Comments on: PBS Site Pwned By Hacktivists; Tupac, Unfortunately, is Still Dead

By: louisvuitton78

louisvuitton78 — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:35:33 +0000

you are really a good webmaster. The website loading speed is amazing. It seems that you are doing any unique trick. In addition, The contents are masterwork. you’ve done a wonderful job on this topic!

By: Idlewild

Idlewild — Mon, 06 Jun 2011 06:48:54 +0000

I agree with #5. Anyone who backs up these people does’t know what it’s like to have their e-mail made public to the internet. PBS employees didn’t have anything to do with this–the producers of frontline did. They didn’t need to be targeted. How is this standing up for what they believe in? What will this accomplish? This is just a childish waste of time. Sharing people’s contact information and passwords is akin to aiding and abetting indentity theft. It could even be considered harassment, imagine how many Lulzsec following, meme spouting 4chan /b/ tards are giving them perverted emails right now?

By: Autumn

Autumn — Mon, 06 Jun 2011 00:20:53 +0000

Lmfao, yes hackers. (Y)

I love when people stir up stuff like this. :’)

Hey, at least they stood up for what they believe in. This is a lot more effective than protesting on the streets, don’t you think?

By: g

Sat, 04 Jun 2011 23:30:51 +0000

By: -_-

-_- — Sat, 04 Jun 2011 18:34:06 +0000

Dennis: You didn’t insult Tupac. You said that you’d rather he be dead than alive. I couldn’t care less if you like his music or not. Comments like that are inappropriate and wrong. You don’t even deserve a response but I’d hate to let even more people get away with reducing the value of human life because you have different opinions.

By: Miles

Miles — Sat, 04 Jun 2011 15:42:12 +0000

@Iain, Unlawful copying is the correct term, though counterfeiting is technically correct as well – think of it this way: if someone unlawfully copies your money they effectively counterfeited your money; they didn’t steal your money. This case further involved an invasion of privacy that is a much bigger deal than the unlawful copying.

Still, your example involves not only unlawful copying, but fraud. The big crime in your scenario was framing someone else for your crime, not the unlawful copying used to do so. It’s like claiming that buying sudafed is the major crime when cooking meth.

By: Mia Foster

Mia Foster — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 08:37:48 +0000

He left behind a grieving mother, myriad fans, relatives and friends.
This is no joke. A talented young man was cut down in his prime, and the killer has gone free all this time.

By: Iain

Iain — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 02:24:06 +0000

Unlawful copying Ha! Good one Alek, how about if I unlawfully copy anything I want of yours? Like your license plates, then you can have a copy of the police photo showing somebody with your plates running red lights. It’s not theft, you still have your plates. Just unlawful copying, this is a HUUUGE difference.

By: Aleksandar Kuktin

Aleksandar Kuktin — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 20:01:57 +0000

They are not stealing anything. They are merely “unlawfully copying” stuff.

(The difference is not only academic, but real. When you steal a car from someone, that someone does not have his car anymore. BUT! When you unlawfully copy a file from someone, that someone still has the very same original file which you copied. In reality, this is a HUUUGE difference.)

By: Dennis

Dennis — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 19:57:59 +0000

Never much into comic books, I like a cigarette after every meal, was never a fan of Family Ties.
I do like to jerk off after every time I get flamed in a comment thread though. Oooh yeeeaaah.

I won’t go into what kind of person anyone who gets all butt-hurt over an insult to Tupac Shakur turns out to be.

BTW – doesn’t anyone moderate these comments?