Given that this is essentially what HBGary was going to do to them, it's actually a kind of poetic justice. Stupid, to be sure, but there's a method to the madness.
This wasn't justice. It was revenge. There's a difference. Justice accomplishes something. It keeps a bad person from doing bad things. Revenge only makes things worse. I mean, if Barr was going to turn over their information to the FBI before, he sure as hell is going to now. So what dis they accomplish by releasing Barr's personal info? Nothing, morally or practically.
I think you might be unfamiliar with the term "poetic justice." It doesn't really have anything to do with the justice system, per se — it's more closely related to the common conception of karma or the idea of "comeuppance." Poetic justice is unequivocally a tit-for-tat repayment for misdeeds, not the kind of deterrent you describe.
Also, they already released all the info themselves, so Barr giving it to the police would be redundant.
I know what poetic justice is. I'm reminded of an English professor who said that it was so-called because it only happens in poetry. :-)
Regardless, poetic justice is more about fate making the good guys get their reward while still being good and the bad guys get punished as a result of their actions. This isn't a case of fate. It's a case of someone (deliberately) posting someone's social security numbers online for everyone to see. Was that the just thing to do? I suppose that's debatable. But I don't think it meets the literary definition of poetic justice.
> This wasn't justice. It was revenge. There's a difference. Justice accomplishes something. It keeps a bad person from doing bad things. Revenge only makes things worse.
I disagree with your definitions. I would say justice is sanctioned legally, while revenge isn't. Aside from that, they're nearly indistinguishable. And given what is and isn't legally sanctioned by countries ("torture" for example), I think the difference is even less.
I'd say justice is more than legal punishment, it is punishment appropriate to the crime. If you steal from me and then I shoot and kill you, that's revenge but it's probably not justice.
Justice is meant to break the cycle of vengeance. Justice is based on objective morality whereas vengeance is based on feelings. Justice is what has cause western civilization to be so successful. On the other side you have dictators and despots.
Very cynical, and wrong. Revenge is carried out by the victim or someone who is emotionally attached. Justice is an objective third party, punishing based on evidence and an established standard which the offender has knowingly agreed to and broken. (By being a citizen of our country, you have implicitly agreed not to murder, for example, or by signing this contract, you explicitly agreed to complete the work.)
Sure, justice gets twisted on a regular basis. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, as a concept, as something different from revenge.
Regardless of the semantics, my point was that Anonymous hasn't accomplished anything aside from a feeling of satisfaction. Use whatever language you wish.
