SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Lily Hay Newman reports at Slate that Sony is counter-hacking to keep its leaked files from spreading across torrent sites. According to Recode, Sony is using hundreds of computers in Asia to execute a denial of service attack on sites where its pilfered data is available, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter. Sony used a similar approach in the early 2000s working with an anti-piracy firm called MediaDefender, when illegal file sharing exploded. The firm populated file-sharing networks with decoy files labelled with the names of such popular movies as “Spider-Man,” to entice users to spend hours downloading an empty file. "Using counter-attacks to contain leaks and deal with malicious hackers has been gaining legitimacy," writes Newman. "Some cyber-security experts even feel that the Second Amendment can be interpreted as applying to 'cyber arms'.”
[Ed's Comment: As I understand it, the Second Amendment only applies in the United States or in its territories overseas — it doesn't give Americans the right to bear arms anywhere else in the world.]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by jmorris on Friday December 12 2014, @05:21PM
Exactly. The U.S. was truly a Revolutionary government. It's Founding Documents assert that Rights are 'self evident Truths' and that every human who has ever drawn breath possesses those Rights. Most are unlucky enough to live in unfree hellholes with oppressive States that deny some or all of those inherent Rights.
Personally I'm a bit wobbly of late on some of those founding concepts. If these Rights are so damned 'self evident' why did it take thousands of years for anybody to notice their existence? And why did the Republic they created fall into a standard issue Empire within a Century?
(Score: 2) by tathra on Friday December 12 2014, @05:59PM
because power vacuums attract sociopaths and sociopaths hate freedom for anyone but themselves. the only reason we lost our self-evident rights is because we have power-hungry fucktards actively suppressing them.
(Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Friday December 12 2014, @09:10PM
It's still taking too long for people to notice that I have the inherent right to free computers. How do I know I have such a natural right, you ask? Because I consulted the magical rights fairy, of course!
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Saturday December 13 2014, @05:33AM
You will be waiting a very long time. The American system was designed around negative rights. What the State can't do. This new 'Rights' bullcrap where people are now supposed to be entitled to other people's stuff ain't even close to being American; it is Progressive. Those ideas derive from the French and Russian revolutions and should have no place here. But of course they do.... now.
(Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday December 13 2014, @02:02PM
The American system doesn't matter. My rights are natural, inalienable rights. Sure, I can't scientifically prove that they exist, and I couldn't prove exactly what rights someone has even if I could prove that natural rights existed, but believe me, my rights are what I say they are.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday December 13 2014, @04:29AM
Indeed. The first US Revolution is sometimes criticized as not a real revolution - unlike the French, it did not aim to tear the social fabric to bits and weave it into a new and better form at the directions of the capital. In some ways it was the opposite of the French Revolution indeed. It aimed instead to reassert,to defend, to secure the traditional rights of free men under common law against a despotic colonialism.
But in its own way it was no less radical than the French Revolution, and in a way they are very similar. After a millenia during which Europe was ruled by kings of 'divine right' these two Revolutions challenged that concept openly.
The detractors may point out that the U.S has failed, from the very first, to live up to its promise. They would be correct, but still, to some degree at least, missing the point. It's better the set high standards and fail than to set your standards lower than our fail point and call that success, no?
"Personally I'm a bit wobbly of late on some of those founding concepts. If these Rights are so damned 'self evident' why did it take thousands of years for anybody to notice their existence?"
The concept of morality itself occupies a rather rarified 'altitude' on the scale of abstractions. It's not surprising that it should take time to arise, and more time to become generally acknowledged. It's not surprising that acceptance of it should have crests and troughs. It's not surprising that brute will-to-power should leave us only very slowly, kicking and screaming, then playing dead before exploding into resistance again.
Unfortunate, but not surprising.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?