It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

hah RIAA hacked again

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2003 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Certainly you don't need be to define what a hacker is.

Peer-to-peer file sharing tools sprung from the hacker culture as an offshoot of distributed DOS tools. The first distributed network tools that ran on TCP/IP technology were introduced by a hacker coalition back in 1991 or 1992. They discovered that the same proceedures used to hold a machine captive for distributed hacking can be used to establish a peering network. This first P2P application was called "Betty", a take on the Archie servers running Prospero protocol.

Long before the general public became aware of Napster and MP3 sharing, hackers were exchanging files for years as a safe, non-public way to exchange hacking applications. Satan was long available only through P2P networks.




posted on Jan, 18 2003 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Heh, I wasn't aware that hacker's started the very first p2p network!


Anywho... I would still like your opinion on what hacker's are. I'd really like to know if your view's are those the media spew's out or not...

I don't think you've ever chatted with some real hacker's. If you'd like, I could u2u a couple of irc server's and channel's where you can find out what hacker's are really like.

The main place I chat keep's getting some guy known as Guest alway's asking howto do this or that, or asking about illegal thing's like hacking a site or hotmail account for him. We turn him down, tell him to read the topic and kick him for pleasure. Hacker's don't do illegal crap, most of the time. The one's your thinking of are most likley script kiddie's.

Until you've had a chance to know the hacker community, your view's on hacker's is completly wrong and you just have no clue. You need some serious re-education!



posted on Jan, 18 2003 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I have a very broad, no tolerance view of hackers since I've been involved in network security and Internet technology since the mid-1980's. I've even aided law enforcement in research on the code red virus of two years ago.

My view of a hacker is any individual which subverts any computer or network for any reason. There are no good hackers, plain and simple.

The anarchist, anti-corporate nature of the hacker culture has cause untold billions of expense in both taxes and corporate losses. There is no good excuse for hacking-styled activity.

Currently, when a new server goes on the internet, it only lasts an average of 8 minutes before hacking attempts begin. Of the systems I am currently involved with, hacking attempts account for 20% of all incoming bandwidth... which translates to $18,000.00 in bandwidth costs per year... not to mention an average of 10 man hours per week paying attention to hacking attempts, which totals another $20,000 in salary costs. This is just one small firm.

My views are first-hand.



posted on Jan, 18 2003 @ 08:04 PM
link   
There are no good hackers, plain and simple.

Uh huh ... That's what I thought. Would you like me to u2u an irc server + channel for you to see just how 'evil' hacker's are? Not all hacker's do what you think they do. The one's I hang with do legal hacking. Yes, there is such a thing, had a link posted but was taken down anyway's. I'm actually participating in a hacking game now. Search rootwars on google.



posted on Jan, 18 2003 @ 09:08 PM
link   
I'm very familiar with hacking games. Do you know that once you reach level 7 or above, it is very often an exercise in breaching corporate firewalls. I've personally discovered one (three years ago) that very accurately simulated CheckPoint One... the most popular firewall for banks. And this was supposedly a fun "legal" hacking site/game. (It was recommended off the RootWars website)

There are no good hackers.



posted on Jan, 18 2003 @ 09:57 PM
link   
PAYING 30 MOTHERF*CKING DOLLARS FOR A DAMN CD IS *NOT* WHAT I CALL SUPPORT.
Its what i call RIPPING!



posted on Jan, 19 2003 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Necro,

Well said


Winston,

Level 7 of what game? Rootwar's don't have level's. And yes, there are legal way's to hack. What you do with your hacking skill's legal/illegal is what make's you what you are. If you hack for illegal reason's, then your describing those hacker's. The one's I chat with don't do that crap. We play wargame's and that's that. You obviously have a very very narrow idea of what hacking is and what hacker's are. I'd suggest getting involved in some clean fun white hat hacking before you BS some more.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 05:13 AM
link   
ROFLMAO!!!

What, no reply from Mr. Morality? lol



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Do you sit anxiously waiting for my response? (I assume you referred to me, another attempt at attacking the messenger, rather than the message)

The "legal" hacking game, as I mentioned, was recommended off of the RootWars site. Many of the supposedly "legal" hacking "games" are actually practice exercises for real corporate firewall installations (when you get above level 6 or 7 of a 10-11 level game). Certainly you must know this?

And regarding our new little "me too" friend, necro99, I've never mentioned any satisfaction with the current pricing level of in-store music CD's. Only pointing out that a lack of respect for musicians will (and is) having a trickle-down effect no one will like.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Me waiting for you? nah....



I'll have to take a look at the rootwars site again


Sound's like your talking about try2hack though...maybe. If that's it, then it's harmless. All outdated crap that's hardly usefull unless some idiot didn't patch his crap up. lol



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by necro99
PAYING 30 MOTHERF*CKING DOLLARS FOR A DAMN CD IS *NOT* WHAT I CALL SUPPORT.
Its what i call RIPPING!


Wow that is ripping. I just payed $13 for my TooL CD.



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Knuckles

Originally posted by necro99
PAYING 30 MOTHERF*CKING DOLLARS FOR A DAMN CD IS *NOT* WHAT I CALL SUPPORT.
Its what i call RIPPING!


Wow that is ripping. I just payed $13 for my TooL CD.



well, maybe you can use the $17 you saved to get yourself a host so your avatar and signature dont contain broken images


just a thought





posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Dunno what happened, they were working last night. Guess the site shut down. Dont get all bitchy and act like a smart azz.



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Winston,

I couldn't find anything about what you said... Do you happen to have a link you could u2u me? I know atleast one mod that isn't to happy about hacking links


Could it have been on the forum's? If that's the case, provide a keyword for me to search



posted on Feb, 4 2003 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Almost forgot about this



posted on Feb, 7 2003 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Winston, I run into you again! And on a subject near and dear to my heart!

While I am not a "script kiddie" (were it not for friends considerably more computer litterate than I, I would still be pounding documents out on an old smith corona typewriter), and I do not begin to know the ins and outs of hacking, I have done a good deal of research into the RIAA and some of its agenda.

The first notion that the RIAA likes to pawn off about itself is that it exists to protect the rights of the artists. Please note, I have TOTAL respect for the artist, and in no way would like to see an artist, any artist (even those who seem to serve no purpose but to use air) be screwed out of what he has lawfully earned.

However, the dollars that are supposedly being lost to internet piracy would never have found thier way into the pockets of the artists. Indeed, even in the rare instances that the RIAA makes recovery of funds directly related to file sharing, I challenge ANYONE to show that said funds went DIRECTLY to an artist who suffered direct damage from said file sharing.

In addition, it has been proven that the music industry is not actually loosing sales (when comparing the ratio of sales to releases, and taking into account the sharp decline of new releases last year.) What this means is that yes, total sales are down compared to the previous year, but not due to file sharing, but because the total number of new releases was sharply lower. Had the labels bothered to properly promote new previously unknown talent, sales would have been far better, on the backs of new releases.

This of course brings up the subject of whether or not artists are promoted by P2P. IF you actually read the data, it appears that P2P only helps sales of established artists (direct correlation between most downloaded and best sales), as well as vastly helping the burgeoning unpromoted artist, by giving them exposure they would never otherwise have dreamed of.

Aside from the obvious moral defficiencies that the RIAA suffers, and the extreme greed, what concerns me the most is the draconian agenda that the RIAA has planned. If you research the legistlation that the RIAA is attempting (totally eliminating copyright time limits, embedded DRM hardware in all consumer electronics, time coded self erasing media) as well as the legistlation already passed (DMCA, NET law, which effectively makes 60 million Americans unindicted felons), the RIAA appears to be the posterchild of Orwellian Totalitarianism. In the future, you will not own ANY media, but will pay each and every time you hear a song or see a movie.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join