[BNBR]

Originally Posted by kokonutty

You bet I'm serious. I'm not dopey enough to accept everything that is searched on the internet - your mileage obviously varies. Once again, the only definition that matters is the one that is enclosed within a law that has allegedly been violated.

You just keep going. So, sure. Let's use the definition from the Statute..

Florida Statute 815.06(2)(a)
Accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device with knowledge that such access is unauthorized or the manner of use exceeds authorization;

It's a 3rd degree felony, by the way.

So you apparently think Google is some "anonymous website" for showing you dictionary definitions. The same definitions that happen to match the Florida Statute. Lol. I would think you would have looked up the Statute before running your mouth off, but, no. You sure are super not dopey, though.

[Ghaati]

Originally Posted by Arcenal352

Well, it just so happens to actually BE the law. It's a crime. And it's "hacking," according to legal definition.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) is the leading federal anti-hacking legislation that prohibits unauthorized access to another's computer system. Although the law was originally meant to protect the computer systems of U.S. government entities and financial institutions, the scope of the Act expanded with amendments to include practically any computer in the country (including devices such as servers, desktops, laptops, cellphones, and tablets).



https://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-1...sect-1030.html

(2)  intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains--

(A)  information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or of a card issuer as defined in section 1602(n) of title 15 , or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer, as such terms are defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. );

(B)  information from any department or agency of the United States;  or

(C)  information from any protected computer;

If she did those things, then yes she would be violating the law.

However, her claim was that the data was SENT to her by people in those departments whose computers she's claiming to have hacked. If they did, in fact, provide her with the data, then she didn't hack anything at all. And since at this point so far, the DoJ and no one else from the Government has released their findings, none of us know which end is telling the truth about this incident.

What we DO know, however, is that Rebekah Jones was a whistleblower, who exposed a coverup: that Florida, by way of DeSantis, intentionally left out important information that its citizens needed to know about COVID-19 statistics.

So we know in advance that Rebekah Jones knew actual facts because she worked in the department. She tried to tell people in charge "hey something isn't kosher here!" and when it was discovered she was right - instead of correcting it, they fired her.

We also know that she had access - in one way or another (whether through hacking or someone GAVE her the data) to the actual information, which she has been posting on the Florida's Dashboard, which is basically a graphic spreadsheet of her own design, using software and code necessary to create websites.

We know she has a history of informing people of facts.

So who am I going to believe? The people who were proven - by her - to have intentionally obscured facts? Or the person who has a history of informing people of facts?

I'm going to believe Rebekah, until they can PROVE that she can't be believed.

[BNBR]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

If she did those things, then yes she would be violating the law.

However, her claim was that the data was SENT to her by people in those departments whose computers she's claiming to have hacked. If they did, in fact, provide her with the data, then she didn't hack anything at all. And since at this point so far, the DoJ and no one else from the Government has released their findings, none of us know which end is telling the truth about this incident.

What we DO know, however, is that Rebekah Jones was a whistleblower, who exposed a coverup: that Florida, by way of DeSantis, intentionally left out important information that its citizens needed to know about COVID-19 statistics.

So we know in advance that Rebekah Jones knew actual facts because she worked in the department. She tried to tell people in charge "hey something isn't kosher here!" and when it was discovered she was right - instead of correcting it, they fired her.

We also know that she had access - in one way or another (whether through hacking or someone GAVE her the data) to the actual information, which she has been posting on the Florida's Dashboard, which is basically a graphic spreadsheet of her own design, using software and code necessary to create websites.

We know she has a history of informing people of facts.

So who am I going to believe? The people who were proven - by her - to have intentionally obscured facts? Or the person who has a history of informing people of facts?

I'm going to believe Rebekah, until they can PROVE that she can't be believed.

That's one heck of a leap. She didn't expose any sort of coverup. That's a completely make believe version of the facts. She was ignoring her superiors and other scientists, thinking she knew better, and portrayed it as some sort of coverup. She has a history of being a problematic person. So if you are going to ask who you want to believe, do you want to believe the problematic employee, who has a criminal history and checkered past, or the supervisors who have no such issues and have given you no reason to doubt them?

And no, the claim is that she used the emergency alert system. That's the "hack" - not using stolen data. Do you not pay attention at all to what is going on before you post this nonsense?

[Corrie22]

point by point...


Rebekah Jones’ firing is the COVID clickbait the media dreams of – but it’s all fake

https://tallahasseereports.com/2020/...-its-all-fake/

[Dave_n_Tenn]

Originally Posted by Corrie22

point by point...


Rebekah Jones’ firing is the COVID clickbait the media dreams of – but it’s all fake

https://tallahasseereports.com/2020/...-its-all-fake/

The purveyors of pseudo outrage leveled at Gov. DeSantis will (likely) not read the link, nor will this change their minds, EVEN if the do.

Facts matter

[BNBR]

Originally Posted by Dave_n_Tenn

The purveyors of pseudo outrage leveled at Gov. DeSantis will (likely) not read the link, nor will this change their minds, EVEN if the do.

Facts matter

Right. And yet the dummies have donated over $500k to her, including $250k on a fundraiser specifically created as personal cash, not for her legal defense. Lol.

[Shiraz2020]

Originally Posted by grad_student200

The Florida Department of Health, like other healthcare agencies, is very strict about privacy and HIPAA compliance. Cybersecurity is taken very seriously. Penalties can be very harsh if an organization is not compliant. This is parlayed to all workers. From their view, the state generally, in many cases, has the right to pursue cases of medical fraud, security violations, malpractice, etc.

With that said, this case seems different because a major prosecutor resigned in protest. It's likely easy for many readers to dismiss a random post by a stranger on the internet. But when an experienced, high-ranking, respected Republican attorney quits in PROTEST over the case, then it raises concerns. It must be a negative, statistically-outlying case rooted in politics. It will likely get worse because now her confidants are exposed, then counter suits may arise. Much of the public is definitely in support. But when even a Republican resigns in protest in the Republican stronghold of Florida, then it looks like a corrupted case.

But in general, I defer to due process. I do not proclaim any knowledge of the details firsthand. Years ago, I worked in Tallahassee, so I know of the state's way of doing things. They have a team of lawyers on hand for situations like this. But if their lead quits, then it will be interesting on how this plays out in court. It will likely go under national scrutiny. In 2000 it was "Bush vs. Gore". Now it's the political turmoil over COVID-19 data.

Meanwhile, the dashboard's high usefulness has been impeded by the seizure of her hardware. That data had been a source of truth for many citizens trying to navigate the data details of the current pandemic. FSU has an excellent GIS department, and her COVID-19 dashboard was one of the best. Many of the healthcare students study GIS at FSU because it is useful in studying disease clusters and growth patterns. But now her dashboard has been disrupted.
https://www.tampabay.com/news/florid...-data-analyst/

Thank you for being a voice of reason and logic, not pulling from QAnon conspiracies posted on the web, YouTube videos, or what Uncle Harvey said after he drank too much wine at Thanksgiving. Much appreciated.

[Shiraz2020]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

If she did those things, then yes she would be violating the law.

However, her claim was that the data was SENT to her by people in those departments whose computers she's claiming to have hacked. If they did, in fact, provide her with the data, then she didn't hack anything at all. And since at this point so far, the DoJ and no one else from the Government has released their findings, none of us know which end is telling the truth about this incident.

What we DO know, however, is that Rebekah Jones was a whistleblower, who exposed a coverup: that Florida, by way of DeSantis, intentionally left out important information that its citizens needed to know about COVID-19 statistics.

So we know in advance that Rebekah Jones knew actual facts because she worked in the department. She tried to tell people in charge "hey something isn't kosher here!" and when it was discovered she was right - instead of correcting it, they fired her.

We also know that she had access - in one way or another (whether through hacking or someone GAVE her the data) to the actual information, which she has been posting on the Florida's Dashboard, which is basically a graphic spreadsheet of her own design, using software and code necessary to create websites.

We know she has a history of informing people of facts.

So who am I going to believe? The people who were proven - by her - to have intentionally obscured facts? Or the person who has a history of informing people of facts?

I'm going to believe Rebekah, until they can PROVE that she can't be believed.

You mean you believe "innocent until proven guilty?" Bravo! It's incredible how many don't believe in that oh-so-American tenet.

[drive carephilly]

Originally Posted by parentologist

This is fascism, pure and simple. Rebekah Jones, former Florida data scientist, who had refused to "massage" Florida's Covid-19 numbers to make the number of infections look lower than they actually were, and was fired for it, continued in her mission to publicize the actual real numbers of infections in Florida. Florida law enforcement believes that she sent a chat message to a planning group on a state emergency alert platform, urging people to speak out publicly about Florida's coronavirus strategies.

https://www.npr.org/2020/12/08/94420...data-scientist

Her home was busted like a drug raid, endangering her and her family, all for her having dared to cross the governor's efforts to ignore coronavirus control measures.

I cannot believe this is happening in America.

They're digging up this old chestnut now?

She created a dashboard on the State website and populated it with self-diagnosed cases. She was told to take it down (because it's not valid data and because there was no discussion about using it at all) she refused so she got fired. Then she tried to run with it.

She's not Julian Assange - she's just a wannabe.

She's exactly where she belongs right now.

[Dave_n_Tenn]

It's pseudo outrage looking for a place to land.