|
 |
On 14-Sep-08 14:46, Stephen wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 13:58:35 +0100, Doctor John <joh### [at] home com> wrote:
>
>>
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/city/story.html?id=25110a8f-a73a-43a0-a2a5-1daa08d147d1
>>
>> Can't make my mind up on this; is the university right in prosecuting or
>> are they overreacting to cover their own insecure *ssh*les?
>> Right now I'm leaning in the direction of overreacting but I'm willing
>> to be convinced otherwise
>>
>> John
>
> I agree with "somebody".
> Wrong is wrong, illegal is illegal no mater the intentions. As others have said
> there are other ways to let people know if there is a security leak. Also
> further education should not only teach technical subjects but some
> understanding of morals as well. I think that some of the differences in answers
> has to do with age and experience. Younger people often think that if they mean
> no harm then they are doing no wrong.
And partly by cultural background. As a true Dutchman I am horrified by
laws passed on good intentions and 'ethics'. You should pass laws that
solve problems (preferably after identifying what the real problem is),
not ones that are counterproductive.
Possibly the dividing line in this discussion is that on the one hand
people argue that it is forbidden and others who argue that that law
simply should not have existed in that way.
> It is also up to the authorities what any punishment is due. Whether it is light
> or heavy.
The case is in Canada so there may be some hope that the judgment is by
authorities based on facts. I don't know the details of the Canadian system.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
