5 ms·

He's being prosecuted for allegedly extracting a password from a hash value on behalf of Manning and encouraging him to leak more information (Obama's DOJ refus

He's being prosecuted for allegedly extracting a password from a hash value on behalf of Manning and encouraging him to leak more information (Obama's DOJ refused to make this charge because it's something all journalists do).

acqq 8y ago
> He's being prosecuted for allegedly extracting a password from a hash value They don't claim Assange extracted a password. They just claim that Assange said in the chat "no luck so far"! That is, that he wrote to Manning that he tried. https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/press-release/file/1153481/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/press-release/file/1153481... The indictment is "conspiracy" with Manning. So there's certainly something to back up the claim from this title https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-april-11-2019-1.5093429/julian-assange-s-arrest-is-a-vendetta-not-justice-says-friend-vaughan-smith-1.5093432 https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-april-11... namely, that "Assange's arrest is 'a vendetta, not justice'" For more context, at the moment this news from ca one month ago have even more sense: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/08/chelsea-manning-judge-jails-wikileaks-case https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/08/chelsea-mann... "Chelsea Manning jailed for refusing to testify to grand jury in WikiLeaks case"
- nickysielicki 8y ago
  > Manning did not have administrative-level privileges, and used special software, namely a Linux operating system, to access the computer file and obtain the portion of the password provided to Assange. Fun to see them exonerate themselves for using broken security by calling a hash a, "portion of the password".
ryanlol 8y ago
No, he's being prosecuted for allegedly agreeing to extract a password from a hash. Not for actually doing so, massive difference.
- rosser 8y ago
  The definition of a criminal conspiracy requires intent and an agreement to act in furtherance of that intent, and only one of the conspirators to have committed overt acts. Everyone with mens rea is guilty of conspiring, not just the person who committed the actus reus.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Everyone with mens rea is guilty of conspiring, not just the person who committed the actus reus. That's not strictly true; the agreement is the individual actus reus.
uryga 8y ago
that'd be "encouraging her", unless you're not referring to Manning here?
- jessaustin 8y ago
  Good point, but some leniency is probably in order. We certainly want to honor Ms. Manning's wishes, but they weren't yet publicly known at that time.
  - eridius 8y ago
    They are known now, and has been known for a very long time.
    - pfisch 8y ago
      When you change your gender does it apply retroactively? I assume it doesn't because that is needlessly complicated.
      - roguecoder 8y ago
        She didn’t change her gender: she is and has been a woman who was in times passed misread. Besides, in what world would referring to someone by a name they purposefully decided not to use be less complicated than referring to them by their actual name? Regardless of whether or not someone is trans, always call them by their current name: it is polite and also doesn’t cause null pointer errors.
        fastball 8y ago
        The word "woman" exists to describe a human female. Just as "bull" describes a male bovine and "hen" describes a female chicken. If you want to stretch the term woman past the historical biological meaning, you can. But nobody else need participate in your re-imagination of terms. Even with your stretched definition, however, you are still either a woman because of biology or a woman because you choose to live as one. Chelsea Manning was not born a female and was not "living as a woman" at the time of her arrest. Therefore, it is still unreasonable to claim that she has "always been a woman". At the time of her arrest, she lived as a man and she was biologically a man.
arduanika 8y ago
Because all journalists encourage sources to leak, or all journalists extract a password from a hash value?
- StanislavPetrov 8y ago
  Both. If a journalist gets a story on French, is it a crime if they publish it in English? Should it be a crime to decode information you possess?

acqq 8y ago

> He's being prosecuted for allegedly extracting a password from a hash value They don't claim Assange extracted a password. They just claim that Assange said in the chat "no luck so far"! That is, that he wrote to Manning that he tried. https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/press-release/file/1153481/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/press-release/file/1153481... The indictment is "conspiracy" with Manning. So there's certainly something to back up the claim from this title https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-april-11-2019-1.5093429/julian-assange-s-arrest-is-a-vendetta-not-justice-says-friend-vaughan-smith-1.5093432 https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-april-11... namely, that "Assange's arrest is 'a vendetta, not justice'" For more context, at the moment this news from ca one month ago have even more sense: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/08/chelsea-manning-judge-jails-wikileaks-case https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/08/chelsea-mann... "Chelsea Manning jailed for refusing to testify to grand jury in WikiLeaks case"

nickysielicki 8y ago
> Manning did not have administrative-level privileges, and used special software, namely a Linux operating system, to access the computer file and obtain the portion of the password provided to Assange. Fun to see them exonerate themselves for using broken security by calling a hash a, "portion of the password".

ryanlol 8y ago

No, he's being prosecuted for allegedly agreeing to extract a password from a hash. Not for actually doing so, massive difference.

rosser 8y ago
The definition of a criminal conspiracy requires intent and an agreement to act in furtherance of that intent, and only one of the conspirators to have committed overt acts. Everyone with mens rea is guilty of conspiring, not just the person who committed the actus reus.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > Everyone with mens rea is guilty of conspiring, not just the person who committed the actus reus. That's not strictly true; the agreement is the individual actus reus.

uryga 8y ago

that'd be "encouraging her", unless you're not referring to Manning here?

jessaustin 8y ago
Good point, but some leniency is probably in order. We certainly want to honor Ms. Manning's wishes, but they weren't yet publicly known at that time.
- eridius 8y ago
  They are known now, and has been known for a very long time.
  - pfisch 8y ago
    When you change your gender does it apply retroactively? I assume it doesn't because that is needlessly complicated.
    - roguecoder 8y ago
      She didn’t change her gender: she is and has been a woman who was in times passed misread. Besides, in what world would referring to someone by a name they purposefully decided not to use be less complicated than referring to them by their actual name? Regardless of whether or not someone is trans, always call them by their current name: it is polite and also doesn’t cause null pointer errors.
      - fastball 8y ago
        The word "woman" exists to describe a human female. Just as "bull" describes a male bovine and "hen" describes a female chicken. If you want to stretch the term woman past the historical biological meaning, you can. But nobody else need participate in your re-imagination of terms. Even with your stretched definition, however, you are still either a woman because of biology or a woman because you choose to live as one. Chelsea Manning was not born a female and was not "living as a woman" at the time of her arrest. Therefore, it is still unreasonable to claim that she has "always been a woman". At the time of her arrest, she lived as a man and she was biologically a man.

arduanika 8y ago

Because all journalists encourage sources to leak, or all journalists extract a password from a hash value?

StanislavPetrov 8y ago
Both. If a journalist gets a story on French, is it a crime if they publish it in English? Should it be a crime to decode information you possess?