What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
377 Comments
- nashvillemike, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11
lol
are you saying we should put the digg effect on http://lake.stark.k12.oh.us/hs - shaolin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6OMG, this is so funny, I went to this school. Lake High School is real backwards, when I went there class of '88I was suspended for giving students caffeine pills...but the funniest part is, there was a Coke Machine in the cafeteria. I wonder if Mr. Lee is still running the place? GO BLUE STREAKS! Man I hated high school.
- JayG25, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Sleep with a hot teacher you are a victim, hit F5 you a criminal.
Can I please be a victim for once? - spamdies, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Deadly F5, you mean he started a tornado?
- Pile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"What law did he break?"
i.e. Title 18, Section 1030 of US Criminal Code:
(a) Whoever--
(5)(A)(i) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
i) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or
(iii) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage; and
shall be punished as provided in subsection (c) of this section.
(b) Whoever attempts to commit an offense under subsection (a) of this section shall be punished as provided in subsection (c) of this section.
(c) The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) or (b) of this section is--
(1)(A) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(1) of this section which does not occur after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph; and
(B) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(1) of this section which occurs after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(2)(A) except as provided in subparagraph (B), a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(5)(A)(iii), or (a)(6) of this section which does not occur after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(B) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(2), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph, if--
(i) the offense was committed for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;
(ii) the offense was committed in furtherance of any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State; or
(iii) the value of the information obtained exceeds $5,000;
Take your pick:
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/cclaws.html
http://nsi.org/Library/Compsec/computerlaw/statelaws.html
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/ccdocs.htm - stevekeller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I personally know mike stone. we live 30 minutes from each other, i was suspended last year for shutting down all of perry local schools network. the best part about this story is, two of our friends were suspended from lake in december for holding the f5 key down (which is pathetic if that actually creates a burden on there server). so mike posted a entry on a music site based out of switzerland, the post told everyone to visit lakes page and hold down f5. the page only got 17 hits total, and was removed by mike. lake claimed to have traced there processor overhead to mikes blog post. they quickly charged him with a fellony. since then the story has been blown out of proportion, i almost ***** my pants when i saw this on digg, and slashdot. mikes mug shots were om the news, the newspapers printed articles, and the radio covered it. lakes website has crashed from the attention that digg and slashdot generated. so lake actually caused their own problem. which, is the funniest thing i ever saw.... keep up the good work ;)
- lexbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Sue Microsoft! Isn't it Windows fault that it started the idea to "Refresh" a window and assign it to F5 as a standard?
- panic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6http://lake.stark.k12.oh.us/hs
Go there and hit F5 a bunch of times =P - butlershouse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4reminds me of the times when you tell the annoying IRC user to try to press ALT+F4 to filter the channel to only chat to girls. sigh
- blixel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@bluffcityjk
I don't necessarily "support" vigil anti justice against the school. But how did the kid break the law exactly? I think the school and the media are blowing this way out of proportion. Either they are attention whores, or they are just stupid. (My guess is the latter.) In the latter case, they have perpetuated the problem 1,000 times by drawing attention to the story.
I mean, get real people. Charging some kid with a freaking felony over what boils down to - "heheh... hey guys... lol .... rofl... this will be so funny ... tee-hee-hee-tee... press F5".
And they are talking about "substantial damages"? What damages? Sites get slashdotted all the time. The worst that happens is the site becomes inaccessible for a given period of time. This whole story is pathetic and laughable.
They are acting like this kid is some Al-Qaeda member who is trying to mastermind an electronic Jihad against his school. It's ridiculous to say the least. - akilleen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"This is not about F5. It's about intent. If you encourage others to do something for the purpose of interrupting services provided to others, that is wrong, and in cases like this, it can be illegal."
I used to work at a school district as an admin, and I have definately had to deal with stupid kids trying to ***** with the systems, so I understand where you are coming from, but you have to admit that they are overreacting a bit. I can understand maybe suspending the kid or something, but a felony?
I think this is just going to end up being an embarrassment for the school district. - MindTrigger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3
@FatD
You didn't do anything wrong. We *should* hear about crap like this happening, because it's a reminder to us all about the police state we are headed toward. I would like to thank you for posting this news, and you should not feel you caused their servers to go down. What caused their servers to crash was that they couldn't handle the hits generated by the fact that they turned this kid into a friggin News story, and the word got out on the internet. The fact is, Digg.com isn't the only website on the internet who has this article posted right now.
People can choose to see this as an attack if they wan't. That doesn't make it one. - rpdillon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah, sorry pile, but this kid didn't break any laws.
This is clearly and without doubt well within freedom of speech. You can have a website telling people how to plow up bridges. The fact that someone goes and does it doesn't mean you are a criminal.
First, these computer were NOT protected, as the law you quoted requires. They were webservers, and they were unable to serve the number of valid requests they were getting.
Second, this kid in now way "caused" the requests to occur. He didn't have control of the computers that people used to initiate the requests any more than he has control of the computers the Digg users are using to hit the site. He didn't use some kind of maliccious software, this was done of the users' own volition.
All this kid did was have an idea, and voice that idea. He could have just as well passed a note in class to tell people to visit a URL and hit F5, and there would be no website involved. - Blackscorpion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The guy is being charged with a felony. You have got to be kidding! First of all I don't see how they can claim that this could cause a tremendous amount of damage. What is the worst that could happen? Someone might have to restart the server. Second, it isn't even creative.
- pixelwerx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Pile,
Things must be tough since you lost that hall monitor job.
This kid created a page that linked to his school's website. According to the story, "It's computers started slowing down" (very well written by the way). He gets arrested.
WKYC covers the story and identifies Lake High School as the victim. It get's posted on Digg. The school's website is toast.
Shouldn't WKYC be charged for their part in this heinous plot? - djdole, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2ddod, EXACTLY.
(This is just speculation, like everyone else, but…)
I figure WKYC is just REALLY vague on the details of the 'attack', and it’s probably all just another school overreacting to a situation they are to stupid to control.
What I figure happened is either whoever setup their network was an ignorant nimrod and didn't set it up securely with an adequate firewall. And rather than linking to ‘their network’ (people will assume website) the student was probably able to access their information server through an open insecure port. That in addition to poor programming on the kids page (SQL Select * statement in a few nested loops) could easily result in a slowing of the network.
They could have even been secure externally, but if their network was setup insecurely internally (i.e. student-accessible computers not on their own fire-walled subnet) then the kid could have EASILY just crashed it from inside. If setup incorrectly it’d be as easy as walking into the library, unplug a computer’s network cable & plugging a router in backwards resulting in multiple domain name servers existing on a switch.
Or a network security ignorant school admin wanted to work from home and didn't know how to vpn or setup ssh, leaving an open port for anyone to access. Or even just as likely someone, (even a secretary) plugged in a wireless router to use their shiny new laptop, and didn't know/care enough to set the router up correctly.
Or even this; schools are notorious for not having/wanting to spend $$ to properly set up their networks. (My HS gave a few students’ 'independent study' credits to maintain their computer lab. And later in another incident called all the cops in 5 counties to breakup a school lunch fight, because the school’s security officer & principal were down the road at the middle school attending a meeting. (The news media dubbed the lunchroom fight a ‘RIOT’.) )
If I were the D.A. in that area, I’d bitch-slap the school admin dismiss the charges & tell them to handle it internally and not embarrass themselves and the district.
If a network is setup incorrect, it’s EASY to break (and in many cases will break itself).
It’s not HARD to knockdown a house of cards. :-/
It seems pretty asinine to me for a SCHOOL of all places to be trying to send a kid to prison for IGNORENCE in the consequences of his actions.
But still, it totally wouldn’t surprise me if student charged, was also in charge of setting up that part of the network and since the school didn't want to pay a contractor to set it up right, they are now 'saving face' by charging the student with a felony. Like they’re looking for a scapegoat.
I mean come on… HS kids are dumb. It’s a prerequisite of adolescence. They don't understand the consequences of their actions.
We all went though it (or are going though it...which if is the case...f'in play it SMART, kiddies.)
We all know how stupid kids can be.
It just sucks that that kid has to pay such a high price for something the school could & should have taken steps to prevent.
I feel sorry for the kids at that school having to try to learn from such dumb people.
Most likely scenario though... the school is overreacting because their network was too slow at the time for them to email the parents notice that the students will now be able to bring Red & Green cookies (on the same day!) to lunch...now that the season is over.
/Someone needs to sit the school administrators down & read them "Chicken Little". - pixelwerx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Malicious intent or not, he linked to a website. That's all.
He didn't engineer a DDOS attack. He didn't compromise a "protected system". He didn't do anything that a nine year old kid on Geocities hasn't done. HE LINKED TO A FREAKING WEBSITE!!!
The real problem is that school officials don't understand how this whole Intarweb thingamajiggy works. - joebob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2pile:
So by this same reasoning I can call up your wife/cousin/brother/dog/whomever and simply say 'Smack him on the back of the head' I have now somehow assaulted you by the very same logic you are using. What you have completely left out is the control over the situation and the actual act commited by said person, me. Did I hit you? Did I in someway trick, coerce, or in otherway unduly influence the person who did? No I simply relayed a message to a person who was in the position to do it. Unless you missed alot of the constitution this is called free speech. I can run out into the street and say any friggin thing I want about ol Dubya Bush and advise that someone should surgically attache his head to his ass for safety reasons, but this does not constitute a criminal act. By moving said speech to a computer this does not alter the situation.
The issue is not about in intent in my eyes. The kid is a dumbass and he should be punished by the school. This however does in no way belong in a criminal court wasting more tax dollars evaluating the criminal responsibility of someone posting a message on a board and saying 'go here, ALOT'.
There is no hacking (lol I R eff5 hAx0r3d j00), there is no manipulation of files, systems or other property owned by the schoool. (unless perhaps if he posted the blog entry from a computer at school maybe)
The sole direct action that he made against that computer system was to probably goto the site and hit f5 on his own system. Which if they recorded his ip and logged each instance of the request could possibly constitute a criminal act. However, according to the articles listed this is not the crime he was accused or arrested for. - ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3What a piss-poor excuse for journalism. The author must have been educated and afforementioned highschool...
"Police say the student, created a website which connected to the school's system" - Do you mean he added a hyperlink to another website, like say 99.999% of all other sites do?
"When enough users logged on and hit the F5 button, it overloaded the school's system." If the users had to 'log on' then wouldn't any webmin worth their salts be able to tell WHO these pesky F5er's were? How the ***** about explaining to John Q Public and his grandmother that F5 is the keyboard shortcut for Refresh in most browsers? Of course not, that would require you doing more than reading and transcribing the goddamn police report. - YoshoKatana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"But, Lake High School caught-on before the system crashed. Its computers started slowing down."
So...he DIDN'T crash the system. He and his (cohorts?) just slowed it down. Sure, he had intent, and they should have given him a detention. But where did it say he had intent? Someone needs to find the blog, and see what his reasons were. I'd say the most he should get is a detention or two.
This reminds me of the Topeka County School District when they arrested that student over "Suspected use of PHP." Why can't schools get admins that know how to do their jobs? (Why can't they just let the Computer Club, who would work for FREE, do it?) - FatD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2When I was in middle school, I was banned for computer use when I ejected a CD. Installed UO on High school machines. Used to make stupid HTML doc`s and have IE start up in kiosk mode when machine booted in. Nobody ever figured it out, they formated and renistalled windows.
- en3r0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow. Are you serious? I hope their system crashes from digg now.
- stimpy2k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think "attack" and "deadly" was sarcasm theprez.
- 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2pile wrote: ...not the least of which is such an act under Patriot can be considered terrorism.
One more reason this nasty piece of legislation should be shredded and used for hamster bedding. I am sure that any reasonably intelligent person can see that this has nohting to do with terrorism. It is simple mischief, and nothing more. - FuzzyOnion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I like how in the video said F5 is the key you press when you want to "overload the server." Clever of Microsoft to include a server-overload feature, wasn't it?
- Pile, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3By the way, for those of you who find yourself, or your web server under attack, here is what you can do: (Note: This should not be considered "legal advice" - consult a lawyer in this area for specifics)
1. Make hardcopies of all the logs. Make sure the time and date of your system is set properly and copy all the server logs to a backup. You'll have time/date information and IP addresses of every request on the site. Using this information, in concert with subpeonas you can probably identify the details on every user.
2. If you're in the U.S. contact your local FBI and file a case. Here is where you can find information on doing so:
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/reporting.htm
Note that the FBI typically has a threshold of "monetary damages" with which they use to justify whether or not they get involved. I've seen cases where this can be $10,000 or $100,000. If you can claim $100k worth of damages, they will investigate the case. This is arbitrary.. if you have a mailing list that you value at $100k that was corrupted, that's good enough.
3. Generally you want to get the authorities involved while the attack is going on, but if you have to shut the attack down, get the server logs and go through them and identify the IP addresses of the perpetrators. Go to http://www.dnsstuff.com and do an IPWHOIS on the IP address and get the contact information on the attackers' ISP. Compose a detailed message to the network operations center with samples of your logs explaining that the IP addresses are interfereing with your services and this is a violation of law. (Note that in some cases, if you notify them and they refuse to do anything, the ISP itself could be party in a lawsuit responsible for damages - so document everything)
Ask them to terminate the host and freeze logs for use by authorities. Also, the IPWHOIS will give you information on the direct phone line to the network operator, so call them and get them on the phone.. they WILL take action... even if it's some dork on DSL hitting F5, if you call the NOC, they'll quite often turn off the service. I've had cases where I've gotten the ISPs to give me personal contact information for their customers.. some ISPs are very sympathetic to webmasters who are under attack.
4. Sometimes you're under attack from foreign computers, especially those in China and South Korea.. don't think you can't take action. Many times those sites are just proxies for domestic activity and the authorities are well aware and have been watching them. In DDOS situations, you'll likely find numerous perpetrators, so you can pick-and-choose which dumbass is the easiest to go after first... so even if you're getting hammered mostly from Korea, if some dork is in Ohio, doing the same thing, you can nail his ass.
5. If you see activity coming from public computers, especially schools and universities, it's even easier to hurt the perpetrators. You can get kids suspended or expelled; many colleges take very seriously abuse issues on their network, so look up those IPs and contact the NOCs and they will take action.
I understand that most people here are users and they don't understand how expensive and time-consuming it is to run network servers, but there are enough legitimate problems going on that these guys shouldn't have to deal with malicious stuff. - livesunkept, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2My school had threaten to call the police on me back in 1998... I had no clue what they could do so I kept saying I knew of no attempt to get universal access. They actually had a password setup for anyone to get in with no matter what the user name... first time "redfire" second time "NoB0dyknows" lol too bad for them that the keylogger was hidden in the cache for the internet... they never cleared there cache ~le sigh~ stupid education system
- Pile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"That's nice but based on the story the kid didn't do any of those things. He didn't break that law. "
IANAL, but I wouldn't be so sure. All the school has to do is claim $5000 worth of damage as a result of the "information" he published and he is indeed guilty.
I know about these things. I have a case before the US Federal Attorneys Office in concert relating to an FBI investigation over someone who tried to hack a form-mailing script on one of my servers to send out spam. This guy didn't think he was doing anything wrong since the script was there and he was just hitting "submit" but his INTENT was clear.. he was trying to overload form fields trying to hack the script. The action caused $x worth of damage; the Feds took up the case, we gathered the evidence and now this guy is really, really sorry he did that. Just like this kid, he didn't see how hitting a button on his keyboard could really get him into that kind of trouble. He was wrong. - MindTrigger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Pile
Pile while I still think this particular event is funny, because of the irony involved, I do agree with you. I predicted this quite a while ago, as I am sure many of you have. Digg is not known for having a particularly level headed and mature group of users.
I don't know, is it really abuse though? There is no malicious code involved here, no shady agenda accept for maybe a little mischief on the minds of a few users. Would the Digg Effect do any less damage if we didn't sit here and laugh about it like I was? Any URL that gets posted here is pretty much going to get slammed no matter how funny some of us think it is. It's the way the internet works. If your web server isn't protected from such things, it can happen.
Should it be used as a weapon? No, and I don't think it really is. Just because some of us choose to see this event as "devine retribution" doesn't mean we all organized an attack. What would you have us do? Would you like the government to make a list of URLs that we can't post on Digg.com or /.? so they are protected from having their servers overloaded with hits?
Even if some asshat made a post on Digg.com saying "Attack this website", you can't blame everyone who happens to click on the link and say they meant to do harm. This site and others are designed to call attention to information on websites. If your server(s) gets slammed, it's not our friggin' fault. Administrators should protect their hardware from stuff like this, whether it's intentional or not.
I don't see any wrong doing here. A couple of us cracked a joke about it. Big deal. I didn't tell anyone to "attack" that site, and no one else really did either. - therw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thanks guys for your support. I actually know this kid and I'm pretty angry that all this is happening. Glad the school got what was coming to them.
- ConorKiley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"The problem is, a lot of young people today seem to have lost the ability to look at things rationally and objectively."
Oh good lord. Too bad people aren't more like machines and code eh? I can't quite figure out what you are argueing in favor of or against. There was no damage, the school admitted this. The prosecuter admitted the kid is being charged so aggressively because he is making an example of him.
If we take every law and prosecute them all to the fullest extent the planet would be a prison. This prosecution stinks to high heaven and had the local police and DA not been involved this would never have caused a problem.
Nobody is defending the kids actions, how often does that need to be repeated? The justified complaint is that the punishment does not suit the "crime". Personal responsibility shouldn't exclude the responsibility of school and government officials to act "rationally and objectively".
The officials are reacting emotionally out of irrational fear and ignorance. You don't ***** up an 18 year old high school kids life over something as petty as this!
The overreaction of local officials is WORSE than what the kid "attempted" to, um... facilitate? Convince others to do? Link to a webpage? I still don't understand what he actually DID to warrant this crackdown on him. Not to mention the fact that it really isn't clear if he even broke the law since these laws are poorly worded and vague not to mention ignorant.
You are also using "intent" in an extremely broad sense that likely wouldn't stand up in a court unless there was some direct and clear law violated in its support. Unless the judge is an ignorant fool. Well, the way things are going I guess maybe it would stand up... - mykoleary, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Site down. Phones next?
http://www.publicschoolreview.com/school_ov/school_id/64607
1025 Lake Center St Nw, Uniontown, OH 44685 - 9466 - tel: (330)877-4282 - pr0t0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@pile just FYI
If you want to know something about the law, the last person you should ask is an attorney...they know very little about the law. I know this seems counterintuitive but it's the truth. Lawyers know a great deal about legal procedure and debate. How to do filings, briefings, motions, and such...that's their domain.
If you want to know about the law, ask a legal researcher or historian. These are guys with passes to the National Archives and their whole purpose is to study the documents (Declaration of Independence=Natural Law, Constitution|Bill of Rights=Conventional Law, etc.) that created/enacted/abolished our various laws. They know the law. They don't even ***** around with legal precendent too much as they consider it irrelevant. It's more like "here's what the law says and here's what it means". That's why lawyers hire them or keep them on staff...to explain the law to the lawyers...who in turn try and explain it to the judge and/or jury.
When you watch a legal researcher explain to a judge that while your city has had a law on the books that requires "xyz" for a 50 years, it runs counter to the "abc" act of 1805 and is therefore unconstitutional; you see a blank stare on the judges face...and on the faces of the city attorneys. Then when you walk out of the courtroom, found not guilty of failing to provide "xyz". That's when you get a very deep and profound understanding of what LAW really means in this country, and how most of the time a courtroom is utterly devoid of it. - Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@pile and others in this thread of conversation
Title 18, Section 1030 of US Criminal Code
"...to a protected computer..."
Even a bad lawyer could get the kid out of this one. It's a fricken web server. - joebob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Title 18, Section 1030 of US Criminal Code:"
None of these apply as the server was a public access page. This is just as malicious as renting a billboard to tell everyone to take the city bus everywhere for the sake of the environment.
Those that support this luddite witch hunt mentality should take a nice looooong vacation to China/North Korea/etc... Thats exactly where this sort of criminal prosecution leads. - a1programmer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There's no way a room full of students are going to crash a web server, by hitting f5, unless of course the server is already crap.
- ConorKiley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"i.e. Title 18, Section 1030 of US Criminal Code:"
That's nice but based on the story the kid didn't do any of those things. He didn't break that law. He linked to a site and asked others to visit it and refresh the page. If that's illegal and can get a HS student a felony criminal record THAT IS WRONG, it's draconian and an abuse or authority plain and simple. It's also flat out stupid to blow something like this up to such a level. School officials need to react to this stuff with a level head and not make a mountain out of a molehill. - ripter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How stupid can they get? “Oh No!! More than one person is on our website!! Caption, I don’t know how much more she can take!”
- edstewbob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2When I worked at the Akron U computer center there was a student who submitted a batch job that crashed the mainframe, circumventing system security. We hired him immediately as a student assistant. We could have had him prosecuted or got him expelled. He became one of the most valued members of our team.
- bonsaigiant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Watch, next week we'll see another digg: "Back-water school system sues Digg for malicious 'digg' effect."
- daworld, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wonder how long it will take the school to bounce back from the Digg Effect?? I say in March they get their site back up for a record 90 seconds...
- tsmori, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A DDoS attack generally requires thousands of connections to a server to overwhelm it. I mean, at most, how many people could this guy have gotten to help, a few hundred maybe? Even if he had built a website that connected to his school's computer, I'm still betting that simply using F5 would not have slowed down the site. The pages would have been cached and refreshing wouldn't have done jack.
- ConorKiley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, I'm curious about what "serious damage" might have taken place because of something so minor as this?
- feross, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1How can crashing their website 'crash their system'? If they use ONE server for everything then they deserver to be fired for not knowing what the heck they're doing. If their computers started slowing down because the web server was overloaded, that tells me they have their backend stuff on that same server too. The only thing that should slow down if their website is being DoS is their internet connection. DUGG++
- Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@bluffcityjk
It is sometimes your civic duty to break laws that are stupid. - ConorKiley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Amazing that everyone on digg is willing to show the world that they are immature kids with the mentality of 12 year olds."
Sort of like humanity in general. There are plenty of childish idiots here, there are also plenty of childish idiots in government. Which group does more harm?
You think the DA isn't using this to support his career? Isn't that a tad childish? You think maybe the school is acting a bit childish by elevating this minor issue? Seriously, a felony? The kid was stupid, as I imagine we all sometimes are regardless of age, but to drop the hammer of the government on him and force him into the system as a felon is even worse.
I am amazed that people are actually defending this draconian punishment. I guess some people have spotless childhoods and never did anything that might have theoretically caused harm. - rain9441, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just because the school is on a 2400 baud modem connection to the internet doesnt mean this can be considered a ddos
- MindTrigger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
@Pile
I wrote a post to you above, please read. No matter what your imagination tells you about what is happening on Digg today, you can't possibly blame us. Read my post above and respond if you wish. I'd like to hear your counter argument.
Furthermore, the fact that the school was stupid enough to make this newsworthy by calling the police in, is part of the reason their site is now slammed with hits. Had it not made the news, we probably wouldn't have known about it. They wanted to make an "example" out of the kid, and so they made noise about it. They took their own servers down, if you ask me. - ConorKiley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"And Digg users aren't abusing their power?"
I said authority, not power. Digg users are not in a position of authority. The school is in a position of authority as are the prosecuters and police, digg users have power but no authority. - will592, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The scary thing is if the school pays for bandwidth on a 'per megabyte' basis. I volunteered for a school and they were crazy about using the internet because they had to pay for ever meg that was transferred to the internet. Not sure if schools are still charged this way or not. I remember a story about a computer lab teacher/tech or something who was running SETI@Home and was sentenced to jail time for 'stealing' from the school because they wound up having to pay for the bandwidth that was being used by seti.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 377 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is