ABC News speaks with a young hacker about what experts call a wide-ranging menace: a new generation of tech-savvy teens who are uniquely dangerous and surprisingly young.
Just because someone you view as a child did something terrible but you feel like they deserve a pass because the consequences of that terrible thing they did are too harsh doesn’t mean that this isn’t the reality and additionally doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t ask the question of whether they would have stopped if they hadn’t been caught or punished.
If a child was kidnapped or raped because of what he did, what then? where’s the line? Do you feel the same about school shooters, or children who molest other children, or is it just because he made a credible threat but wasn’t able to execute it that you feel he specifically deserves a pass here?
Brock Turner was 19 when he raped a woman who had passed out. He was heavily intoxicated. Should we take the fact that his brain wasn’t finished developing, or the fact that he was intoxicated into account when we decided if he broke the law?
Genuinely asking because there so much danger posed by leaking the data he stole, and pretending he did nothing wrong doesn’t really make sense to me.
I have already stated my views on prison and they hold for most crimes, regardless of age actually. I believe in rehabilitation rather than punishment, and I don’t think prison or the prison system offers that so I don’t believe prison is the place for this individual. But that doesn’t mean that I don’t recognize what he did was wrong or had a great potential for wide spread harm.
Between August and December 2024, Lane used stolen login credentials to access the computer network of a second victim company – a software and cloud storage company that served school systems in the United States, Canada and elsewhere. Lane caused personally identifying information of students and teachers stored on that company’s networks to be transferred to a computer server Lane leased in Ukraine. Later, the second victim company and others received threats that the names, email addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, medical information, residential addresses, parent and guardian information, and passwords, among other data, of more than 60 million students and 10 million teachers would be “leak[ed] . . . worldwide” if the company did not pay a ransom of approximately $2.85 million in Bitcoin.
He was successful. The company paid the ransom. The fact that he was 18 instead of say 25 doesn’t enter into what the FBI charged him with because the law doesn’t care what age you are, and unfortunately, especially at the federal level it has no real way to mete out consequences to “fit the crime”.
You offer no solutions, don’t even have the beginnings of a way to better handle the situation (even though I can think of several that all have problems of their own including the house arrest suggestion I first posited) and this guy freely admits that he was unlikely to have stopped if he weren’t arrested.
Additionally, some of that data was leaked, leading to the company offering credit monitoring for 2 years but clearly we know that that leaked data will impact the victims possibly for the rest of their lives.
It turned out that – despite earlier assurances to the contrary – what one state official described as a “rogue actor” tied to the original breach secretly kept some of the data.
In exchange he got 4 years in prison which is a slap on the wrist when compared to what he might have gotten as far as prison time is concerned.
Let me ask you something. Would you have them let him go? No repercussions? No consequences?
Ask yourself if he would have stopped without the intervention of law enforcement. Please read the articles where he talks about being addicted.
After you answer that question for yourself, please understand that unless you’re planning on actually saying something relevant to the points I have made instead of reiterating a point I have not disagreed with, you should not expect any further replies from me.
What part of him was so undeveloped that he couldn’t understand the wrongness of the situation he was in or the repercussions of what he was threatening? Including that if he was caught he would face prison time?
Keep in mind that I am aware that the threat of prison time literally is scientifically proven to not prevent people from commiting crimes.
Are you suggesting that this person didn’t understand? Are you suggesting that this person can’t be held responsible for his actions? Are you suggesting that this person lacked impulse control and therefore should not face consequences? Are you suggesting that this person is unable to think far enough ahead to understand the situation they were in?
Because “not done developing” doesn’t mean that they lack the ability.
I’m going to leave you with this link because I am done with this conversation. I am and have not argued that this man deserves prison time, only that prison time is the current consequence for his actions under the law.
I have not argued that prison is a good place or a good place for him, specifically because I do not believe that it is a good place or a good place for him.
Read the article or don’t. But I’m over having more than half of what I say ignored so you can regurgitate that same comment repeatedly as if it means something in the grand scheme of this conversation.
Sigh. I have not been disputing this.
Just because someone you view as a child did something terrible but you feel like they deserve a pass because the consequences of that terrible thing they did are too harsh doesn’t mean that this isn’t the reality and additionally doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t ask the question of whether they would have stopped if they hadn’t been caught or punished.
If a child was kidnapped or raped because of what he did, what then? where’s the line? Do you feel the same about school shooters, or children who molest other children, or is it just because he made a credible threat but wasn’t able to execute it that you feel he specifically deserves a pass here?
Brock Turner was 19 when he raped a woman who had passed out. He was heavily intoxicated. Should we take the fact that his brain wasn’t finished developing, or the fact that he was intoxicated into account when we decided if he broke the law?
Genuinely asking because there so much danger posed by leaking the data he stole, and pretending he did nothing wrong doesn’t really make sense to me.
I have already stated my views on prison and they hold for most crimes, regardless of age actually. I believe in rehabilitation rather than punishment, and I don’t think prison or the prison system offers that so I don’t believe prison is the place for this individual. But that doesn’t mean that I don’t recognize what he did was wrong or had a great potential for wide spread harm.
so what the feds are doing is wrong. whatever the solution is, it is not what they are doing
He was successful. The company paid the ransom. The fact that he was 18 instead of say 25 doesn’t enter into what the FBI charged him with because the law doesn’t care what age you are, and unfortunately, especially at the federal level it has no real way to mete out consequences to “fit the crime”.
You offer no solutions, don’t even have the beginnings of a way to better handle the situation (even though I can think of several that all have problems of their own including the house arrest suggestion I first posited) and this guy freely admits that he was unlikely to have stopped if he weren’t arrested.
Additionally, some of that data was leaked, leading to the company offering credit monitoring for 2 years but clearly we know that that leaked data will impact the victims possibly for the rest of their lives.
In exchange he got 4 years in prison which is a slap on the wrist when compared to what he might have gotten as far as prison time is concerned.
Let me ask you something. Would you have them let him go? No repercussions? No consequences?
I don’t see how putting him in prison helps anyone. it doesn’t stop data from leaking. it doesn’t protect the other kids.
Ask yourself if he would have stopped without the intervention of law enforcement. Please read the articles where he talks about being addicted.
After you answer that question for yourself, please understand that unless you’re planning on actually saying something relevant to the points I have made instead of reiterating a point I have not disagreed with, you should not expect any further replies from me.
we will never know what might have happened, we can only know what has happened.
What part of him was so undeveloped that he couldn’t understand the wrongness of the situation he was in or the repercussions of what he was threatening? Including that if he was caught he would face prison time?
Keep in mind that I am aware that the threat of prison time literally is scientifically proven to not prevent people from commiting crimes.
Are you suggesting that this person didn’t understand? Are you suggesting that this person can’t be held responsible for his actions? Are you suggesting that this person lacked impulse control and therefore should not face consequences? Are you suggesting that this person is unable to think far enough ahead to understand the situation they were in?
Because “not done developing” doesn’t mean that they lack the ability.
I’m going to leave you with this link because I am done with this conversation. I am and have not argued that this man deserves prison time, only that prison time is the current consequence for his actions under the law.
I have not argued that prison is a good place or a good place for him, specifically because I do not believe that it is a good place or a good place for him.
Read the article or don’t. But I’m over having more than half of what I say ignored so you can regurgitate that same comment repeatedly as if it means something in the grand scheme of this conversation.
https://www.sciencefocus.com/comment/brain-myth-25-development
doubt
I missed the word “not”. it has been proven not to do that. Are you done?