[hackerspaces] revspace and randomdata in the news re wikileaks ddos story

[Matt Joyce]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nation-shudders-at-large-block-of-uninterrupted-te,16932/

/troll

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Matthew McCabe <matt at mrmccabe.com> wrote:

> http://thoreau.eserver.org/civil1.html
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Matt Joyce <matt at nycresistor.com> wrote:
> > Law is societal ethics.
> >
> > If you breach law, you breach ethics as defined not by you, but the
> society
> > you are a part of.
> >
> > Breaking the law is unethical.
> >
> > QED
> >
> > /troll
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Yves Quemener <quemener.yves at free.fr>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Why do you equal disobedience with violence and revolt ?
> >>
> >> > Until you have rendered the application of law a functional
> >> > impossibility, all that you are is either a worthless protestor or a
> >> > criminal.
> >>
> >> That I can agree on, but in democracies, retorting to violence and
> >> secession is not the only mean to achieve that. Retorting to numbers is
> >> the
> >> other way. If millions refuse to respect a law, it is likely to change.
> If
> >> millions support one person that broke a law, it is likely to change.
> >>
> >> If we say "keeping websites like wikileaks online is worth breaking some
> >> bad laws" it is a political message that will have a strong impact on
> >> policies if millions support it.
> >>
> >> But you are right on something : I am personally too coward to go break
> >> laws and risk jail time. I prefer to pursue the slower but safer legal
> way
> >> of developing software that can help. However, I see no contradiction in
> >> supporting publicly the persons that have the guts to stand up.
> >>
> >> When a journalist or a human rights activist is arrested in an
> >> authoritarian country, we have no problem supporting this person even
> when
> >> it means supporting a "criminal" by local standards. Why can't we accept
> >> that there might be similarly bad laws progressively coming in our
> >> democracies and that peoplke breaking them might be ethical ?
> >>
> >> On 12/11/2010 01:13 AM, Matt Joyce wrote:
> >> > To the "revolutionaries" and "activists" of the world.   If you are
> >> > going
> >> > to revolt... bloody revolt already.  Stop threatening to do it and
> just
> >> > get
> >> > it over with already.
> >> >
> >> > Standing around with a sign, and ddosing mastercard is not a revolt.
>  A
> >> > revolt is a group of guys with assault weapons siezing territory and
> >> > shooting otherwise would be authority figures.  Unless you are willing
> >> > to
> >> > go kill people, and probably yourself in the process.... by all means
> >> > stop
> >> > pretending anything done is somehow analogous to revolt.
> >> >
> >> > It's not.  Until you have rendered the application of law a functional
> >> > impossibility, all that you are is either a worthless protestor or a
> >> > criminal.  That's reality.  Cold and hard.
> >> >
> >> > Sorry if you delusional belief in your revolutionary hat is challenged
> >> > by that.
> >> >
> >> > /troll
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20101211/eb1d2de2/attachment-0001.htm>