Superb projection there bud.

Don’t let your car kill other people, if your expensive deathtrap kills you I feel bad but I can’t say it’s unexpected.

Push down on the short side of the tab and just behind the two lumps on the lid, it should go “kathuck” and the top comes up off the lid so you can pull it free.

Yes you do.

I can’t find a reference to that but China did 17 minutes in January this year. I think you’re confusing the announcement that they increased power by 17x while maintaining plasma.

This test was 20 minutes at a higher power setting without being incredibly destructive, that’s their milestone.

And you’re not reading your sources, none of those are about access to .gov sites and yet again critique is scope and vagueries.

because you’re just doing debate bro shit

Like actually reading or basing my argument on factual law not multiple unresolved opinion. Fuck would you need that for huh?

Right off the bat you lost.

Swartz doesn’t have an outcome, he killed himself before that and this wouldn’t be normally accessible anyway. But bey nice ai try bud.

Link#2 also a fail on your part.

The Court held that an individual will “exceed authorized access” under the CFAA when he or she accesses a computer without authorization and obtains information located in particular areas of the computer, such as files or databases, that are off-limits to him. Because Van Buren had access to the license plate information he accessed, the Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit’s opinion. Thus, employers should carefully review employees’ computer access, as access for improper purpose may be permitted under the CFAA.

Link#3

The third is a critique of it’s incredible scope and vagueries of definitions which would again imply I’m correct.

Seriously bud, AI is not your friend, don’t let it out do your schoolwork for you.

Correct, which is why out isn’t a mandatory charge and has quite a high level of burden to carry.

Read the cfaa and try again.

The cfaa:

Section 1030 describes a number of offenses that occur when a defendant accesses a protected computer “without authorization.”  See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5)(B)-©.  The Department will not charge defendants for accessing “without authorization” under these paragraphs unless when, at the time of the defendant’s conduct, (1) the defendant was not authorized to access the protected computer under any circumstances by any person or entity with the authority to grant such authorization; (2) the defendant knew of the facts that made the defendant’s access without authorization; and (3) prosecution would serve the Department’s goals for CFAA enforcement, as described below in B.3.

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-48000-computer-fraud

(2) the term “protected computer” means a computer— (A) exclusively for the use of a financial institution or the United States Government, or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, used by or for a financial institution or the United States Government and the conduct constituting the offense affects that use by or for the financial institution or the Government; (B) which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States; or © that— (i) is part of a voting system; and (ii) (I) is used for the management, support, or administration of a Federal election; or (II) has moved in or otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce;

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=18-USC-695191731-692694672&term_occur=13&term_src=

It is by definition hacking, stop being obtuse and moreover stop spreading misinformation.

It is unauthorized. An unlocked door isn’t an invitation not is an open website or database, this is clearly delineated in the cfaa which btw makes tampering with any protected device a crime open door or not.

You should really lookup the law before you offer bad advice.

You’re not though.

Federal law specifically and in multiple prohibits unlicensed/unwanted entry into government devices, you don’t know what you’re talking about you simply feel it shouldn’t be illegal which is a different thing entirely.

You can unlawfully use things that are public the fact they admit they know the opening is unintended makes it clearly hacking. Stop trying to undermine an accomplishment simply because you don’t like the connotations you link together in your head.

If you know it’s not intended to be open then you notify someone it’s white hat hacking.

Iirc they actually modified it which removes any doubt.

That’s still hacking though boss petty and amusing but still hacking.

It is by definition hacking.

Stupid doesn’t negate unwanted nor illegal. I may be dumb and leave my door unlocked but you’re still a criminal if you come in without permission and move stuff about.

I was wrong it was before the declaration of Independence.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1688_Germantown_Quaker_Petition_Against_Slavery

Quakers don’t fuck around, iirc they were the first to riot after the usa was forged.

No. 500 FBI agents showed up and protested his release.

You missed the most important part, in prison for murders his accusers later plainly stated not only he didn’t do it but physically could not have.