I was going to try to explain but seeing you use phrases like "pure, raw evil" to describe a couple of internet pranks makes me wonder if it's even possible.
The epilepsy thing was going too far, I agree, and they haven't done anything like that since. But I don't see why this one is so bad, in fact when I saw the headline I grinned and thought "good old 4Chan, creating drama for the rest of us .."
When I think "pure, raw evil" I think of nazi concentration camps and pleasure killers, etc. I cannot even begin to put these pranks into the same category. I don't see any reason whatsoever why it should be illegal. I just don't understand your reaction at all, basically. What is the problem?
is a prank that's actually funny and clever. Most of the 4chan things aren't particularly clever or entertaining, and things like targeting people with an illness, or children, are just lame, and not funny. Things that make for entertaining pranks are focusing on the powerful, the famous, and especially those who are full of themselves.
Honestly, I found that prank (précis: college A sabotages college B's materials to mistakenly spell college A's name at a football game) to be quite profoundly un-funny, reminiscent of those awful "kids at camp" movies where the "hero" kids would do something to make the "enemy" kids all fall into the water, or something.
I guess my idea of funny pranks would be something like The Chaser (Australian TV Show), not sure what the US equivalent would be.
Personally, I feel that singling out handicapped people on the web and posting images specifically tailored to bring about possible-fatal seizures in them is the very behavior of pleasure killers.
At least many of the Nazi soldiers that participated in the holocaust didn't personally agree with their orders, despite what they did. But make no mistake about it, every single Anonymous member that posted on YouTube and the epilepsy forums did so of their own volition and should be tried for it.
The posts to the epilepsy forum could easily be tried as attempted manslaughter. And the posts to YouTube, on an individual basis, are almost guaranteed to cover a number of lesser charges, such as distribution of sexual material to minors, lewd acts, etc.
I said I also disagreed with the epilepsy event. That went too far. But this is learning, is it not? They went too far, they learned from it, they haven't done it again. Why involve the law? You would never find them anyway.
There were no lasting ill effects from the epilepsy forum vandalism. The Wired article you link to mentions "day-long migraine", someone who locked up for "about 10 seconds", etc. I'm not trying to downplay the stupidity of it, not at all. I'm just saying that throwing around phrases like "attempted manslaughter" is a huge exaggeration. It was a stupid, ill-conceived prank that had unanticipated consequences. If they'd done it again after that, then you can start using words like malicious or maelevolent, but they haven't.
I don't have any problem with the YouTube prank at all. Who cares if some kids see some naked people? I'd almost prefer them watching porn than the fricking Jonas Brothers. And good luck convicting anyone, they'd just claim is was art or something, and I kind of agree.
The epilepsy thing was going too far, I agree, and they haven't done anything like that since. But I don't see why this one is so bad, in fact when I saw the headline I grinned and thought "good old 4Chan, creating drama for the rest of us .."
When I think "pure, raw evil" I think of nazi concentration camps and pleasure killers, etc. I cannot even begin to put these pranks into the same category. I don't see any reason whatsoever why it should be illegal. I just don't understand your reaction at all, basically. What is the problem?