Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Don't ask to ask, just ask

Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case

by merlyn (Sage)
on Dec 24, 2001 at 00:44 UTC ( #134101=perlmeditation: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

See my fors-announce message for details.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

  • Comment on Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case
by grinder (Bishop) on Dec 24, 2001 at 01:42 UTC
    That really sucks. Really, that really, really sucks.

    I dunno, I've followed this saga on and off for years, I'm pretty familiar with the case. But maybe there are other people, new to Perl, who don't know what this is all about. Do you have a link to a web page that explains the issue?

    Maybe if people knew the whole story, they would be less inclined to downvote you on this...

    g r i n d e r
    just another bofh

    print@_{sort keys %_},$/if%_=split//,'= & *a?b:e\f/h^h!j+n,o@o;r$s-t%t#u';
Re: Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case
by Chrisf (Friar) on Dec 24, 2001 at 11:39 UTC
    I'd have to agree with grinder here, this really does suck. If I had any respect left for Intel, or the U.S. Justice department I would have just lost it.

    For anyone who is unfamiliar with the case, there's a good summary here (

Re: Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case
by jepri (Parson) on Dec 24, 2001 at 03:18 UTC
    Your link didn't work in my browser for some reason, but I located the article fairly quickly.

    I'm sorry to hear the court declined to hear your case. It's always a terrible thing to hear about the law being used to punish someone frivolously.

    I didn't believe in evil until I dated it.

Re: Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case
by tachyon (Chancellor) on Dec 24, 2001 at 21:07 UTC

    I have lived for the past eight years in the hope that the legal system was truly a justice system, but that hope has now faded, and I'm older and wiser, but permanently battle-scarred.

    Chin up, shoulders back. The legal system just is. I did a single year of law once upon a once upon before I saw the light. I was continuously chastised for my idiotic notions of justice - this was law afterall - what did justice have to do with it? The two may have been related at some time in the dim and distant past but....

    The sun will rise tomorrow and it will be a new day. With that thought compliments of the season to you.




Re: Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case
by schumi (Hermit) on Dec 24, 2001 at 15:57 UTC
    That is very sad news indeed. I have always thought - rather na´vely I guess - that courts would listen to facts and decide according to them. Your case just proves once more that this obviously is not the case. It seems that justice the longer the more becomes a question of who has more money, power and influence.

    I wish you a quiet, merry Christmas despite all this, and all the Best for the new year.


Re: Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case
by vladb (Vicar) on Dec 25, 2001 at 03:06 UTC
    Randal, I can't believe it! I didn't hear about your case until this moment and it now strikes me so hard, I simply fail to understand how one could cope with all this. I should comment your 'hacker' spirit! I'm still not 100% aware of the circumstances of your case; however, from what I have been able to dig up on the web, I say that laws (especially those of Oregon state) are "bull shit!". I don't trust COPS now either. I never trusted the government. To produce such llama laws is shameful.

    I'd like to learn more about what _exactly_ happened.. God knows, it might help me never get in the same pile of dirt =/.

    Randal, you are the _MAN_! I wish you good luck in ur career and hopefully some positive resolution in this case.

    "There is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels." -- Confession of Faith
Re: Oregon Supreme Court declines to hear my case
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 19, 2002 at 06:54 UTC

    Interesting to see this case mentioned in Maximum Security, 3rd edition (In chapter 14 - the password cracking process):

    The problem with distributed cracking is that it makes a lot of noise. Remember the Randal Schwartz case? Mr. Schwartz probably would never have been discovered if he were not distributing the CPU load. Another system administrator noticed the heavy processor power being eaten. (He also noted that one process had been running for more than a day.) Distributed cracking really isn't viable for a cracker unless he is the administrator of a site or he has a net work at home...

    Unfortunately it doesn't appear the publicity helped to reverse Intel's or the justice department's position. Hopefully other people did learn something from the case though, I know I did.

      It's also incorrect. I was not "distributing the CPU load". I was using the shared server that we had just installed but not yet deployed for its designated task, partially as a test of the new server, and partially as a test of the new Crack version which I had not used. And it was the only server on which I was running crack. There's no "distributing" there.

      While I appreciate that my case has been written up in at least half a dozen books, I do wish some of them had come to me for a bit of fact-checking first.

      -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

        Doesn't surprise me, almost half the statements in that book are flawed in some way.

A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlmeditation [id://134101]
Approved by root
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others avoiding work at the Monastery: (4)
As of 2023-05-31 22:18 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found