| ▲ | cucumber3732842 5 hours ago |
| >criminals >law >legally You keep using these words but it causes circular logic as those are all defined by the same entity that is acting unilaterally. The action the government took was not a "good" action by any moral standard. But it was perhaps the least worse action available all things considered. Can't just whisk people off the street in a foreign country or drone them over such matters, those options would be worse. |
|
| ▲ | oytis 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Running a ransomware gang is immoral. Catching someone running a ransomware gang is good. If publishing their name helps catch them, it's also good. Not sure where do you see the gap between legality and morality in this case |
| |
| ▲ | flipped 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | People often forget that Threat Actors (TA) are the ones keeping the infosec alive. They are doing a good job of scaring people into implementing actual security protocols and thereby improving everyone's security posture. The whole infosec would collapse without TAs, let's not forget that. They create jobs. | | |
| ▲ | seanhunter 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is the “Broken Window” fallacy[1] which was explained by Bastiat. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window | | |
| ▲ | flipped 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't fucking care about made up terms. If you can't see the actual economic growth (not some vague, theoretical fallacy) they create, you're just another moron in denial. | | |
| ▲ | jojomodding 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The wildfire industry brings growth but it would be a whole lot better if we didn't have wildfires. The same thing is true with computers. Imagine all the nice things we could have if we didn't have to worry about people abusing the systems we build. | | |
| ▲ | oytis 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Well, to be honest, those old enough remember when cryptography was considered someting for the military and special services, and considering using encryption would put you under immediate suspicion. Now we can at least argue we need it to protect us from the cyber crime, even if we really have privacy and free speech in mind |
| |
| ▲ | Yokohiii 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If economic growth at all cost is the solution, then you are wasting your time giving your fiction away for free. |
|
| |
| ▲ | oytis 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's right. They also create jobs for police though, and now German police is doing theirs | | |
| ▲ | flipped 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | German govt is also one of the most corrupt and vastly incompetent govt. It's run by bunch of boomers. Most of the prolific ransomware gangs have terrible opsec. De-anon'ing them is child's play. Most of the opsec-aware TAs never even get attributed, let alone get caught for any breaches. | | |
| ▲ | jojomodding 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > One of the most corrupt It's on like place 10 out of 180, which makes it one of the least corrupt places. It also has some surprisingly non-boomer departments, like the Sovereign Tech Fund. Either way you need to celebrate police doing good things and immoral actors being exposed, it can only have good outcomes. Perhaps it deters them, or deters the next generation of such hackers. Or at least it makes their life less enjoyable, which is fair since they were only able to afford their travels due to their illicitly acquired wealth. | | |
| ▲ | oytis an hour ago | parent [-] | | > surprisingly non-boomer departments, like the Sovereign Tech Fund The one that has just invested in Scala? In year 2026? There are many good things about Germany, but competence in tech is not one of them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | Yokohiii 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > You keep using these words but it causes circular logic as those are all defined by the same entity that is acting unilaterally. It's not, in Germany we have separation of powers. > The action the government took was not a "good" action by any moral standard. Morals aren't binary. Morals have context. |
|
| ▲ | zaphar 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Is it your position that privacy is a right regardless of any action you take? Many rights are dependent on circumstance and in tension with other rights. In this case I think you can make the case that their right to privacy is lost. |
