do when we see that we cannot reform them, not how we treat everyone who breaks the current set of laws.
- iosDrone 8y ago
  It's a bit rich for you to hold up Norway as a model for sensible attitudes towards punishment. This is the same country that sentenced a man who killed 77 people to 21 years in a resort-like prison. Regardless of your own philosophy, most people (even opponents of the death penalty) would view this sentence as so absurdly lenient that it verges on psychopathy towards the victims and their families. (I strongly disagree with the original commenter, by the way. I do think capital punishment is warranted in extreme cases.)
  - sgift 8y ago
    Yeah. Isolation cells are "resort like" now. Maybe you want to check in into such a resort for a few years? I mean it seems to be a great deal according to you.
MaxBarraclough 8y ago
> I knew that stating my opinion was going to be taken badly, but then I thought why censor myself? I should say what I mean and mean what I say. No, it's not being 'taken badly'. It's on you. What you're saying is an outrage. HackerNews isn't a YouTube comment thread; we expect better. Rather than complaining about how your readers misunderstood you, you might think to at least explain yourself when you go ahead and say that teenaged hackers deserve death.
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
Death is not "debatable" in any reasonable sense. If you'd just said "that road leads to prison, as it should" I could totally understand that, but there is no coherent moral framework in which death is an appropriate penalty for malicious hacking that doesn't kill anybody.