CapitalistSwine Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 The content of the quote I used above from your response to my question seemed to imply that there was something wrong with my asking the question. My assumption that is was pointed at me was based on your quoting of my statement. If I inferred that in error, apologies. Not at all, the quote system within that context only reinforced the view that it was a remark directed at you. I was multitasking away from the computer when I made the comment and I apparently did not clarify my intention as well as I should have. It was a general statement, no worries. I am the one to apologize here, so my apologies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eiuol Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 The hacker is still only assuming that the victim of the hacking has done corrupt/rights violating things. They may have some evidence, but they lack proof. Only by violating rights (hacking) can they get the proof to reveal. Well, I think of the sort of people who are willing to pirate software because they think it's unfair or an injustice how companies set their software distribution rules and permissions. I don't mean hacking into a computer without permission to find out information before anything is known. Hacking doesn't necessarily involve an unauthorized break in to computers or networks, though it might like in the example above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.