|
jark
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 8:27 PM
while i understand his message, personally, i think he went about the protest in the wrong manner. either way, i wish him the best of luck in his legal troubles. |
|
richieZ
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 8:28 PM
'pimpshiz', that's kinda a cool name... |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 8:35 PM
Richie, one of the questions the FBI had for Pimpshiz was, "What does your name mean?"
I'm guess they might have thought he "pimped shit." (Like he stole stuff and sold it.)
Anyway, Pimpshiz said it meant nothing and a friend gave him the name.
~Heidi |
|
richieZ
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 8:44 PM
hehehehehehehehe |
|
smelv1n
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 8:46 PM
What is he being charged for? What is the maximum punishment for it? I just wanna know if there's actual laws for defacing websites.
Good luck pimpshiz |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 8:47 PM
I couldn't agree more.
~Heidi |
|
attila
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 8:59 PM
I wish Pimpshiz the very best. I've known him in the past from my time in the America Online scene. My handle used to be Tekno - if that means anything to you, heh. Anyways, I believe website defacements are a good way to get your point accross, but eventually, the defacer has to come to grips with the facts. For one, if you're smart enough to be able to manipulate a server to deface it, then you should be smart enough to know you'll get caught. Everyone I've known to deface websites have had run-ins with the law in some form or another.
Well, Pimpshiz can now be added to my list of compadres who have let their knowledge of computers lead them down the wrong path. Although his message might have been good, his actions certainly were not. A few months ago I might have been all for it, but now that I've grown, it just doesn't seem worth it. Blah, my eyes are bloodshot. |
|
Chad
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 9:01 PM
It is breaking into a computer system that is the crime. |
|
Chad
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 9:02 PM
Owch....
I just wonder if he will get a fair shake in the justice system unlike some people who get into trouble for computer crimes. |
|
Poet
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 9:52 PM
Like Tekno, I've known Pimpshiz for a loong time. Unlike Tekno, I know a little more about what he did and why. He wasn't doing the defacements to protest anything, he was looking for a reason to deface sites with a "new exploit" he had discovered. In fact, he never even used Napster, nor knew anything about it except what he had read on popular sites. I love Pimp like a brother, but he did something stupid and without a reason but to be famous. He claimed that wasn't the case, yet right after the defacements, he joined the Observers.Net staff and tried to get himself seen publicly. Just another ex-AOL user who was busted due to lack of brainstorming. Let it be a lesson. |
|
nockilla
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 10:08 PM
Ok, the internet is a free place right? What kind of bs charges can they bring on a person for displaying his first amendment right at a free place. What is this country coming. Al I can say is Viva La Revolution! |
|
doobybrain
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 10:22 PM
yeah, i dont think defacing other people's creations is ever a good way to do anything.
[doobybrain] |
|
doobybrain
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 10:27 PM
pimpshiz should have known to not deface other people's property. especially with his knowledge of computers.
[doobybrain] |
|
attila
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 10:38 PM
Uhm, are you serious? You didn't know that defacing a website was a federal crime? A persons website isn't a free place. If you had one, would you want someone in your computer system, disrupting your service, causing you to lose money, credibility and status? |
|
attila
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 10:42 PM
I think Pimpshiz will get what he deserves. A federal crime deserves appropriate measures, don't you agree? If it's his first offense, he'll probably get off with a fine and probation. If it's not his first, he'll definately have to do time. |
|
attila
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 10:45 PM
Yea, it's like graffiti. The message gets out their to a large population, but the end result is just destruction. |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 11:07 PM
attila, I agree with you when you say, "Are you serious?" Could you imagine if there was no punishment and everyone went around defacing each other's sites? Crazy.
~Heidi |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 11:11 PM
Do you still think he'll just get a fine and probation after he did it to 200+ sites? That's a lot of disruption.
~Heidi |
|
attila
|
Date: January 14, 2001 @ 11:59 PM
Well, if he had access to a server that hosted multiple domains, then from what I remember about the current statutes, that counts as a singular "attack." It's up to the judge and the state laws mostly. |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 12:45 AM
dee,
I know you are a lover of DMusic ... so how would you feel if someone hacked this site and put up some "DMusic sucks" crap. I don't think you'd like it. Just my two cents.
~Heidi |
|
rob_n
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 3:27 AM
uhh yeah i knew him too from my day[z] in the aol hood yo. We go way back yo uh huh we like brotha to brotha ya know what i'm sayin home boy. Give me a fuckin break. This kid is stupid and he's going to get a slap on the wrist if that. The young offenders act in the usa if it's anything like the one in canada will let him go no problem. Kids under the age of 18 can apparently do no wrong. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 7:03 AM
Scary... |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 7:24 AM
He says he is protecting the artists who wrote the songs. What about the artists who wrote the sites? |
|
premise
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 8:02 AM
I think what he did was a GREAT USE of his leet skillz =) Now if only more 'hackers' would do what he did instead of posting pics of porn and shoutz to their hommies... |
|
xqwert
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 8:23 AM
Nockilla, you are probably some teenage brat that has no idea what the real world is like. You think you know everything, but trust me, you don't. There is no difference between vandalizing bits & bytes or vandalizing a tangible asset.
Many museums are free, or have a minimal donation to enter. Is it a first amendment right to destroy art work or artifacts in a free museum?
Grow up. |
|
doobybrain
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 9:53 AM
i think the FBI comes in on these site creakins because they are a bit more serious and they require a lot more work to find out who did it.
as for grafiti and buildings, its fairly simple to do and the cops can crack down on it much easier just by going undercover at night or whatever. i've seen it happen.
[doobybrain] |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 9:54 AM
depends on who's site it was and how much money they have.
OJ anyone ¿? |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 9:58 AM
unless other countries are going after him its considerably les that 200 right ¿? |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 11:28 AM
Great comment! Isn't it the same thing?
~Heidi |
|
milladrive
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 11:42 AM
Dee, this is quite possibly the most outta line thing you've ever said. This MAY even beat the jungle bunny comments. ;)
Nothing is unhackable. Nothing.
What makes you think it's okay ta deface buildings and spraypaint walls? It's not. Vandalism is really wrong. The main reasons why local graffiti's not a federal crime is because it's unsually not commetted on federal turf. The internet is federal and then some. Besides, most federal lawmakers have never been vulnerable ta graffiti, so the laws are not as tuff as they really should be. The doobster's also correct when he says it takes technology usually available to only a federal police force. |
|
milladrive
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 11:45 AM
Good point. |
|
Gebedeen
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 12:03 PM
It blows me away that people think that Hacking someone else's site isn't wrong.. or that defacing someone's site or space isn't wrong. If i came to your house, spraypainted the same thing he put up on the sites on your garage doors or on your walls think i could say it was freedom of speech or expression?? |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 12:44 PM
There you see what happens when someone eats too much of Simon's propaganda! As to you Simon, you know who I am, come and get me! |
|
Chad
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 12:55 PM
Yes, I agree.. a federal crime deserves a timely and fair trial, thats what I'm asking.
Kevin Mitnick or whatever was imprisoned for like 3 years without having a trial...and that.. is illegal. |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 2:29 PM
I find that really interesting.
~Heidi |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 6:28 PM
i belive he is right. the music industry records music for us to listen to even makes blank tapes and cd's for us to record these songs the slams everyone because they are not making any money on people sharing the songs. music was ment to be free.
|
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 15, 2001 @ 9:52 PM
Maybe he is right, but he could have found a better way to express himself.
~Heidi |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 16, 2001 @ 8:09 AM
Darn right Chad
and now he has to live under some impossible standards.
BS |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: January 16, 2001 @ 8:54 AM
what was this guy thinking? coule he come up with no better way to get his message across? |
|
babyraven
|
Date: January 16, 2001 @ 10:23 AM
Well, while I support what he was trying to say, when you knowingly break the law, you should just as knowingly pay the consequences.
I know if I spent thousands of dollars and invested tons of time into a website, only to have it hacked, I'd be pissed, regardless of whether it was hacked by someone trying to make a political statement or not. |
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 16, 2001 @ 2:59 PM
I feel the same way.
~Heidi |
|
citizenjohn
|
Date: January 17, 2001 @ 12:15 PM
Jark
Totaly agree with you
John |
|
Hockey3712
|
Date: January 17, 2001 @ 9:00 PM
I just hope no one hacks this PHAT site!
|
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 17, 2001 @ 9:32 PM
Hehe, I hope that was not sarcasm. Cause then I would have to beat you. j/k.
~Heidi |
|
milladrive
|
Date: January 18, 2001 @ 8:23 AM
"…how come tis ok to deface buildings and spraypaint walls…"
How many times should I read it? |
|
a_3_Headed_M...
|
Date: January 18, 2001 @ 8:19 PM
His Message was right, but hacking other people's sites was wrong. Especially if it results in a loss of income.
The law coming after him is right, but the FBI is overkill.
Also, since when does FBI have world jurisdiction.....on second thoughts, if they think they do - they probably do.
|
|
Heidi
|
Date: January 20, 2001 @ 4:37 PM
The FBI doesn't have world jurisdiction:
"Pimpshiz did indeed "work on" over 200 sites for his pro-Napster cause, yet many of those sites were out of the United States. Which means they are out of the jurisdiction of the FBI."
~Heidi
|
|
Navigation
