Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Frank Coluccio Technology Forum - ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1109)	2/10/2000 12:22:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1782

Ray, "Do good crackerz still hang at alt.2600?" Yes, but 2600 has taken the unusual stand this time of distancing themselves from the whole mess. They claim that what's been going on has given hackers a bad name. I am not privy as to what the actual motivation might be that lies behind that claim, however. I can only speculate... One needs only to read the details of the discussions in my post 1108 carefully to fully appreciate the fact that the anarchic nature of the 'net is still alive, and very well. Ironically, they are times like these when they attempt to reconcile the shortcomings of same, though. Regards, Frank

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1109)	2/10/2000 12:50:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1782

Ray, here's an eye opener for you. 2600.com presents some interesting arguments, below. Frank 2600.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- "HACKERS TO BLAME? DOUBTFUL" 02/09/00 "We feel sorry for the major Internet commerce sites that have been inconvenienced by the Denial of Service attacks. Really, we do. But we cannot permit them or anyone else to lay the blame on hackers. "So far, the corporate media has done a very bad job covering this story, blaming hackers and in the next sentence admitting they have no idea who's behind it. Since the ability to run a program (which is all this is) does not require any hacking skills, claiming that hackers are behind it indicates some sort of knowledge of the motives and people involved. "This could be the work of someone who lost their life savings to electronic commerce. Or maybe it's the work of communists. It could even be corporate America itself! After all, who would be better served by a further denigration of the hacker image with more restrictions on individual liberties? "Let's look at the headlines: "Government sees cyber-attacks as disruption of commerce." "Justice Department wants more funds to fight cyber crime." "Didn't take them long, did it? And later in the same story: "But the FBI may never know who is responsible for the cyber-attacks, due to the difficulty in tracing the electronic trails, a senior law enforcement source told CNN." "How convenient. An unseen villain. No need for any actual FACTS to be revealed, but plenty of blame to be cast on hackers everywhere. We find it to be a bit too contrived. "Whoever is responsible is either completely clueless or knows EXACTLY what they're doing. It's the latter that should concern hackers everywhere. "Number of times hackers were named or implied as culprits on these sites: cnn.com 14 msnbc.com 13 zdnet.com 4 abcnews.com 0