7 ms·

The article tries to frame him like a noble hacker who turned to the good side but in fact he remains a backstabbing snitch. Does anyone here have respect for w

The article tries to frame him like a noble hacker who turned to the good side but in fact he remains a backstabbing snitch. Does anyone here have respect for what he did?

dobbsbob 12y ago
His last few months as a snitch he changed his twitter pic to an islamic black standard militant flag and was openly calling for violence and 'cyber-terrorism'. Ridiculous
- EpicEng 12y ago
  What would you have him do; change his profile pic to a US flag while working undercover?
  - serf 12y ago
    I'd have him continue his previous activities in a similar fashion to avoid the chance that his current actions are a message to important actors that he has been poisoned or is being watched in some way. everyone knows he's an actor for the state anyway, but a quick temperance change online would be a pretty big red flag for many.
    - dobbsbob 12y ago
      It was a red flag. One day he is lulzsec doing lulzy mischief, disappears and comes back inciting terrorism and giving big ups to reactionary militant islam.
dublinben 12y ago
I doubt it. He will probably never be able to find work in the tech industry again. If I were an employer, and searched his name, I would toss his resume.
- dobbsbob 12y ago
  It's likely he still works for the FBI and had a hand in taking down DPR. His FBI handler was in charge of that investigation, an anonymous 'agent #2' is referenced all through the complaint.
rayiner 12y ago
The "snitch" concept is not just adolescent, but harmful. There's nothing morally wrong with trying to atone for past bad actions by exposing other criminals.
- pyre 12y ago
  > The "snitch" concept is [...] harmful. That's the point. The idea is that one should 'fall on the grenade' to protect his criminal comrades. When he instead throws them to the wolves to save himself, people get up-in-arms about it. Though it's not all that surprising. It's sort of like whole 'honor among thieves' ideal. When you throw in with a bunch of people that are willing to 'colour outside the lines,' sometimes the lines that they cross will not just be the lines drawn in the sand by the law, but the lines that you yourself draw in the sand.
  - sillysaurus3 12y ago
    The idea is that one should 'fall on the grenade' to protect his criminal comrades. When he instead throws them to the wolves to save himself, people get up-in-arms about it. I guess I'm missing some context. Whose idea was the first sentence?
    - pyre 12y ago
      If you are part of a group engaging in illegal activity, and you (specifically you, not the whole group) are caught by the authorities, you are considered a 'snitch' if you rat out your associates rather than refusing to give the authorities any information and just 'doing your time.' @codesuela called him a "snitch," which has a negative connotation (e.g. phrases like "snitches get stitches"[1][2]). [1] http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snitches+get+stitches http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snitches+get+...! [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Snitchin%27 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Snitchin%27
  - rhizome 12y ago
    When he instead throws them to the wolves to save himself, people get up-in-arms about it. Well, there's a reason why it's called "defection" in the Prisoner's Dilemma.
tptacek 12y ago
Sure, it is possible not to see anything admirable in Monsegur's actions even if you think that the prosecution of the "militant" faction of Anonymous served the public interest. Becoming an informant against Anonymous might be admirable if the informant did so because their conscience required it, and the informant undertook risks in doing so; the act of conscience and cost of that action would outweigh the betrayal of friends and peers. So, for instance, someone who had participated in a group who planned to bomb abortion clinics might be admirable if they had a change of heart about killing innocent people and risked their life to break up the plot. It does not seem like either of those two factors are at play in Monsegur's case. There is, of course, a difference between finding Monsegur admirable and determining for oneself that the prosecution was or wasn't in the public interest.
smsm42 12y ago
Given that the choice is between 10 years inside (Jeremy Hammond) or more, or 7 months and going free and working with the FBI, I don't think this is much of a choice at all. Would you throw your life away for the sake of a bunch of anonymous people whose only connection to you is a common interest in breaking things? I don't know about respect, but I certainly can understand the choice.

The article tries to frame him like a noble hacker who turned to the good side but in fact he remains a backstabbing snitch. Does anyone here have respect for what he did?

dobbsbob 12y ago

His last few months as a snitch he changed his twitter pic to an islamic black standard militant flag and was openly calling for violence and 'cyber-terrorism'. Ridiculous

EpicEng 12y ago
What would you have him do; change his profile pic to a US flag while working undercover?
- serf 12y ago
  I'd have him continue his previous activities in a similar fashion to avoid the chance that his current actions are a message to important actors that he has been poisoned or is being watched in some way. everyone knows he's an actor for the state anyway, but a quick temperance change online would be a pretty big red flag for many.
  - dobbsbob 12y ago
    It was a red flag. One day he is lulzsec doing lulzy mischief, disappears and comes back inciting terrorism and giving big ups to reactionary militant islam.

dublinben 12y ago

I doubt it. He will probably never be able to find work in the tech industry again. If I were an employer, and searched his name, I would toss his resume.

dobbsbob 12y ago
It's likely he still works for the FBI and had a hand in taking down DPR. His FBI handler was in charge of that investigation, an anonymous 'agent #2' is referenced all through the complaint.

rayiner 12y ago

The "snitch" concept is not just adolescent, but harmful. There's nothing morally wrong with trying to atone for past bad actions by exposing other criminals.

pyre 12y ago
> The "snitch" concept is [...] harmful. That's the point. The idea is that one should 'fall on the grenade' to protect his criminal comrades. When he instead throws them to the wolves to save himself, people get up-in-arms about it. Though it's not all that surprising. It's sort of like whole 'honor among thieves' ideal. When you throw in with a bunch of people that are willing to 'colour outside the lines,' sometimes the lines that they cross will not just be the lines drawn in the sand by the law, but the lines that you yourself draw in the sand.
- sillysaurus3 12y ago
  The idea is that one should 'fall on the grenade' to protect his criminal comrades. When he instead throws them to the wolves to save himself, people get up-in-arms about it. I guess I'm missing some context. Whose idea was the first sentence?
  - pyre 12y ago
    If you are part of a group engaging in illegal activity, and you (specifically you, not the whole group) are caught by the authorities, you are considered a 'snitch' if you rat out your associates rather than refusing to give the authorities any information and just 'doing your time.' @codesuela called him a "snitch," which has a negative connotation (e.g. phrases like "snitches get stitches"[1][2]). [1] http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snitches+get+stitches http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snitches+get+...! [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Snitchin%27 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Snitchin%27
- rhizome 12y ago
  When he instead throws them to the wolves to save himself, people get up-in-arms about it. Well, there's a reason why it's called "defection" in the Prisoner's Dilemma.

tptacek 12y ago

Sure, it is possible not to see anything admirable in Monsegur's actions even if you think that the prosecution of the "militant" faction of Anonymous served the public interest. Becoming an informant against Anonymous might be admirable if the informant did so because their conscience required it, and the informant undertook risks in doing so; the act of conscience and cost of that action would outweigh the betrayal of friends and peers. So, for instance, someone who had participated in a group who planned to bomb abortion clinics might be admirable if they had a change of heart about killing innocent people and risked their life to break up the plot. It does not seem like either of those two factors are at play in Monsegur's case. There is, of course, a difference between finding Monsegur admirable and determining for oneself that the prosecution was or wasn't in the public interest.

smsm42 12y ago

Given that the choice is between 10 years inside (Jeremy Hammond) or more, or 7 months and going free and working with the FBI, I don't think this is much of a choice at all. Would you throw your life away for the sake of a bunch of anonymous people whose only connection to you is a common interest in breaking things? I don't know about respect, but I certainly can understand the choice.