“SiegedSec account suspended,” vio wrote. “this current account will be used as a backup until a new one is set up :3.”
The entire article is worth reading for once.
“SiegedSec account suspended,” vio wrote. “this current account will be used as a backup until a new one is set up :3.”
The entire article is worth reading for once.
Gay furries hacking right-wing think tanks. What a world to live in. Maybe this is what left-wing hackers should be doing? Not hacking poor saps downloading torrents, but right-wingers and their unthink tanks.
What? A good chunk of hackers are left-wing and go after authoritarian or repressive targets. I have no idea what you’re referring to unless you’re talking about the recent Korean ISP story which is so far off from your categorization.
The other option is Poe’s Law.
What are you not understanding?
Wanna back that up with something?
The very existence of Anonymous, pretty much the most notorious hacker group? Could you name one instance of a left-wing hack of torrenters?
I was expecting stats, but OK. So North Korean, Israeli hackers, NSA, Chinese state hackers, and bunch more are all left-wing too?
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/23662381
Now you’re moving the goalposts. You’re saying left-wing hackers need to go after something other than torrents but you haven’t even show that happens yet. You don’t understand your linked story if you think that applies.
I think stats-wise, less than 10% of those convicted under the CFAA are right-wing. I don’t consider state actors to fall under the category of “hackers;” that’s probably a personal bias. I would want you to categorize those states as left or right and then provide stats since that’s your thing and you brought them in. You’ll also need to define where hacks for clout or cash land, since that’s a huge percentage of CFAA convictions.
Which goalposts am i moving?
Again, no proof. Just a claim. I can think anything I like. Also that stat could also just prove that non right-wing hackers get caught more often or are worse at opsec.
So the NSA doesn’t have “hackers”? What are they then?
How are people hired by a state always aligned with that state’s ideology, assuming that these examples are even left-wing in the first place? How is that MalwareTech guy’s botnet for personal gain spread through torrenters, which are indeed an easy vector, a left-wing hack?
The literal post you are commenting on
So these gay furry hackers are “a good chunk” of hackers? Thanks for that scientific insight. Got any more of those? A “good chunk” of immigrants are rapists and killers ergo that makes it a majority?
You really don’t know the landscape, do you? Gay or furry hackers do, in fact, make up a significant number of security professionals. There are a ton of in-jokes about exactly this. There are several gay, furry hacking groups active at the moment, probably representing a large percentage of active groups outside of nation state APTs.
It’s an unsubstantiated claim that I’d like evidence for. Bring me a study that used proper methods to gather its data and I’ll believe it. Simply saying “in my experience” means next to nothing. What if I spent my time in a group of right wing hackers and that’s all I knew? It would be my word against yours.
This is exactly how misinformation spreads: blindy believing what some person tells you online. I’m willing to accept that most hackers are gay furries. I would be elated even. But I’m not going to just go “oh wow, thesmokingman said so, so it must be true”.
I’ve already provided you CFAA prosecutions and security professionals, both of which you can go find data on yourself. What more do you want? A third population? You want me to go link you all the data? Do I need to chew your food for you too? Every single time I provide an answer you move the goalposts further and further.
You made the unsubstantiated claim that started this thread and you are continuing to make claims that you yourself have provided no data for. I’m still waiting for you to provide real examples of left-wing hackers focusing on torrents as a vector like your original comment.
You have no idea what you’re talking about and you constantly double down. Have fun with that.
OK. So you can’t provide any data. Noted.
Bring ME one. You made the claim. You should prove it.
Quote which claim I made.
Well you made the initial assumption, so you have to provide data to back that up.