New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Raided for running a Tor exit - Accepting donations for legal expenses
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Really. Why? Do you honestly think nobody can track your IP and find out where you have been and what you did? In this day and age? Tell that to all those victims of identity theft, leaked databases, NSA surveillance and all. You are a victim too, one day someone will come with some embarrassing things, not even illegal, and will force you to do something. It is all in the emails, facebook, your cat picture pages, just crack one of those and follow the IP, will lead to many places you have been, so everything can be traced to you, even if the ISP will not cooperate in giving your data which is extremely unlikely.
So where is @William now, and where will he be after this is "resolved"? Prison?
I'm sure lots of people can, there's no reason I should be able to shirk responsibility for my actions
Force me to do what, feel embarrassed for things I've actually done? So? I don't have an innate right to not shoulder responsibility for things I do
He was never in prison nor will he be. They had no case in linking him with the criminals, all they had was the Tor node IP address. As such, in order to prove they spent hundreds of thousands for a good end, they nailed him with an overbroad law which makes anything you do illegal. If they put him in prison, the outcry would have been too big and the case destroyed on appeal as well as maybe the law revised, they couldnt risk that, but can use it as a scare for the public.
All he got was 3 years probation, which probably only means he can't run another exit in that time or commit any crimes.
WHAT A HARSH AND UNJUST SENTENCE
William intentionally did things like 'no logging' because he wanted to set a legal precedent, and furthermore spending lots of time/money on the investigation by police netted him only 3 years probation instead of an easier investigation which would have led to decades in prison
No it doesn't, try and dial back the crazies for your own sake, regardless of what narrative you're trying to push
There should have been no other decision that to leave him alone as soon as they found out it was not him. If you got sentenced 3 years on probation for running a restaurant where some suspect ate as you knew that anyone can eat there and as such you were an accessory to whatever crimes he was suspected of, you would not think it was a light sentence. You would also be considered in the same boat because you took cash KNOWING that can hide the identity of the customer instead of going with the card as most other people would do.
The chain that binds us all begins when the first link is forged, and we are waaaay past that. Some people seem to like that, but many others are not into bondage.
Who taught you analogies, because I think they messed up
All I got to say is good! He's just as guilty as the people sharing child porn are. What do you expect a Tor exit node to be used for that's legal?
This crazy thing called internet freedom.
Criminal negligence isn't some wildly new concept in the legal system, and neither is aiding and abetting (which 'not logging' definitely falls under)
Fixed that.
You work for an unnamed "large hosting company". Therefore you KNOW your services can be used for illegal purposes. Thus, you should be responsible for the legal consequences for such association.
I know several people who've broken the law. I knew a couple carders. I know a dude in jail for TDDoS against the CIS. I know a dude who smokes pot every day. I know a dude who's tried to push weed seeds to me across the pacific ocean, knowing full well australian and american customs would search the package. Should I be held responsible for their actions?
Why not? If you bought them and your address is on the package.
I guess "tried to push" isn't the best language. It'd more accurately be told as "He offered to give them to me for free."
And prove the purchase how exactly? I can set someone up knowing their address, and certainly the police knows many people which can send drugs in the mail and then pick you up when you check your mail. You can also buy it with bitcoin or other currency like that, BTW, when are we arresting bitcoin miners because they aid peple maintain their anonimity when buying stuff? They know full well the purpose of a currency therefore cannot say they did not foresee nefarious usage, they also dont keep logs so it is criminal negligence. Also the governments that print money, cash is used for illegal transactions, after all, why would anyone use cash these days unless they want to hide something.
Soon, hopefully!
You should take another break tbh.
Points at http://www.reddit.com/r/darknetmarkets
You are losing sight of the purpose of justice and law enforcement.
They must benefit the citizen (society). There is no such benefit if the criminal is not punished, but the system which allowed him to protect his rights. Until convicted in a court of law, everyone is presumed innocent, so, even the criminals have rights until that moment, therefore the police cannot condemn someone and then taking that as a base rule out their rights and start digging for evidence to support the decision. It is like the police punishing the lawyer.
This thread steered off-topic really quick...
Privacy! Who needs it! You're not hiding anything right @texteditor? Should we assume the people who think privacy matters are criminals, and put them away for life? Bah!
Whoa. Texteditor, you aren't getting it, and well, you really don't seem to understand what anyone is talking about here. The point is that the HOST does not violate the laws, his CUSTOMER does. Not keeping logs is ensuring customer privacy, most certainly not aiding and abetting, no matter how sickening the crime. It's just a policy, which he should be free to pursue or not pursue as he sees fit.
Is this the same case?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7976267
Yes
Feel free to flag my posts and ask mods to ban me. I am certainly not afraid of you or any mod/admin as well as banning, never was.
it wasn't a damn threat, he meant for your own mental well-being, yours posts keep devolving further into word-salad
You can't even keep your capitalization and punctuation straight. Who're you to be talking?
This thread...
I think it needs to be closed.
The only "other" break I took was when Joel banned me because of the BuyVM issues. He specifically said "another" break and he was one of those "me too" people that attacked me then, therefore it should be assumed he means another ban.
He is not a mod or admin here and this does not impress me a bit, and it would have been the same if he was, the most anyone can do is to ban me and I do not really care about that. Besides, who are you to interpret his posts for me?
As for the people concerned about my mental health, this is one of the approach of the police states, the prosperity and freedom are obvious for everyone, whoever says the contrary is either an enemy or insane, they must be locked out for the good of the "people" and their own.
That's the problem with freedom of speech and anonymity
Many people can say what they think without fear of consequences. Once we manage to eradicate this privacy and block any possibility of remaining anonymous, things will improve dramatically. There will be nobody spreading dangerous ideas (at least not with impunity), blasphemy, destroy the reputation of our leaders, try to lure people away from the righteous path, poison the mind of our kids with ideas about freedom of choice, democracy, worship of the evil, equality, justice, human rights and civil liberties.