Re: Missing the point
"intentionally causing damage without authorization , to a protected computer."
How do you parse this?
I can only parse it one way: he did not have authorization to cause damage but he did so and intentionally. Being authorised to access the computer is irrelevant, it was the damage he wasn't authorised to cause. And the additional factor is the intention. We all have the risk of that accidental oops moment which does cause damage but the intention to do so would be lacking.