4 ms·

I don't know that anybody is frustrated about what they did. It's that anybody else who could have benevolently done the same thing, much faster, but without al

I don't know that anybody is frustrated about what they did. It's that anybody else who could have benevolently done the same thing, much faster, but without all the process, would be in massively hot water. I think mostly it's just frustrating to want to do the right thing, know that you could, also know that you can't, and then see somebody get to do it officially so much later. Top that all off with the fact that it's really hard to trace who and what were involved, versus a more transparent process where legitimate experts could chime in and prevent any further harm. Instead we have to cross our fingers that they did it right and that the judge understood what he was agreeing to. And I mean it's not a unique problem to this circumstance. Just kinda how institutions tend to be.

vulcan01 6y ago
> It's that anybody else who could have benevolently done the same thing, much faster, but without all the process, would be in massively hot water. Isn't this how it is with a lot of things? The government can tax people. If I tried to tax people, that would be illegal coercion.
- andrewstuart2 6y ago
  It's definitely that way with a lot of things, but it can still be super frustrating for anyone who would prefer to use their knowledge for good, but due to scar tissue, we know we can't. Scar tissue being both the laws as understandable and justifiable reactions to misuse by those with less admirable intentions, and from seeing the laws used to unjustly prosecute people trying to do the right thing in the face of authority who won't listen, and assuming wrongly that all they need is a demo to help them understand the severity of the problem.
dx034 6y ago
That's what police is for. There are enough situations outside of the digital world where it's better to call the police and let them help instead of getting too involved yourself. I believe it's good that not everyone can apply their own judgement in what needs fixing but that police/law enforcement applies certain standards there (although obviously not always correctly).
DangerousPie 6y ago
> I don't know that anybody is frustrated about what they did. It's that anybody else who could have benevolently done the same thing, much faster, but without all the process, would be in massively hot water. But the process is the whole point isn't it? If anyone was able to do this whenever they wanted and without oversight that would be a major concern. This is an example how this kind of thing can be done in a safer, legal way. Of course it won't be as fast as just letting anyone do this, but that's a price worth paying.

vulcan01 6y ago

> It's that anybody else who could have benevolently done the same thing, much faster, but without all the process, would be in massively hot water. Isn't this how it is with a lot of things? The government can tax people. If I tried to tax people, that would be illegal coercion.

andrewstuart2 6y ago
It's definitely that way with a lot of things, but it can still be super frustrating for anyone who would prefer to use their knowledge for good, but due to scar tissue, we know we can't. Scar tissue being both the laws as understandable and justifiable reactions to misuse by those with less admirable intentions, and from seeing the laws used to unjustly prosecute people trying to do the right thing in the face of authority who won't listen, and assuming wrongly that all they need is a demo to help them understand the severity of the problem.

dx034 6y ago

That's what police is for. There are enough situations outside of the digital world where it's better to call the police and let them help instead of getting too involved yourself. I believe it's good that not everyone can apply their own judgement in what needs fixing but that police/law enforcement applies certain standards there (although obviously not always correctly).

DangerousPie 6y ago

> I don't know that anybody is frustrated about what they did. It's that anybody else who could have benevolently done the same thing, much faster, but without all the process, would be in massively hot water. But the process is the whole point isn't it? If anyone was able to do this whenever they wanted and without oversight that would be a major concern. This is an example how this kind of thing can be done in a safer, legal way. Of course it won't be as fast as just letting anyone do this, but that's a price worth paying.