Yeah, I get it guys. Of course I know it's out there. But two points:

1. It wasn't here. You'd have to look for it. This makes it that much easier. It's on Slate for crying out loud. And moreover, he could have written the same article making the same points without the breathless joy of discovery and blow-by-blow instructions and LINKS. I just really hate the hypocritical nonsense espoused by those who do harm to others for others' "own good" while all the while benefiting themselves. It's BS and the author knows it. This isn't a public service. It's juvenile boasting. Nothing more nothing less.

2. He claims he DID it. (Again, I hope he's kidding and/or these techniques are ineffectual if he actually did do it.) How the heck is that journalism? That's just putting your tag all over town and then writing an article about how folks need better security around their homes and businesses. Or like breaking into homes through people's open windows, robbing em, and then writing an article about how we need window bars. You don't get credit for that. You don't get to be part of the problem and then try to act like you're just a samaritan. It just makes you two whole different kinds of d*ck at once.

Would serve Slate right if someone did take em down as a result of the info in this piece though. Would remind us that in a world of coulda, shoulda on occasion also still be a topic of reflection.

Anyway. Maybe I'm just getting old.