‘it is morally indefensible’
The author's morals maybe, but life has taught me that there is huge variability in personal morals, generally relative and on a sliding scale to the applicability to the individual.
The input and professional assessment from multiple expert personnel has fed into this ruling, it clearly hasn’t been an arbitrary decision. The judged “dangerous individual” has taken it upon himself to publicise the issue thereby ensuring difficulty in obtaining employment and maybe housing. Possibly a further attempt to be ‘manipulative’?
Is he an IT consultant or an IT contractor? Or, is he just a bloke who knows his way around a computer? The description has changed between El Reg articles.
Personally, my morals can accept the assement and judgement of the listed professionals involved, that’s what their role in society is, to make judgements and attempt to protect society.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
