I was reading on slashdot and wired news about a convicted hacker who refuses to give blood.. and I’m wondering why this is even an issue?
If this guy was a convicted murderer or rapist that they were going to set free, I could see the need to have his DNA on file to compare against future cases, but this is a hacker — a guy involved in computers. If he were to penetrate the network of some major company, having his DNA wouldn’t help.. the last time I checked when you hack or crack into something you don’t tend to leave a little text file entitled “DNA test results.txt” for forensics to compare against DNA stored on their big computers. Or am I missing something..?
On a tangent, I am amused that the guy’s surname is “Lamo”, just ’cause it sounds like “lame-o” in my head. ;)
Edit: You’ve all probably noticed the new layout.. there’s also a new rant about football.