http://static.businessinsider.com/image/4d00e452ccd1d5f878050000/hackers-movie-assange-editorial-sidebar.jpg
― am0n, Friday, 10 December 2010 17:58 (fifteen years ago)
so glad this evil calumny has finally been exposed
― fuckin magnates, why don't they work (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 10 December 2010 18:47 (fifteen years ago)
so. i just got a robocall from the quebec civil court informing me that my ISP gave them my info re: having read wikileaks and i am being added to a pending case that could result in SIGNIFICANT fines.
25% is this for real? 25% oh, sigh, how predictable, 50% want to go watch 'Brazil'
― The SBurbs (Alex in Montreal), Friday, 10 December 2010 21:09 (fifteen years ago)
http://twitter.com/alexostroff/status/13328797394800640
Just got a robo-call from the Quebec Court informing me that I was added to a civil case for reading classified #wikileaks docs. 2000$ fine. 44 minutes ago via web
― ╭∩╮⎝⏠⏝⏠⎠╭∩╮ (jeff), Friday, 10 December 2010 21:10 (fifteen years ago)
xp - ouch
― ╭∩╮⎝⏠⏝⏠⎠╭∩╮ (jeff), Friday, 10 December 2010 21:11 (fifteen years ago)
holy shit
― goole, Friday, 10 December 2010 21:11 (fifteen years ago)
Matthew Bennell: [dials his phone] I'll get the police.Telephone Operator: [voice] Police.Matthew Bennell: Officer, I'd like to report four bodies in my backyard.Telephone Operator: Wait right there Mr. Bennell.Matthew Bennell: How do you know my name?Jack Bellicec: [Jack's eyes widen with fear] Hang up, Matthew.Matthew Bennell: [into the phone] I didn't tell you my name.Jack Bellicec: Hang up!Matthew Bennell: [hangs up the phone] I didn't tell them my name!Nancy Bellicec: That's because they're all part of it. They're all pods, all of them!
― youtubular bells (Edward III), Friday, 10 December 2010 21:12 (fifteen years ago)
Wait, how is this possible? The only people who are endangered by reading the documents are US federal employees afaik.
― seandalai, Friday, 10 December 2010 21:29 (fifteen years ago)
wait wtf alex???
― k3vin k., Friday, 10 December 2010 21:30 (fifteen years ago)
canada got no 1st amendment
how is the case civil and not criminal?
i have like a billion questions about this. so fucked.
― goole, Friday, 10 December 2010 21:32 (fifteen years ago)
contact the phone company, trace the call, get us some answers dammit
― youtubular bells (Edward III), Friday, 10 December 2010 21:33 (fifteen years ago)
yeah doesn't make any sense to me (who is bringing the suit? how can it be a crime to read something? etc.) but I know fuck all about Canadian law
― fuckin magnates, why don't they work (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 10 December 2010 21:33 (fifteen years ago)
sounds like bs
― lotta diamonds ... but prolly more display names (deej), Friday, 10 December 2010 22:18 (fifteen years ago)
yeah, i mean, i have half a mind to think it's a scam of some kind. but i've no idea how canadian law works.
are you usually notified that you're a party to a suit by robocall?
― goole, Friday, 10 December 2010 22:20 (fifteen years ago)
holy fucking shit
― kanellos (gbx), Friday, 10 December 2010 22:21 (fifteen years ago)
it could well be a scam but well, what's the hypothetical point of said scam
― fuckin magnates, why don't they work (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 10 December 2010 22:27 (fifteen years ago)
get your data? fuck i dunno
― goole, Friday, 10 December 2010 22:30 (fifteen years ago)
yeah, a cursory google search suggests that someone is fucking with you
― kanellos (gbx), Friday, 10 December 2010 22:30 (fifteen years ago)
yeah. i am of the opinion now that someone is fucking with me, but to what end. and given that the phone number listed in caller ID matched the number provided on the Montreal division of the Civil Court of Quebec. and given that they didn't ask for any information?
― The SBurbs (Alex in Montreal), Friday, 10 December 2010 22:51 (fifteen years ago)
like...no you are not normally notified by robocall that you are party to a suit, nor are you usually warned in advance that you are underinvestigation by things you have not yet been charged with BUT who would stand to gain from fake calls to canadians re: wikileaks.
― The SBurbs (Alex in Montreal), Friday, 10 December 2010 22:52 (fifteen years ago)
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSnuQF7cy1yFFxKcLPQ_lLoMwK1Qn-YUDDhScaydgPoR2SlLyWI
― fuckin magnates, why don't they work (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 10 December 2010 22:54 (fifteen years ago)
is pranknet still around?
― ╭∩╮⎝⏠⏝⏠⎠╭∩╮ (jeff), Saturday, 11 December 2010 00:36 (fifteen years ago)
This Assange guy has a fangirl Tumblr dedicated to him that boarders on the creepy, pages upon pages full of fan art and gushing over how "hawt" he is with the white hair. Is Tumblr the new LiveJournal or something?
For me, WikiLeaks case isn't even exciting. I don't think we'll be seeing people with "Free Julian Assange" signatures in tech forums like Usenet users did during Kevin Mitnick's case two decades ago.
― ILM Flipping - I Kelsey Grammered Your Thread (MintIce), Saturday, 11 December 2010 01:00 (fifteen years ago)
Is Tumblr the new LiveJournal or something?
Its the establishment 4chan via Twitter?
― Telephoneface (Adam Bruneau), Saturday, 11 December 2010 05:00 (fifteen years ago)
whoa, just re-reading this thread, did caek and history mayne think i was posting the ralph nader citation in comment to the comments right above mine on the issue of what constitutes rape? i came here to post that and didn't read the most recent comments before i submitted the post...
― jeevves, Saturday, 11 December 2010 15:56 (fifteen years ago)
i've seriously been wondering for two days what the hell they were on about
i can't remember. iirc you were saying that nader being framed was a bit like assange being done for rape. i was saying, nader being deliberately set up is different from assange having something he actually did used as a tool to bring him down for "other reasons".
― man dem coalition (history mayne), Saturday, 11 December 2010 17:29 (fifteen years ago)
sorry if i wasn't clear about that. a member of my immediate family is a rape victim - i definitely wouldn't make that assertion if assange had actually done something. rereading my post it looks like i was commenting on what someone was saying earlier, but i was trying to make a general comment.
― jeevves, Saturday, 11 December 2010 17:33 (fifteen years ago)
e.g., if assange is prosecuted for something he actually did he is in no way like nader. sorry i really want to clarify that.
― jeevves, Saturday, 11 December 2010 17:35 (fifteen years ago)
I don't think we'll be seeing people with "Free Julian Assange" signatures in tech forums like Usenet users did during Kevin Mitnick's case two decades ago.
No? http://images.theage.com.au/2010/12/12/2091504/protestmain-300x340.jpg
― manic pixie dream girl phenomenon (Trayce), Sunday, 12 December 2010 06:42 (fifteen years ago)
Free Assange is so fucking gauche.
― rappa ternt sagna (jim in glasgow), Sunday, 12 December 2010 07:19 (fifteen years ago)
Those were called "Julian Assange masks" on some news site (possibly bbcnews). They either don't know they're V For Vendetta Guy Fawkes masks or Assange has started growing face hair in jail.
― StanM, Sunday, 12 December 2010 07:38 (fifteen years ago)
It was bbc, but they've corrected it already: it was the photo caption here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11977406
― StanM, Sunday, 12 December 2010 07:41 (fifteen years ago)
The whole v for vendetta/anonymous /b/tards thing is cringeworthy, tbh.
― manic pixie dream girl phenomenon (Trayce), Sunday, 12 December 2010 08:22 (fifteen years ago)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1GulEPb-z8&feature=player_embedded
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 12 December 2010 08:33 (fifteen years ago)
I know this makes me a BAD person but, erm... Link to the Tumblr pls?
Because I have been calling Rule 34 on Julian Assange Prison Slash for several days now and LiveJournal has not come up with the goods.
::slinks off guiltily at the poor taste::
― I got so many Socks I keep some at my aunt's house (Karen D. Tregaskin), Sunday, 12 December 2010 09:54 (fifteen years ago)
lol
'un chant d'assange'
― salvia diva, no rum (nakhchivan), Sunday, 12 December 2010 13:03 (fifteen years ago)
lol kdt
― reginald velkohnson (crüt), Sunday, 12 December 2010 13:18 (fifteen years ago)
Was this posted yet?
http://www.okcupid.com/profile/HarryHarrison
last online dec 31, 2006 so you know it aint a fake
― Princess TamTam, Sunday, 12 December 2010 19:21 (fifteen years ago)
throw away the key tbh
― À la recherche du temps Pardew (jim in glasgow), Sunday, 12 December 2010 19:30 (fifteen years ago)
LOL
The Slut Test 87% Slut
― Fetchboy, Sunday, 12 December 2010 19:30 (fifteen years ago)
cia black ops hit new low
― salvia divanorum (nakhchivan), Sunday, 12 December 2010 19:31 (fifteen years ago)
The Are you Dominant or submissive Test 87% - The Master
The do you understand women Test 73 sensitivity
The Alignment Test Chaotic Neutral
― Princess TamTam, Sunday, 12 December 2010 19:32 (fifteen years ago)
Interesting you can see his profile even not logged into okc. Cant anyone else's i know.
― manic pixie dream girl phenomenon (Trayce), Sunday, 12 December 2010 20:52 (fifteen years ago)
yes you can
― Princess TamTam, Sunday, 12 December 2010 20:53 (fifteen years ago)
i do it all the time
It's a conspiracy from the CIA!!!! OMGz
― Mordy, Sunday, 12 December 2010 20:53 (fifteen years ago)
Gotta admit, soon after lolzing at Harry Harrison I scrambled to okcupid to make sure I'd deleted that profile that I stopped using 5 years ago.
― Fetchboy, Sunday, 12 December 2010 20:55 (fifteen years ago)
Oh ok maybe you can set it in yr settings then cos mine isnt viewable logged out.
― manic pixie dream girl phenomenon (Trayce), Sunday, 12 December 2010 20:57 (fifteen years ago)
hey www.amazon.co.uk is down
― jabba hands, Sunday, 12 December 2010 21:05 (fifteen years ago)