I am not a conservative, but I understand you have a very narrow view of the world and everyone must fit into strictly defined categories and fit into rigidly structured cubby-holes, so confusion on your part is expected.
I am all about personal responsibility. Like standing up for the fact that you committed a crime and not trying to place blame on the victim. On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's called negligence. And here I thought you were a conservative and all > about personal responsibility... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Stroz [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:19 AM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty! > > > So, there you go. You do indeed support blaming the victim. And here I > thought you were a liberal. > > On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Eric Roberts > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I do think there should be a penalty assessed when you get hacked and it > is >> because you have a weak password. Imagine how many IT headaches that > would >> solve. >> >> I think the moral of the story is that if you are going to do something > that >> is illegal...make sure you use a strong passwords and a good encryption >> scheme....or at least one good enough to stop a teenager ;-) >> >> Eric >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Medic [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 9:36 AM >> To: cf-community >> Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty! >> >> >> Well, kind of. You could say the lid on the mailbox is akin to a weak >> password on your email. However it's kind of a moot point. >> >> The common argument here, and one which you seem to be parroting is the >> "don't be surprised if..." argument. This I think loses the plot a bit > here >> as I don't think anyone is arguing about being surprised about the email >> getting hacked with a weak-ass challenge response. However whether a turn > of >> events is surprising or unexpected doesn't make the crime any more or less > a >> crime. >> >> On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Eric Roberts < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> That's even a bad analogy. The mail box isn't locked and cant be (or how >>> else does mail get in), while your email is supposed to be secured. If >> you >>> want to stick to the snail mail analogy, then maybe a PO box and you > leave >>> your key hanging on the box at the post office. But again, if you don't >>> secure thing and you leave it wide open, don't be surprised when someone >>> comes it. Not leaving it secured is akin to putting a neon sign over it >>> and >>> saying come on in...especially if you are a public figure. >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Medic [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 5:54 AM >>> To: cf-community >>> Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty! >>> >>> >>> I don't really think comparing it to breaking into a house is a very good >>> analogy. I think it's probably more accurate to equate it to taking mail >>> out >>> of someone's mail box. I believe this is a felony. And if someone did it >>> you >>> would blame the victim by saying "well the mailbox wasn't even locked." >>> >>> I think it sucks that some kid who guesses a password gets time, but it's >> a >>> crime and a massive, premeditated invasion of privacy. We need to protect >>> that privacy, especially now as we're losing more and more of it. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:317230 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
