Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

LulzSec's Raynaldo Rivera, a.k.a. 'neuron,' Gets One-Year Prison Term

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the finally-caught-up-to-him dept.

The Courts 105

hypnosec writes "Raynaldo Rivera, who went by the online moniker 'neuron', has been sentenced to a one-year prison term, 13 months of home detention, 1,000 hours of community service and has been ordered to pay over $600,000 in restitution. Rivera pleaded guilty in October 2012 to charges of conspiring to cause damage to a protected computer after participating in the attack on Sony Pictures in 2011. The court documents note that the main motive of the Lulzsec hacking collective, and offshoot of Anonymous, during its two-month hacking rampage and attacks on corporate and government entities like the Sony Pictures, was to see the 'raw, uninterrupted, chaotic thrill of entertainment and anarchy.'"

cancel ×

105 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

so... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44519897)

ordered to pay over $600,000 in restitution

So, after all the rest of this stuff is over with, how does
anyone seriously expect him to pay this? Or is this just another
one of those "utterly destroy his life to make an example out
of him" scenarios?

Re:so... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44519953)

Or is this just another one of those "utterly destroy his life to make an example out of him" scenarios?

Yes, pretty much.

On one hand, this is Sony here, a colossal bunch of assholes.

On the other hand, that doesn't mean you get to be online jerks. It may be worth the effort to show the little douchebags that the lulz are on them.

Re:so... (-1, Offtopic)

Jockle (2934767) | about a year ago | (#44519989)

As everyone here knows, I have a rancid as fuck asshole. I'm sure everyone here also knows that Slashdotters always possess rancid assholes. Now, I've been thinking... isn't it a bit lonely that our rancid assholes can't talk amongst themselves? I've already used my fetid cock to smooch everyone's bowels, but what if I could shove my disgusting asshole into your foul assholes? Impossible, right? Wrong! With an anal prolapse, the impossible becomes possible! I can penetrate your repugnant assholes with my rancid asshole and they can party down together! It's a feces fiesta! What say you?

Re:so... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#44520047)

You fucked up. [slashdot.org]

Re:so... (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#44520627)

Meh. Since late July all of his homophobic comments have been logged to his account. It's clear he doesn't give a feck any more. Although if you search /. for the phrase "rancid asshole" you get dozens of hits... Btdubs, eww gross!

How much did Sony have to pay (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520239)

For their rootkit?

Re:How much did Sony have to pay (2)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | about a year ago | (#44520807)

I think I get your point, but Sony paid somewhere around 5.75 million it looks like. The interesting thing you'll note from the article is that if you have enough money you can pay a state to stop its investigation into your case.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/sony-rootkit-settlement-states-reaches-575m-558 [infoworld.com]

In the ballpark of 5.75 million (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520819)

First search result for me on Sony Rootkit Settlement [pcworld.com]

I don't think that figure include the loss of goodwill, only the cost of paying off the states, replacing people's CDs, etc.

Re:How much did Sony have to pay (2)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about a year ago | (#44521087)

Is Sony a powerless individual? Yeah, I'm still really angry about that too. Companies should not be able to get away with crimes when an individual would be severely punished for the same crime.

Re:How much did Sony have to pay (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522443)

Yeah, Sony rooted thousands, or millions, of computers. Did they spend a year in jail, and get 13 months home confinement, and get ordered to do community service? ANY of their employees who were responsible for this? No?

But a guy who took some revenge on them for their actions gets put in the slammer. Justice? Er, no.

Re:so... (5, Interesting)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44521159)

It may be worth the effort to show the little douchebags that the lulz are on them.

Not so many years ago I would have agreed with you. After the financial crisis, and the government bending over backwards to ignore criminal behavior, or worse rewarding the criminals with our money, I no longer feel that way. The whole idea of justice is a joke, especially in financial crimes (and what 'neuron' did is strictly financial damage). I don't defend anything he did, but until people in the financial sector pay a proportional penalty, or any penalty, it's not justice. I'd be just as happy if he got away with it.

Nor am I some sort of kid indulging in a nihilistic "it's all rigged" rant. For many years I had more faith in the "system", knowing full well it was far from perfect. I've reached the point where I no longer believe that, and it's more because the system has changed than because I have. Search on almost anything written by William K. Black. He's been there and done that. He was a mucky muck in the OCC (one of our numerous bank regulating agencies) when the S&L crisis hit. He was instrumental in getting over 1000 criminal convictions, and establishing the case law for control fraud, in a scandal that was a pittance compared to the recent financial crisis. He knows what control fraud looks like, and that's what the financial crisis was in spades.

Re:so... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44524415)

It happens after the Zionist puppet Obama entered the White House.

Re:so... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44519985)

I'd lock him up throw away the key, but then again I'm not an anarchist.

Re:so... (2)

space_jake (687452) | about a year ago | (#44519991)

Identity theft obviously...

Re:so... (-1, Offtopic)

Jockle (2934767) | about a year ago | (#44520023)

Your asshole is the most rancid asshole in Rancidville! My fetid cock wants to party down in your foul asshole! I can't hold anymore! It's time for the feces fiesta of the decade! My tadpoles will swim all over your feces as they please like corn on peas! What say you?

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521469)

Would someone please mod this disgusting troll down more? 0 isn't low enough. better yet, put a bullet in his fucking brain.

Do you REALLY want to shoot him in the ass? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522831)

Even bullets have places they don't want to go...

Re:so... (2)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#44520037)

That's exactly what this is.

Re:so... (1)

RevWaldo (1186281) | about a year ago | (#44520063)

Kickstarter?

.

Re:so... (2)

SirGarlon (845873) | about a year ago | (#44520223)

Expecting him to pay is not the only reason to order $600K in damages. For example, Sony may gain some kind of financial advantage (tax or similar) from being able to say they have a $600K uncollectable debt instead of $600K in unplanned IT expenses. (I Am Not an Accountant)

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521403)

Well, what's the alternative?

As I see it, this is restitution for damages, not punishment. Despite everything said, $600,000 is not the end of the world, although it may seem so at the moment. So suppose the restitution is limited to a small amount, say $10,000. This forces the damaged party (who may or may not have deep pockets) to eat the rest of the damage, even in the event that he makes huge amounts of money in the future (writing a book about lulz or anonymous, perhaps).

To me, the court results seem fair. From what I've seen, he did this just for the kicks and to be malicious. Just like someone who goes out and tp's or eggs a house, he has to clean up the mess when he gets caught. Bigger damage, bigger restitution.

Re:so... (1)

Cederic (9623) | about a year ago | (#44523923)

After nearly 20 years of employment $600k is not double my net worth. It's pretty fucking close though.

You want to spend half your working life making up for a couple of months of silliness?

Give me a $600k fine and I start paying it in blood. I refuse to accept indentured servitude.

Re:so... (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about a year ago | (#44521459)

So, after all the rest of this stuff is over with, how does anyone seriously expect him to pay this? Or is this just another one of those "utterly destroy his life to make an example out of him" scenarios?

If he caused $600,000 worth of damage, didn't he destroy his life himself?

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44526153)

He must have been an impressive man to cause exactly $600,000 worth of damage. Precisely to the penny. Damn.

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521863)

Even worse, once he's unable to pay, they'll throw him back in prison and tack on even more fines.

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522167)

Not true.

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522311)

I doubt they really expect he'll ever pay it. The judge just did it for the lulz.

Re:so... (2)

Colin Castro (2881349) | about a year ago | (#44522365)

He can declare bankruptcy and not have to pay this.

who'z (-1, Offtopic)

csumpi (2258986) | about a year ago | (#44519951)

lulz'n now?

Lights Out (0)

sycodon (149926) | about a year ago | (#44520547)

was to see the 'raw, uninterrupted, chaotic thrill of entertainment and anarchy.'"

I suspect he will see that in spades when the warden announces Lights Out.

Re:Lights Out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521071)

Anarchy means "no rulers", not "no rules".

Re:Lights Out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522133)

Instead of John Romero, it seems that Bubba or Tyrone will make him their bitch! Sucking it down, indeed.

Sure, in this case (2)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#44520007)

In this particular case, I can't particularly complain. Even without computer-specific laws, I'd consider this to be criminal mischief. Truly stunning though when compared to Aaron Swartz's situation...

Re:Sure, in this case (-1, Troll)

Jockle (2934767) | about a year ago | (#44520051)

Wow! What do you have here? A rancid Bayer aspirin hole, that's what! What is this rancid underhole doing? It's begging me to shove my fetid cock right into it and smooch the deepest reaches of your bowels with said cock! Wow, what a foul asshole you have, and it's even filled with treat-treats for my cock! Let's get our feces on and start this party! What say you?

$600,000 (2)

pr0nbot (313417) | about a year ago | (#44520109)

$600,000 is basically a sentence to a life of slavery isn't it? I don't know how much he could reasonably expect to pay back in a year; presumably even less than otherwise given a criminal record. $5K? $10K? But I suppose if that's the assessment of the damage he caused, how he's going to pay it back is immaterial.

How do these kinds of damages even work? No one's going to loan him that kind of money, so presumably the damaged party is going to have to collect over a period of decades?

Re:$600,000 (3, Informative)

nonsequitor (893813) | about a year ago | (#44520153)

Unlike student loans, this debt can be cancelled out by declaring bankruptcy. He will lose everything he has first though, assuming he doesn't have assets valued at $600k

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520321)

And honestly if you have a felony you might as well have bankruptcy as well. Its not like anyone will hire you or give you a loan anyways.

Re:$600,000 (3, Informative)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44520735)

Restitution in criminal cases is not dischargable by bankruptcy.

So basically he's a slave until the restitution is made.

http://coloradobankruptcyguide.com/940/can-i-get-rid-of-my-criminal-restitution-obligation-in-bankruptcy/ [coloradoba...yguide.com]

Re:$600,000 (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#44521245)

"Slave" is a bit hyperbolic. He can still work a 40 hour work week, he will still have his own home / transportation, and he will still have a quality of life that is pretty decent compared to the vast majority of the world.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521643)

That is entirely dependent on how much they chose to take. He does not get to chose how much he pays. Like in divorce cases with children involved, it is quite possible for the courts to determine that taking 90% of 30k a year is an appropriate thing to do based solely on what the other party wants.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521901)

"Slave" is a bit hyperbolic. He can still work a 40 hour work week, he will still have his own home / transportation, and he will still have a quality of life that is pretty decent compared to the vast majority of the world.

Some slaves in ancient Rome had a very high quality of life too. What matters is if he's required to work for someone else without his consent.

Re:$600,000 (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#44522231)

There is no law that I am aware of which would allow the state to force you to work for a particular employee.

Some slaves in ancient Rome had a very high quality of life too.

WHat makes slavery slavery, is that you dont have autonomy. Having a debt like this does not remove your ability to travel, to change employees, or to make your own life decisions; it just restricts your finances.

Re:$600,000 (1)

theArtificial (613980) | about a year ago | (#44523327)

If you work for someone, they're considered an employer. Someone who works for an employer is an employee.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44524559)

There is no law that I am aware of which would allow the state to force you to work for a particular employee.

Some slaves in ancient Rome had a very high quality of life too.

WHat makes slavery slavery, is that you dont have autonomy. Having a debt like this does not remove your ability to travel, to change employees, or to make your own life decisions; it just restricts your finances.

What makes slavery slavery is that you're forced to work for a specific master without your consent. In this case Raynaldo's master is Sony, and having some token choices about how exactly he will serve them doesn't change what it is. Those ancient Roman slaves were often given a great deal of day-to-day "autonomy" as well, but it ultimately came down to another person owning their labor.

If Raynaldo wants to feed himself or provide for his family, he'll have to work extra on Sony's behalf. This is merely a shadow of freedom, an illusion so that people like you will deny what has happened.

Re:$600,000 (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#44524919)

He does not have to serve sony, he merely has a debt to them. If you are defining the word "slave" to include "has debt", then you are using a definition I have never heard before and which seems to be pretty counterintuitive. Raynaldo caused financial damage to Sony, and while we can argue over the amount of damage and the proper amount of restitution, there is no doubt that in a just society his judgement would include financial restitution.

Slavery specifically refers to being beholden to a specific master, which is a far broader term than "creditor". As I said, Raynaldo can still make any number of life choices, including deciding not to work; that in itself makes this clearly "not slavery".

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44526173)

Fuck your definitions and fuck you, cunt. Slavery is when any authoritarian entity restricts your actions. I don't give a fuck about your asshole unfair employee-employer relationships or your fucking laws either you fucking cocksucking asshole piece of shit. Stick it up your fucking ass and choke on it! Scumbag fuck

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44526325)

Intelligent people give reasoned responses. Vitriol like the above is reserved exclusively for spoiled brats that can't make a cogent argument and are upset that someone else is smarter than them. Get an education or GTFO.

Re:$600,000 (1)

jittles (1613415) | about a year ago | (#44522539)

Restitution in criminal cases is not dischargable by bankruptcy.

So basically he's a slave until the restitution is made.

http://coloradobankruptcyguide.com/940/can-i-get-rid-of-my-criminal-restitution-obligation-in-bankruptcy/ [coloradoba...yguide.com]

Bankruptcy laws vary by state. I was injured by someone who committed an assault felony against me. I talked to a lawyer and found that in this state, any damages that were awarded to me from a criminal act were dischargeable through bankruptcy. The lawyer said that the best I could hope for is that they threw the book at the guy, but not to expect any damages because he didn't have any assets that would prevent him from discharging the damages in bankruptcy.

Re:$600,000 (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44526045)

I am not doubting your experience, but this is a Federal case. As such state laws don't apply, and under Federal law this is not dischargeable.

Re:$600,000 (1)

jittles (1613415) | about a year ago | (#44526855)

fair point!

Re:$600,000 (1)

radarskiy (2874255) | about a year ago | (#44524297)

This is why organized criminals establish their shell companies ahead of time.

Re:$600,000 (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#44521219)

I dont believe you can clear out debts imposed by the court through bankruptcy.

Re:$600,000 (3, Informative)

spartacus_prime (861925) | about a year ago | (#44521229)

Bankruptcy attorney here. Without reaching the merits of discharging criminal restitution, you do not necessarily run the risk of losing everything you have in a Chapter 7 (and you definitely don't in a Chapter 13). From my experience, the only time an asset is in jeopardy is if there is equity and your attorney didn't take the requisite exemptions. This rarely happens, however -- most people get to keep their houses (usually underwater), their cars, and most other things. YMMV however.

Re:$600,000 (3, Interesting)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44520229)

You can create shell companies with other people as board members and put any wealth not already spoken for by the court in there. It becomes untouchable. Pay yourself a small salary and re-invest the rest into the corporate accounts. They can only garnish a certain percentage of your official salary. All the while you live off the corporate accounts.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520611)

nope.

depending on the state the courts can chase that money down.

Re:$600,000 (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#44526861)

Exactly, only fictional persons are allowed to use that dodge. Actual people have lesser rights.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520665)

Are you saying that "[living] off the corporate accounts" is not considered an income or at least an employee benefit over there? If so, why doesn't someone just start a corporation like that and let others use it to hide assets for a small fee? I mean, if you are going to cheat your fellow citizens, why not go all the way and steal everything you can?

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520701)

Very interesting. Wrong, but oh so interesting!

Re:$600,000 (2)

HeckRuler (1369601) | about a year ago | (#44520839)

I had some distant family that got screwed over by a lawyer. He botched the will. The father died, the kids were assholes, and the mother was left with nothing. So she sued. The lawyer did whatever shenanigans lawyers can do to delay things while he consolidated his money and bought a fancy house and car. By the time the case went forward and locked down his assets he hardly had anything of worth other than the house and car. He loses the case and they come for his money, but they're not allowed to touch his home or his means of transport. So she ended up getting nothing.

But this is the sort of game that rich people who can afford lawyers play. The laws apply to Raynaldo because he can't afford the legal footwork to dance around those laws.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522785)

but they're not allowed to touch his home or his means of transport

Maybe they can't legally take it but there's nothing that says it can't catch on fire in the middle of some dark night.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44524121)

Why, so he could collect insurance money on it? That's pointless.

Re:$600,000 (1)

Minwee (522556) | about a year ago | (#44522081)

You can create shell companies with other people as board members and put any wealth not already spoken for by the court in there. It becomes untouchable.

And the best part is, you don't even have to tell those people that they're on the board [arstechnica.com] , and can even use made up names [arstechnica.com] . And nothing bad will ever happen to you as a result [arstechnica.com] .

It's foolproof!

Re:$600,000 (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about a year ago | (#44520323)

They put him in a debtors' prison until he has paid his debt off. And he has to pay rent. That's the classical method anyways.

Re:$600,000 (1)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year ago | (#44520697)

They put him in a debtors' prison until he has paid his debt off.

Where are you from, the 18th century? He was convicted in California, "debtor's prisons" are illegal in every US jurisdiction. Having a felony conviction however pretty much relegates him to being in debt for the rest of his life though.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44523489)

Where are you from, the 18th century? He was convicted in California, "debtor's prisons" are illegal in every US jurisdiction.

Are [stltoday.com] you [illinoistimes.com] sure? [yahoo.com]

How did breast cancer survivor Lisa Lindsay end up behind bars? She didn't pay a medical bill -- one the Herrin, Ill., teaching assistant was told she didn't owe. "She got a $280 medical bill in error and was told she didn't have to pay it," The Associated Press reports. "But the bill was turned over to a collection agency, and eventually state troopers showed up at her home and took her to jail in handcuffs."

Although the U.S. abolished debtors' prisons in the 1830s, more than a third of U.S. states allow the police to haul people in who don't pay all manner of debts, from bills for health care services to credit card and auto loans. In parts of Illinois, debt collectors commonly use publicly funded courts, sheriff's deputies, and country jails to pressure people who owe even small amounts to pay up, according to the AP.

Under the law, debtors aren't arrested for nonpayment, but rather for failing to respond to court hearings, pay legal fines, or otherwise showing "contempt of court" in connection with a creditor lawsuit. That loophole has lawmakers in the Illinois House of Representatives concerned enough to pass a bill in March that would make it illegal to send residents of the state to jail if they can't pay a debt. The measure awaits action in the senate.

"Creditors have been manipulating the court system to extract money from the unemployed, veterans, even seniors who rely solely on their benefits to get by each month," Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said last month in a statement voicing support for the legislation. "Too many people have been thrown in jail simply because they're too poor to pay their debts. We cannot allow these illegal abuses to continue."

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44524161)

It sounds reasonable to me. You owe a debt, you are summoned to court to answer for it because the collector can't get ahold of you, and you're thrown in jail if you're a no show. What's the problem? This isn't because they can't pay their debt. It's because they're not responding to the court. You can't just ignore debt. You have to actually do something about it.

Re:$600,000 (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#44526911)

The problem is that the creditors manipulate the proceedings. For example by not being terribly diligent about serving the summons to appear.

From the second link:

It is possible that the debtor does not receive this notice to appear in court and doesn't even know that a lawsuit has been filed against him or her. Additionally, if a citizen is later stopped by police they can be arrested and placed in jail for failure to appear in court, not because of their debt.

Re:$600,000 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520453)

Hardly a life of slavery. I am 44 years old and have made $6 million dollars so far as a computer programmer. Perhaps if this asshat had spent his time doing something actually productive instead of being a spoiled prick, he would just write the check.

On another note, I wonder how 366 days of having one or more very large, strong men forceably inserting their penises in his mouth and ass will work as a deterrent of him continuing to be an asshat?

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520637)

If we check current US statistics, it will only make it worse.

Keep having the dumb monkey mentality though, maybe one day it will be so effective the US will be wiped off the map into irrelevance.

Re:$600,000 (1)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year ago | (#44520743)

Current US statistics on WHAT? You make an interesting point but on what I'm not sure. The "dumb monkey mentality" that will "wipe the US into irrelevence" is meaningless without context. What the fuck are you talking about? I don't nessessarily disagree with you, but your point has no balls.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521129)

How's being tough on crime actually working out for you guys? Look it up. Reinsertion is more successful than longer sentences and harsher prisons in every serious study I've seen so far.

Re:$600,000 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520579)

Hmm. Maybe he should have considered how he'd handle the consequences of his action before he acted?

I know, I know - personal responsibility is no fun, and we need the gentle guiding hand of the government watching over us at all times. It's probably Obama's or Bush's fault (maybe Clinton!) that he wasn't prevented from doing this in the first place by strict regulations on Sony requiring them to sever all connections to the internet and cease doing business altogether by liquidating all holdings and pouring the cash into the Marianas Trench.

If he can't repay, he can call a lawyer, spend a couple hundred bucks declaring bankruptcy, and then his "LIFE OF SLAVERY" turns into 10 years of "trouble getting a credit card." Oh the horror - however will he particpate in our vibrant consumer economy if he can only spend the money he has earned?! Bankruptcy will also allow him to shelter a fair amount of his assets - they're not going to take away all your clothes and furniture and car, and you can even completely exempt your primary residence in many cases (if you have a mortgage, the title is held by the bank anyway, so they can't very well seize those assets.)

I feel exactly zero sympathy for him, honestly. Sometimes when you decide to vandalize shit, the law catches you.

Re:$600,000 (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#44520833)

And if we fined you for everything wrong you ever did, in full accordance with the law, you'd be broke too, criminal scum.

Re:$600,000 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521745)

Take a trip to Singapore some day. Litter on the bus get fined or sentenced to cleaning busses.

Get caught putting gum on the sidewalk, pay a fine or get sentenced to cleaning sidewalks.

Guess how clean busses are there.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44526465)

No, I wouldn't be broke. You know why?

1) I'm a generally law-abiding sort.
2) I have a job that pays more than minimum wage.
3) I actually have savings, because I don't expect the government to come bail me out every time I need some money.

Go figure - if you take a little personal responsibility, life is pretty good.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521633)

"I feel exactly zero sympathy for him, honestly. Sometimes when you decide to vandalize shit, the law catches you."

Bingo.

He chose to take a big shortcut--rather than lifting even one finger to try to make the system better, he vandalized someone else's property because it was easier to do than doing the right thing.

Re:$600,000 (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44522497)

He chose to take a big shortcut--rather than lifting even one finger to try to make the system better, he vandalized someone else's property because it was easier to do than doing the right thing

you know what? still cheaper than lifting a finger to make the system better!

Re:$600,000 (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about a year ago | (#44521551)

$600,000 is basically a sentence to a life of slavery isn't it? I don't know how much he could reasonably expect to pay back in a year; presumably even less than otherwise given a criminal record. $5K? $10K?

Not slavery. He is free to move, free to work where he wants, and so on. On the positive side, no woman will marry him for his money. On the negative side... If some woman wants to marry him, she'll better get good advice how to keep their finances separate.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522009)

He is only free to move within the borders of the US. He is only free to work at the tiny subset of employers that will hire felons.

More, importantly, you need to stop the false dichotomy fallacy when it comes to slavery. A slave doesn't mean someone in shackles who is beaten with a whip every other day. Historically speaking, there have been slaves in various parts of the world who lived on their own, ran their own businesses, and were completely free to do as they wish as long as they payed a (large) tithe to their owners on their earnings. They had all the illusions of freedom while being completely owned. At any time, all those priveleges could be taken away.

A priveleged slave is still a slave.

Re:$600,000 (1)

Gallomimia (1415613) | about a year ago | (#44522881)

They had all the illusions of freedom while being completely owned.

Kind of like you, right now.

Re:$600,000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522537)

No one's going to loan him that kind of money, so presumably the damaged party is going to have to collect over a period of decades?

Yes, that is exactly how it works. Often they will take any tax refunds as well.

600k? He's going to be a criminal after prison. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520381)

When people have nothing left to lose, they'll turn to drastic measures.

Re:600k? He's going to be a criminal after prison. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520539)

Presumably as a "master hacker" and "computer genius" he should be able to use his "talents" to start his own software company and make money. It costs very very little to create and release a mobile application. Of course, if it's anything like some past hacking cases, they might bar him from even owning a computer for some period of time. But if not--13 months of house arrest should be plenty of time.

Re:600k? He's going to be a criminal after prison. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520951)

There's money to be made in running LOIC? Hot damn!

Re:600k? He's going to be a criminal after prison. (1)

Gallomimia (1415613) | about a year ago | (#44522857)

Maybe his "killer app" should be a multipart authentication metric for the PSN?

Re:600k? He's going to be a criminal after prison. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520837)

Thanks for the words of wisdom, Bob Dylan. Might wanna keep working on that line, though, it doesn't scan well.

How does it feel?
How does it feel?
To be without a home?
Like a complete unknown?
Like a rolling stone?

If he gets out of prison and turns back to a life of crime, then I'm happy to pay taxes to put him right back in prison. The threat of someone's criminal behavior is not a bargaining chip, and the only proper response to that argument is, "Great, we'll keep the prison cell warm for you."

Re:600k? He's going to be a criminal after prison. (1)

JockTroll (996521) | about a year ago | (#44521907)

He won't get out of prison. Not alive. The inmates will rip him to shreds after they're done turning his bunghole into a highway tunnel. Aye, they will be able to run two Amtraks side by side through his overdilated craphole. If fate is merciful, he won't be able to feel it, having gone numb from the abuse. I hope his relatives have already said their goodbyes because there won't be much left of him to bury or cremate. Probably the remains won't fill a bucket. That's what happens when you're a weakling playing tough guy: you get shat upon. Or rather, as in this case, you get your flesh ripped apart and devoured, then you get shat upon with the shit that was *YOU*.

bad news sunshine (1)

felix rayman (24227) | about a year ago | (#44520569)

So you thought you might like to go to the show, to feel the raw, uninterrupted, chaotic thrill of entertainment and anarchy, that space cadet glow.

Typical. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44520925)

Screw over normal people by giving out fraudulent loans and mortgages, and it doesn't matter even if the entire economy nearly fails. You'll just be bailed out, because you're a bank or other wealthy corporation.

Screw over one of those corporations, however, and you're sold into their slavery. None of this nonsensical modern "bankruptcy", either, where you just go on about your business and start over. You'll be paying for the rest of your life, and actually get a prison sentence.

Because we all know who the evildoers are, don't we. They're the pranksters who can actually fight a company and cause them some damages. Not the people who nearly tank the world economy, just some thrill-seekers who expose companies' secrets.

plea bargains are a corruption of justice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44521663)

along with guilty pleas in general and should be abolished

they require both the prosecutor and the accused to perjure themselves, give too much power to the state, and have been abused since there was a concept of a justice system by being generated through deception and coercion

if a bad person did a bad thing there should always be an open and public trial before they are punished

if someone is truly remorseful there they should be allowed to help the prosecution gather objective evidence against themselves if they so choose, but should never be required to do so

tis better that 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be hanged

Re:plea bargains are a corruption of justice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522855)

tis better that 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be hanged

Tell that to everyone who is pissed off that George Zimmerman walked.

Re:plea bargains are a corruption of justice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44523283)

I think that Trayvon Martin did not go free after this case.

USA = disproportionate punishments (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522315)

The USA was formed on the basis of disproportionate punishments. Many of the early colonists actually went to the Americas so they could be free to impose their own 'justice', free from the 'restrictions' back home in Europe. The USA was the ONLY modern industrial democracy to legalise widespread slavery in its borders. European states involved in slavery did NOT have any significant numbers of slaves in their own nations- the courts of those nations almost always ruled slavery ILLEGAL.

Since the USA uniquely allowed widespread slavery, it allowed legalised torture, rape and murder of Humans the highest courts and founding Fathers of the USA described as "sub-Human property". Slave owners had the ABSOLUTE right to rape, abuse, and put to death their slaves. Some states restricted some forms of torture, and some states discouraged murder, but EVERY state recognised the right to rape slaves.

With a significant part of the US population subject to cruel and inhuman treatment, the US justice system always welcomed extreme and disproportionate sentencing of the 'underclassses'. Only a few days ago I read of a couple who were given TWELVE years each in prison because a python they owned accidentally escaped and killed their young child. The US population loves to exterminate the lives of people who slip up. And each year, the average length of sentences for various offences increases across the USA.

The powerful love this system, since their expensive lawyers can get their clients off almost any crime. The parents I mentioned above would NOT have been convicted had they been able to afford a decent lawyer.

When the US finally abolished slavery, it recreated slavery officially in the 'justice' system. Initially this was inspired by the idea of returning 'uppity' Blacks to effective slavery. Eventually it became a favoured tool of the government.

mo3 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522523)

ANYONE THAT THINKS JoIn GNAA (GAY munches the most so that you don't

what happened to the jails are too full? (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | about a year ago | (#44522605)

And yet Lindsay Lohan is still free and endangering the public.

It's actually one year and one day (1)

Provocateur (133110) | about a year ago | (#44522777)

Can he pick Valentine's Day, so after his one year term he can use that particular day for a conjugal visit. Bet that will make the news.

Charged with damaging a PROTECTED computer... (1)

Gallomimia (1415613) | about a year ago | (#44522811)

In an attack on Sony? Someone has to be lying. The lulzsec release when the PSN went down was that it took one single injection to grab the entirety of the database. If you're getting charged with damaging a protected computer, please make sure they know what protected means, and make sure they know how dismally poor and ineffective those "security" measures were.

If you can't (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44522897)

do the time and pay the fine, then... don't do the crime. It's really just that simple.

I'm starting to wonder what's gotten into the water... the current generation of young geeks/nerds seems to be rather supremely stupid and lacking respect for the property and privacy of others. We see case after case of stupid idiots doing blatantly illegal things while convincing themselves that they are mini Robin Hoods fighting "the system" on behalf of "the little guy". Of course, they're generally just helping themselves, and the only results the bulk of the population get are stricter more oppressive laws, more severely locked-down consumer electronic devices, etc.

Don't like Sony's policies? Fine. Don't buy and use Sony stuff. Maybe even get together with some like-minded super geniuses and start your own company with your superior ideas. What you DO NOT have ANY right to do is to break into or otherwise interfere with any Sony server or other system. I don't think Mr Rivera (apparently equipped with a single neuron) is getting punished half as severely as he ought to be.

Re:If you can't (1)

lxs (131946) | about a year ago | (#44523787)

I'm starting to wonder what's gotten into the water... the current generation of young geeks/nerds seems to be rather supremely stupid and lacking respect for the property and privacy of others.

Kids these days take their inspiration from the great leaders both in business [wikipedia.org] and in politics [youtube.com] .

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?