Someone mentioned prosecuting Quinn...
*begin non-circlemud-related rant*
Well, if the guy is hacking ISPs or server machines that the MUDs are
located on just because the Implementor of the MUD catches him and is able
to stop him, and keep the mud up and running, then I agree, he's a
malicious little bastard and should be prosecuted if he's actually
damaging the ISPs in some way.
BUT!!!! a BIG but here!
You gotta realize something. The people out there that know one form of
code or another to the guru extent often refer to themselves as "hackers",
and to me, that's what a true "hacker" is. They can "hack" code. A
"hacker" does not destroy things, they simply find things out, they're
curious, and they're good at what they do. Yes, many of them _could_
damage things if they wanted to, but very few do, and if they do, I
personally no longer classify them as a "hacker" but a "computer vandal"
(as in, he vandalizes computers that aren't his own).
The big But here is this... If you prosecute him, and anyone in the media
hears about it... Well, I think all of us open-minded people realize that
the Media sometimes portrays "stereotypes" too harshly, and in many cases,
as in the case of the hacker stereotype, the media actually _created_
those stereotypes. So, if you prosecute this guy, and someone mentions the
term "Hacker", and someone hears this, then the stereotype of what a
"hacker" is will continue to be "criminal". The only way to stop this is
to prosecute "computer vandals" as just that, "computer vandals", or
"criminals", and to never, ever, not even so much as _once_ mention the
word "hacker".
*end non-circlemud-related rant*
Just my opinions, we now return you to your regularly spammy mailing list
:)
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST