> "Mistakenly hacks" is generally not a crime, even though this fact doesn't seem to get through to the HN audience who brings this up on a daily basis.

If you are seeing it daily, then you have also seen the responses daily, which is mens rea is required for some crimes, not all, and thus the perpetrator can still be prosecuted.

If, like you say, you see this daily, at this point you're simply spreading lies.

▲

user43928 an hour ago | parent [-]

Show me the criminal law relevant to hacking that you claim applies without intentional access.

To my knowledge there is only one provision that instead uses "knowingly" for unauthorized access, and that one is about national-security information.

▲

lelanthran an hour ago | parent [-]

> Show me the relevant criminal law that you claim applies without intentional access.

All laws apply culpability when intent is lacking.

You aren't naive enough to believe that this audience has never seen the analogy with "intentionally run over someone" (murder) and "accidentally run over someone" (culpable homicide), are you?

You don't think AI-boosters have been spewing your argument here daily?

There are no special laws carving out lack of intent when it comes to computers.

	▲	user43928 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> All laws apply culpability when intent is lacking. Incorrect. Each criminal offense has its own legal requirements. Criminally negligent homicide in your example is an independently defined offense. You would need to identify a criminal statue punishing negligent or reckless unauthorized computer access.