The asshole motherfuckers running this website give this to ppl who use wget --xattr https://www.imaginesystems.net/images/datasheets/t420s.pdf to fetch their PDF:
Connecting to www.imaginesystems.net (www.imaginesystems.net)|47.181.156.171|:443... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 999 No Hacking
2026-04-18 ERROR 999: No Hacking.
Using a GUI browser, even over Tor, is no problem.
People are widely unaware of the --xattr feature that is unique to wget. So the ultimate problem is ignorance. If more people knew about wget --xattr, they would use it and these pretentious pricks wouldn’t be making the naive assumption that wget implies something nefarious.
What are you trying to imply? That because Bradly Manning used
wget, that makes wget a threat? Manning probably also used Firefox. So let’s flag Firefox as a hacker tool too.Mainly that the somewhat ridiculous idea that wget is a hacker tool isn’t new. I certainly agree with you substantially. 😉
Could we at least not use her deadname? I get that the article is old, but please don’t.
We are talking about Manning’s history. It is proper to use the name of the time of the events. People don’t create new identities for the hell of it. New identities are generally created for a new life going forward, to be disconnected from a past life.
Europe recognises the right to be forgotten which is enshrined in GDPR art.17. Guatamala respects people’s wishes to establish a new identity to the extent of allowing name changes with no public record in a closed-door session with a judge.
Tying someone’s new name to their prior history is disrespectful. Some may want their legacy to follow them despite a name change and we might guess Manning is proud of their accomplishment, but it’s not for you to decide what people with new identities carry forward from their past.
Please respect people’s privacy. I know Manning’s privacy is toast anyway, but it’s still off to be part of the intrusion and then to ask others to also drag new identities through their prior history.
You also advocate historic inaccuracy. Exxon (a dead name) discovered climate change. Not ExxonMobil. You cause confusion by insisting on refencing new identities in past events. If you say ExxonMobil discovered climate change in the 1960s, you falsely imply that ExxonMobil existed at that time. But in fact the merger (and thus new identity) came after that.
