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.
originally posted by: crazyewok
originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: crazyewok
Can the UK extradite a US hacker for violating a "D" notice article?.
They can.
But i dont know why the US cant try and sentence them themselves as its there own citizens in there own country.
Hacking is illegal in both countries.
Seems silly to extradite when we cam both try and sentence them ourselves.
originally posted by: jonsoup
Do posters on ATS even hear themselves anymore?
This is a very serious breach in trust in "the cloud" and the governments (in)ability to keep up with the ever increasing standard of technology. It simply isn't funded to do so.
These hacks of the of our government and our political parties have far more sinister implications than you all seem to realize. There are any number of ways this could fly wildly out of control and go beyond the point of fixing.
originally posted by: Alien Abduct
Not funded (not allotting the funds in that department) doesn't mean they don't have the funds. It is after all the most funded government in the world and in world history.
originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: intrptr
He is not subject to US law as he is not a US citizen.
I assume he has not visited the US therefore, they have no jurisdiction.
If they are going to do this stuff, then why not send women over to say, Saudi Arabia because the women are driving in cars which is illegal in that part of the world.
This is just over-reach as usual.
P
originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Xcathdra
Im not suggesting rewarding him but extradition to another nation where he may be sentenced to 25 years in a federal penitentiary seems a bit harsh.
Can we not just give him 240 hours community service, and ban him from using a PC for a few years?
The argument is that, because the computers accessed were physically located in the US, that is where the crime actually occurred.
originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: EvillerBob
The argument is that, because the computers accessed were physically located in the US, that is where the crime actually occurred.
But it is not a crime for him because he is not subject to US law.