Part of the issue is people like you who advocate for respecting "the system" and essentially scaring kids into not doing anything. Except that simply re-enforces the draconian laws that are currently in place. If more kids rebelled and this was a regular occurrence it would help to desensitize society to digital pranks instead of always treating these kids like terrorists.
Unless you kill someone I generally don’t believe in life long criminal records. They only serve to drive people into further criminality.
I imagine for a robbery you could get 5 years in prison, 5 years with it on your record and then automatically get it expunged.
Back to the topic at hand , what if the IT hack stopped people from getting paid on time. How many suffered emotional distress ? Evictions can literally cause suicide.
Maybe someone can’t afford medication, skip it and have a stroke.
The entire criminal justice system is broken. So you did something stupid at 20, at 46 you still can’t find a job due to your record.
People want simple easy solutions. Things are much more complicated. If you release a dozen felons 5 years early and 2 go on to commit horrific crimes it’s easy to ignore the good the other 10 did
There are processes for changing the laws without sending kids to jail, having to treat kids like terrorists, or potentially making the law even harsher because it isn't effective enough to dissuade lawbreaking. If the laws feel draconian, perhaps following those processes might be a better approach to change the system without as many sacrifices.
The comment didn't say "respect the system", it said to deal in the realpolitik and don't try to effect legislative change by ruining your life as a high school student.
Is it a good system if a "stupid prank" can "throw away your future" ?
Welcome to the War On Redemption. Primary participants are the harmful people who create these systems and the people who remain silent while countless lives are ruined for no good result.
Yes, students get in trouble all the time, but most of the consequences for their stupidity are slaps on the hand. Lunch in a classroom, a parent-teacher conference, after school detention, in-school suspension, getting grounded - none of these things carry civil or criminal charges that are a matter of record. What should be a harmless prank can turn into a life altering civil and criminal charges. With high school kids, things quickly go from, "I hacked the school network to do a Rick Roll; they laughed and sent me on my way," all the way to, "I gave my friend the exploit to do something similar; I didn't know he was going to change everyone's grades to 69%."
Further, I would not want to teach in a district where students doing digital pranks is the norm. I volunteer at a high school. Unchecked digital pranks would quickly turn into a constant stream of disruptions. Everyone would think that their prank is better than the last.
Why do we tolerate pranks? You shouldn't be able to interfere with someone else and say 'just a prank bro'. Leave other people's things alone. Don't create work for other people. Don't bother people just trying to do their jobs. Don't impose your sense of humour on others. These all seem like basics to me?
If you think someone's funny? Great. Just don't bother other people with it. Do it with your own stuff, not other people's.
This is a super basic example, but it serves to illustrate my point. It's not just a prank bro, even when it is.
Even if I agree that it's a dumb practice, you're proposing a world where employers are free to refuse your hire if you (eg.) were fired from a job 26 years ago, but not because you were convicted of a crime.
Pranks can be an outlet for creativity and learning that might not otherwise happen.
The post concludes with:
> This has been one of the most remarkable experiences I ever had in high school and I thank everyone who helped support me. That's all and thanks for reading!
I'm certain this kid learned so much working through the execution of this prank, and without being criminalized by the district, he's better off for it. Likewise, the IT department is better off with a more secure system, and staff and students experienced shared moments of unexpected joy.
Call me naive, but I'd say this kid made his small slice of the world a bit better, if only for a fleeting moment.
Great.
But do it with your own things then. Don't bother anyone else or touch anyone else's things.
And no worker should ever have to do any work (such as reset a computer system) because of your prank. Workers have enough work to do and enough hassles in their lives.
You're really oversimplifying here. Something tells me this highschooler doesn't personally own the breadth of commercial equipment that he hacked for this prank.
> And no worker should ever have to do any work (such as reset a computer system) because of your prank. Workers have enough work to do and enough hassles in their lives.
Okay, let's all be worker robots :)
So they shouldn't have done it.
> Okay, let's all be worker robots :)
It's not about what you want to do. It's about what some low-paid worker who has to clean up after you thinks. Or some other student inconvenienced by your prank thinks.
If you're impacting on someone else's life then you're in the wrong!
I think you misread the GP. He's not defending the system, just describing it, and how the OP was lucky that the people in charge were unusual and open-minded. He's warning others that the risk/reward implied by the OP's experience is misleading.
I suspect that most commenters on this site applaud the kids adventurousness and style. A great hack! But we are uniquely aware of how rare it is that anyone with authority, school administrators or law enforcement, would show any leniency or self-restraint in these cases. On balance, the instinct seems to go for the jugular, dehumanize the kid as a criminal hacker, and ruin his life. No-one is saying that's good, or reasonable. It's just how it is.
What if these people don't want your sense of humour imposed on them?
I think it's ethically wrong.
As the author points out early on in this article, most school districts would not have tolerated a prank like this. In fact this is the only example I know about a prank this big that got the response of toleration the author documented in the article.
> You shouldn't be able to interfere with someone else and say 'just a prank bro'.
The students made a report of what they did and presented it to the administration.
I guess to be generous I could reinterpret your concern to be, "Do students in every school district in the U.S. get to avoid criminal prosecution under the draconian CFAA by constructing a complex hack tailored to avoid interrupting regular school business, then writing up a report and giving a powerpoint presentation to an apparently enlightened and tech-savvy administration to help them strengthen their network defenses?" In that case, point taken.
So what?
Can I push you down in the street and then hand you a report explaining how I was able to push you down and that makes it all ok?
And none of them work, or will ever work in this oligarchy. The rich own the congress, and the senate, and they benefit greatly from these things. America hasn't been a functioning republic in at least 50 years.
(Maybe we just have different experiences and thus different definitions of the word.)
To use the murder example again: many people who commit manslaughter have all kinds of various intentions. The one murder is concerned with is whether or not they specifically had the intent to kill the person. "Establishing intent" in this scenario is specifically regarding that one intent. Not any intent.