Monday, July 8, 2013

Jester's Angels

Jester's Angels

There are so many good titles out there for this post...like...What I Learned on my Summer Staycation, and Only Fools Rush In: The Study of Crazy People

Today, I head back to my real life; Staycation 2013 is officially over.  Mostly, I did lots of stuff with my kids and pretended to clean the house in earnest.  But, this weekend, I got a sliver-glimpse of the Twitter world and its finery.  The best part of band camp was always the last two days.

While my concerns will turn elsewhere now that I am back to my real life, my weekend as part of Jester's Angels was fun.  Not that he needs Angels, and not that he works in a crew or needs a crew to work.  But, I had fun blasting haters with Beth J, Rachel, and Stephanie.  These are fantastic women, and it has been an honor to serve with them.  They are fun, witty, and refreshing.  Thanks, ladies - you are all rock stars.  I met some really nice guys, too, but the names are very confusing.  You know who you are (and thanks for sending me links to the videos on the NarcoTroll).

I have learned that most of the people that oppose the work of Jester really have no substantive argument to share.  In one tweet, they will say he isn't a hacker, and in the next tweet, they will say his work is ruining The American Way.  In one tweet, they will claim he has no influence, and in the next claim they have turned him into the "authorities."  If he is nobody, why do you spend all of your time trying to unveil him?

All I asked for was proof.  

Tell me how the legal system defines hacking.  Tell me how what Jester does doesn't fit the law.  Tell me why you say he is only a propaganda whore, and show me proof that he hasn't given credence to the work he has done.  Calling me names and telling me that I send my panties to the guy makes you sound like a dumbass.  If you claim to do research for a career, be prepared to share your "research."  Telling me to lick an extension cord is slightly original, but, alas, not a defense.

The weekend was, indeed, enlightening.  But, I prefer tweeting with educators.  They share lots of great stuff, and they work toward celebrating good work. So, I salute The Jester and his Angels.  Thank you for an awesome ride ;p

PS.  The thong is mine.  I believe Rachel sent the hipsters.  You bake the cupcakes.












20 comments:

  1. This is awesome!!! Sharing it!! xox

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Beth - i think that he has broken the law according to the link you provided in these paragraphs here -

    intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or
    intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage;

    knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization, if--

    (a)trafficking affects interstate or foreign commerce; or such computer is used by or for the Government of the United States; with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, educational institution, financial institution, government entity, or other legal entity, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to cause damage to a protected computer; 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--

    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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your post. I posted that link to show that what he does is, in fact, hacking. There was a thread on Twitter that suggested he wasn't a hacker, and I wanted to be sure.

      Delete
    2. the question relating to that link which actually contained the answer was "tell me how what the jester does doesn't fit the law"

      Delete
  3. Beth in regards to the legal issues as far back as 2003 the US govt was against "patriot hacking" -

    http://www.crn.com/news/security/18821779/government-warns-patriot-hackers-against-cyber-attacks-on-iraqi-interests.htm

    Those laws originally created by the FBI are now looked after by a department of Homeland Security.

    Also a denial of service attack (DOS) is illegal - which is basically when someone brings down a website, more here -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dos_attack

    Crimes relating to DOS attacks were originally covered under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act are now covered via the Patriot Act.

    Given now that he is also targeting foreign governments websites he may well be considered an international Cyberterrorist - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberterrorist

    There is also the charge of extortion as he has just threatened the Venezuelen Government by threats of blackmail that he will release information detrimental to them if they do not change their stance regarding Snowdon - just published on twitter.

    Criminal law breaches aside he would certainly be open to civil damages claims as well.

    At the end of the day you are more than likely supporting a criminal and with recent attacks against other countries embassies etc. in all probability a cyberterrorist according to the patriot acts own defination. (title VIII)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your post. I am always interested in understanding the law.

      To be clear, though, my "support" of Jester extends to his philosophy and not his actions. While I do joke about being a fan girl, the reality is that I am most interested in how hactivism is impacting our schools (and I feel this trend is growing). He is my favorite because he is the most clear about his intentions - even if I don't agree with them all of the time. I do believe he believes he is doing justice for our soldiers. I also believe he feels that his impact will help America. I am not qualified to judge whether or not he is successful in providing justice or safety to soldiers and Americans.

      That said, I struggle to find core philosophical points from other movements. I can't pinpoint one philosophy from Anonymous (it isn't the nature of the movement to do so), and other groups like LulzSec seem to be based on prank style hacking. Of the hacking groups most attractive to students, I would say they fall into either worshiping Anonymous or The Jester.

      Delete
    2. are not his actions a result of his philosophy ?
      Hitler , Stalin etc all thought they were justified as well.
      What are his intentions ? - shout down and abuse everyone he disagrees with ?
      Beth i think you are back-pedalling a bit in regards to this being a mere interest in hactivism ?
      If you study one's philosophy you would surely just read the material - not publish pro blogs about them and tweet to them and buy their merch and calling yourself one of their angels.
      I think that clearly crosses the line.

      Delete
    3. While I appreciate your post, I don't believe I have back pedaled at all. The concept of The Jester (one person standing up for America) is refreshing. I am not qualified to determine his success.

      As far as "The Angels" go - they aren't a real group - they were a collection of women online at the same time fighting off the dumbest flame attack I have ever witnessed. The Jester doesn't need or want Angels. He has been doing his thing for three years; surely, there have been other women?

      As far as "pro blogs" are concerned, scrolling down may be of service to you. I write about all sorts of things and only when the mood strikes me. When I get tired of writing, it will be another year or so until I do it again. Blogging isn't my profession, and it certainly isn't designed to be academic research. My research, any ANY substantive research is serious and not meant to be haphazardly tossed on a blog with a picture of the Power Puff Girls.

      As far as being a groupie, well, I guess my freedom of speech and expression is only credible if I like who you like? I think the Jester is a character. I don't agree with everything he does, and I don't know enough about how he does it to judge. He has opinions; he is not wishy washy about them. We have the right to agree to disagree about whether the message, messenger, or vehicle is appropriate.

      And, further, I am not sure what line can be crossed when one of us is real and the other is a persona.

      Delete
    4. i think you are watering things down a little bit again and i shall explain why to each paragraph -

      While I appreciate your post, I don't believe I have back pedaled at all. The concept of The Jester (one person standing up for America) is refreshing. I am not qualified to determine his success.

      Your support is certainly assisting him surely ?

      As far as "The Angels" go - they aren't a real group - they were a collection of women online at the same time fighting off the dumbest flame attack I have ever witnessed. The Jester doesn't need or want Angels. He has been doing his thing for three years; surely, there have been other women?

      It is not entirely relevant that they are not a real group , wether or not he needed them or that their are other women helping him -
      my point is you claim to be more interested in his philosophy when you have actually taken a more engaging pro-active pro jester approach

      As far as "pro blogs" are concerned, scrolling down may be of service to you. I write about all sorts of things and only when the mood strikes me. When I get tired of writing, it will be another year or so until I do it again. Blogging isn't my profession, and it certainly isn't designed to be academic research. My research, any ANY substantive research is serious and not meant to be haphazardly tossed on a blog with a picture of the Power Puff Girls.

      That seems as though it's an attempt to disregard your pro jester line which is quite clear on these pages

      As far as being a groupie, well, I guess my freedom of speech and expression is only credible if I like who you like? I think the Jester is a character. I don't agree with everything he does, and I don't know enough about how he does it to judge. He has opinions; he is not wishy washy about them. We have the right to agree to disagree about whether the message, messenger, or vehicle is appropriate.

      I welcome freedom of speech but not those who assist others in denying someone elses

      And, further, I am not sure what line can be crossed when one of us is real and the other is a persona.

      Well a real individual is very much alive and well behind the persona - a persona that you are in support of - one that engages in illegal activity, denies others of their right to free speech and violates the patriot act

      Delete
    5. Beth would you mind sharing with us what it is that you don't like about the jesters intentions ?
      thank-you D

      Delete
    6. I am not sure if both of these posts are from the same person or not, but, for the sake of brevity, I will address both at once.

      Statement 1: "Your support is certainly assisting him surely ?" No; I don't think Jester relies on supporters for assistance. He operates alone and would do his hacks with or without support from Twitter followers.

      Statement 2: "you claim to be more interested in his philosophy when you have actually taken a more engaging pro-active pro jester approach" I am not entirely sure what this line means, but I am a "cheerleader" for all voices - not just the Jester's voice. He is one of many "hactivisits" that I find interesting.

      Statement 3: "That seems as though it's an attempt to disregard your pro jester line which is quite clear on these pages" I believe the initial accusation was that this blog is only devoted to defending The Jester? I defend lots of opinions on this blog. I happen to be interested in this topic at the moment. That said, let me be clear, I don't shy away from the idea that I am interested in Jester's work. It is fascinating. This discussion with you, alone, is fascinating. If the criticism is that I am doey-eyed by one person's attempt to change the world, so be it. I believe we should all "be the change we want to see in this world." If his actions are illegal and unethical, he will have to answer to those charges if he is ever caught. My admiration of his "one man band" is not unethical or illegal.

      Statement 4: "I welcome freedom of speech but not those who assist others in denying someone elses " This is a fair point. I still think you can be fascinated with someone's work (art, for example) without buying their paintings.

      Statement 5: "Well a real individual is very much alive and well behind the persona - a persona that you are in support of - one that engages in illegal activity, denies others of their right to free speech and violates the patriot act" I agree that he is alive and well, and I believe that I will continue to watch his work, the work of anonymous, and the work of other hacking groups/ideologies. They all fascinate me.

      Delete
    7. Statement 6 (second post): "Beth would you mind sharing with us what it is that you don't like about the jesters intentions ?" I support freedom of speech and expression for all voices, even the ones I don't want to hear. I could never be a hacktivist, for so many reasons, but if I were, I don't believe I would take down sites of those I oppose. That said, my acceptance of the freedom to speak and express extends to The Jester (and Anonymous and whomever) in supporting the idea that they can take their chances with the law and do what they have to do to get out their opinion. I may not agree with any particular message, but I agree with the premise that Americans have the right to expression. Hactivism is expression.

      Delete
    8. again you believe in free speech and yet support someone who doesn't - it doesn't wash that it can go both ways
      jester doesn't get his opinion out he shuts down those that oppose his
      hactivism is illegal expression

      Delete
    9. beth have you ever purchased anything from the jesters online clothing store ?

      Delete
  4. you can support the law or you can support the jester - but most definately not both
    im not interested in unveiling him and hopefully he'll realize sooner than later what he is doing is pretty much pointless - however going into his third year now i am concerned that he won't

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you for your post. I don't see such black and white lines as "you can support the law or you can support the Jester." I support the law because they are laws; but I also support all the people who fight for rights that don't yet exist or for people trying to change laws that shouldn't exist. If what he is doing is so pointless, why do so many people have so much to say about him?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think people have so much to say about him because he is a failure with very little results (no matter on your position on him) but still claiming to be a hero.
      Also because he is obnoxious and abusive in his posts and attacks and brags far too much and i think that gets under people's skin.
      A real hero to me anyways doesn't tell everyone what he's done - goes about his business and remains humble.
      I don't see how the jester is fighting for rights that don't exist yet or for people trying to change laws that don't exist. Isn't that thinking just giving someone the right to do whatever they think is necessary because they believe what they are doing is right. Sounds like the foundation of anarchy.
      I just see him attacking people because they have a different viewpoint. Are we in a war with south america ?
      The Jester is most definately breaking the law - that's what unrestrained vigilantes do this one appears to answer to no-one and that's a danger.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for your response. Again, I am not qualified to judge any form of hacking, so I won't venture into that realm. I also can't speak for his motives; they are his. I can only say that I think he is an interesting figure and one that seems to draw the admiration of college students.

      Delete
    3. It's not necessary to understand hacking to see the results of his work have amounted to very little.
      In truth it does more harm than good
      you seem to not accept this.

      Delete
    4. I don't see such black and white lines as "you can support the law or you can support the Jester."
      well that's having it both ways

      Delete

Thanks for your comment! I will check it out, and if you are not a spammer, I will post your comment!