finally! Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate!

[Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>]

chris () blask org wrote:
> --- On Thu, 11/26/09, Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org> wrote:
>
> > I agree, which is why we don't debate climate change, but
> > the hacker's actions.
>
> My take:
>
> The hacker is wrong - ethically, morally and legally.

Thank you for answering the question actually asked. I agree.



> The exposure of the information can be either good or bad, separately and distinctly from the ethics of the hacker.  
> Which one it is is more complicated than I can determine at the moment - looking back a decade or two would give the 
> vantage to determine.  It will remain unclear whether the release of information contributes to the public good or 
> has a sum negative impact until it can be determined whether the public discourse is improved or not, and whether the 
> aggregate public "decision" on the topic is empirically proven to be wise or not.
>
> --------------------
>
> An example of my thinking:
>
> There is an extremist who has knowledge of a ticking bomb.  I (with my Jack Bower glasses on) choose to torture the 
> information out of him, succeed, and the bomb is defused.
>
> The ethics?
>
> o  I am ethically, morally and legally in the wrong.  I expect to go to jail.
>
> o  The disclosure of the information that I unethically gained?  That is an ethical act, saving human lives.
>
> ----------------------
>
> Since we cannot extricate this conversation from global warming, I'll add my two cents for better or worse (probably 
> worse) on that, too.  
>
> o  All would be better served to start the conversation with the question: "Do you believe it is *possible* for 
> mankind to have any impact of any kind on the global climate under any conditions?"  Anyone answering "no, God (Gaea, 
> Kermit the Frog,...) won't let us" doesn't need to be involved in the conversation further.
>
> o  Increasing ratios of components known to retain heat in atmospheric systems in a single-change scenario would have 
> seemingly obvious results.
>
> o  The global climate is anything but a single-change scenario: it is actually a "constant multiple-factor change 
> scenario", in which it is conceivable that we are currently otherwise in a cooling phase and we have just happened - 
> by sheer dumb luck - to find ourselves pumping warming agents out at the right time.
>
> o  Counting on dumb luck to work in our favor over the long term is a Bad Idea.
>
> -chris
>
>
>       
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.


-- 
Gadi Evron,
ge () linuxbox org.

Blog: http://gevron.livejournal.com/
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.