You're ignoring a lot of the other things hackers do. Like, you know, break into systems they don't own for profit. On the dark web, you've got DDoS as a service and botnet as a service sites.
What is wrong with that? The owners of these systems should have made sure that they don't run shitty and (vulnerable/old versions of their) programs.
> On the dark web, you've got DDoS as a service and botnet as a service sites.
These things exist on the normal web as well.
Yes
> What about in the physical world?
Actions in the physical world actually harm people, something which is not true for the virtual world and can be trivially be avoided.
I can drain your bank accounts by hacking you, how is that not actual harm?
> and can be trivially be avoided
Leaving aside the argument about whether securing yourself is "trivial", that doesn't make it OK! If you leave your door unlocked, that doesn't mean it's OK for me to come in and steal your TV.
One would need to be extremely irresponsible in order to let themselves be hacked. I would consider it as a punishment and a lesson more than anything.
In any case, this does not directly cause harm in the real world - you would not be able to make money disappear out of your home for example.
> If you leave your door unlocked, that doesn't mean it's OK for me to come in and steal your TV.
It's only the combination of the two (virtual world + can be trivially be avoided) that makes it OK.
It is not trivial to secure digital systems. If anything, it’s far harder to ensure digital systems are secure, because of the number of moving parts. I can be fairly confident that if I pack my physical money into a safe, a vulnerability is not going to be discovered that allows an arbitrary person thousands of miles away to empty it without my knowledge. Quite the opposite is true of digital systems!
Breaking into people's homes is trivially easy.
Computers are used by humans for a purpose. If you harm the computer there is a decent chance tncauses problems (inconvenience and up) to people.
No, we were talking about hacking, not things like DDoSing.
I would support the stance that DDoSing should be illegal because it only causes harm and can't be defended against easily.
What exactly do you think they're talking about when they write "hackers"? They're talking about DDOSers and data ransomers. Criminals, not some romantic bringers of justice, or something.
Bullshit argument. It’s trivial to break into most houses, for example, but it’s hardly regarded as an acceptable practice.