The 40 minutes of the presentation before the hack gives a lot more context: there are 2 journalists in addition to this anonymous pink Power Ranger, and they investigated the Nazi network, which is international. And Martha Root (the pink power ranger) was trolling them by creating an account and using LLM. The LLM didn't work properly, the account was blocked for suspicions of being a bot (and maybe for having "= 1 OR 1" as eg. gender), she talked her way out of it, and incredibly the admin that unblocked her asked if she wanted to meet up with him, and the site's founder. She said yes, didn't show up, but used that opportunity to covertly follow them and uncover the founder's identity - the journalists found that it's a 57-year old lady who's never been known in the scene, who was married to a French banker whose parents survived the holocaust, but in the last decade fell into the rabbit hole of white-victimization-theory.
> the journalists found that it's a 57-year old lady who's never been known in the scene, who was married to a French banker whose parents survived the holocaust, but in the last decade fell into the rabbit hole of white-victimization-theory.
Just to clarify, she fell into the rabbit hole, not him. He divorced her. Your comment can easily be read both ways.
This is how it is done, the hacker ‘Martha Root’ dressed as the pink power ranger and hacked white supremacist dating sites, stole their data, took down their sites and then proceeded to DOX members by making a map with members locations and information around the world.
In the UK Vigilante justice is punished extremely hard.
If you commit a crime in the commission of preventing crime you will go to jail. There's a couple of things that are permitted and they're outlined as "detainment without excessive force" - for citizens arrest, and then it's only for the duration until a relevant authority can be called... with a maximum term of time that authority must be called.. It's extremely limited.
And one of the offences specifically not permissible for citizens arrest is inciting racial hatred.
You do understand that if their side does the same, you won't have any kind of moral high ground to stand on because you have already condoned stooping to their level?
I'm not sure how much that would mean swinging from the rafters of [insert intolerant country]. The white supremacists will maybe lose their jobs or reputation, but the consequences could be much more dire in retaliation.
something something, "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them," something something
You're exaggerating. Yes, it gives up the "doxxing not OK", but there will often remain a large moral difference between "Alice was accurately doxxed as KKK/Nazi" versus "Bob was accurately doxxed as $X."
There are very few $X which are both worse, plausible, and "the other side."
We also need to ask who is going to care or be convinced. Orwell's The Party does not care about ethical or moral consistency, only power.
Weird moral equivocation. Nazis declare themselves enemies of mankind. They otherise themselves with their beliefs. It should be legal to stone them in the streets as non humans.
If "Their Side" did the same to innocent people who hadn't declared they are everyone's enemies its a completely different scenario.
Somehow I'm not holding my breath for this gal to be prosecuted under the CFAA. And then people wonder why the global right is rejecting the idea of the rule of law...