2265
2266

Dissenting Opinion (imgur.com)

jzeek2012 が 投稿x2

並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]cpxh 36 ポイント37 ポイント  (165子コメント)

Look, I agree with you. In a perfect world everyone would have their privacy respected.

But this isn't a perfect world. You can't walk through a back alley in detroit waving around a stack of $100 bills and expect that just because you shouldn't be robbed, you won't be.

Heck you should know better than to carry any cash at all anywhere in detroit.

Now if you go ahead and put naked pictures of yourself on the internet, even if its your own private storage place, you have to at least consider the fact that this isn't a perfect world, so you shouldn't be surprised if someone finds them and steals them.

Basically what I am saying is if you want privacy, take steps to insure you keep private shit private. Don't put that shit online.

[–]AnnaKarenina7423 153 ポイント154 ポイント  (101子コメント)

But none of the women were doing anything similar to "waving around a stack of $100 bills" in a bad part of town. Their personal storage space was broken into. It's more like saying that they shouldn't have had nice things in their personal safe, because someone could rob their house.

The "scandal" here isn't that they had naked pictures, but that some lowlife broke into their personal online space (what if he had broken into their houses and stolen pictures?). Furthermore, it's a scandal that he decided that he and everyone else on the internet was entitled to see people at their most vulnerable simply because they're celebrities. It's a scandal that the iCloud was hacked. But under no circumstances are the victims to blame.

[–]Noltonn 40 ポイント41 ポイント  (24子コメント)

I agree, that comparison isn't good. Let me make a better one. iCloud is the equivalent of a safe (Reddit likes safes, so I'm using safes). A pretty shitty safe. One placed in the middle of a town for everyone to try their luck on. Yes, it's your property, and they shouldn't, but eventually people are going to give it a shot. To indicate that they shouldn't, there's even a sign next to it saying "Don't open this safe, it's not yours". But people know there's something in the safe they want, so they keep going at it. This guy was the equivalent of a locksmith, and broke the safe open. It's inevitable that eventually someone was going to break it open, because you left your valuables in a place where people have the ability to try to open it. Eventually someone smart enough would come along and open it.

Was it right to open it and take what was in it? No, of course it wasn't. Nobody is arguing the morality of that choice. But was it a good idea of the person to put his valuables there? It wasn't. It was a stupid idea. He should've known people were gonna try their luck out. He should've never put these things in a location where people can try their luck at it. The only thing to say is "Well, what did you expect?"

[–]ocdscale 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

A safe in the middle of town is a bad example. A bank is a better example.

The people using iCloud didn't decide to use an extremely conspicuous way to store their data, they used a service provided by a well-known company.

[–]Noltonn 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm sticking with the safe in the middle of the town because it shows that there wasn't any other security. It was just that, one combination to get to your valuables, and nothing to stop you from just trying again and again.

[–]UncleBenjen 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's just semantics but instead of safe I would call it a locker. Most lockers have pretty minimal security (i.e. you can brute force your way into a locker), and it's in a public, accessible place.

Calling it a safe implies it's not in a secure place and has multiple measures of security.

So this would be like those famous people putting their most prized (or private) possessions in a fucking locker.

[–]aybrah 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Its actually a pretty good example. Icloud is hardly a 'bank'.

[–]ButtsexEurope 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (11子コメント)

One that everyone will try their luck on? That's also not comparable because that's not what happened. iCloud wasn't hacked. Each individual account was hacked. He got their information and individually got the passwords changed. iCloud isn't Instagram. Obviously they're not that dumb.

All you're doing is blaming the victims. The "yeah in an ideal world" argument has been dissected. They didn't do anything wrong.

[–]Noltonn 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (10子コメント)

It's an analogy. And I don't see why what you say makes it work any less. Anything that's merely protected by a username and password with unlimited tries to open it is basically a safe, you just need to get the combination right. You don't need to break into anything to get to try your luck at the combination. It's just a safe in the middle of town. I'm saying each individual account is a safe, not iCloud itself being one big one.

Wrong is a bit word. Morally, sure, they did nothing wrong. What they did, though, was do something stupid. If there's something you want to keep from others you make sure nobody can reasonably access it. And while there was a lock on the safe, it was still in the middle of the town.

[–]Aias2 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Heck, it's a safe where you can have a robot sit there and try for you. It takes little effort on the part of the safe breaker. Anything on a network is available to someone. Is it readily available? No. But if someone wants to get in there, they will eventually. Cyber security is only truly secure when it has no access to the world wide web in any manner.

[–]Noltonn -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yep. There's two ways to be secure when it comes to technology. Either make sure it's offline, or make it not worth the effort. If someone wants to hack into my email they probably could in a matter of minutes. But why would they want to?

[–]ButtsexEurope 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Yeah, they did that by keeping it on their private account and not telling anyone the password. He got in the same way Sarah Palin guy did: internet detective work finding information to security questions. You can expect enough privacy to not have it on the cover of People but still not care if the NSA sees it. If you're walking around topless in public that's one thing. Expecting no paparazzi to take pictures of that is dumb. But this is something they took with their own phones and didn't exactly distribute to the press.

Not everybody can do a brute force attack into a server. Anyone can take a picture of a nipple slip on the red carpet.

[–]Noltonn 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Not everybody can do a brute force attack into a server. Anyone can take a picture of a nipple slip on the red carpet.

But it's a fair assumption that eventually, someone will come along who does know how to do this if you have valuable enough things on there. It's a very safe assumption to make, and they should've acted accordingly.

[–]ButtsexEurope 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

No, it's reasonable to expect a paparazzo to take a picture of you pressed up naked against your window getting fucked in the ass. It's not reasonable to expect your iCloud account getting hacked. Not even tabloids do that.

[–]Noltonn -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Because people know who run tabloids. If a tabloid did this and people found out how they did it they'd be sued seven ways to Sunday. Which is exactly what happened during the phone hacking scandals.

It's naive to believe people in general won't do it.

[–]ButtsexEurope 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

That's why it was so controversial. They folded after that. But you don't see any other tabloids in the US doing shit like that. That would be extremely illegal. So no, there is no reason for them to expect something like this.

[–]Couldntbehelpd -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

The problem is that iCloud runs in the background and that people don't even know it's there. I can't come up with a good analogy because there probably isn't one. People don't realize that when they take pics on their iPhones or save pics to their iPhones, it is also going into iCloud. Then, when they delete the pics from their phone, iCloud isn't good about telling you, hey, your pics are still on iCloud and you can still get them.

[–]Noltonn 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

But isn't it your responsibility to know what your phone does, and what happens with sensitive information? Is ignorance really a good defense here? It's not like this information was completely hidden away, it's not like this was done secretly. Hell, the information is easy to find. They just didn't bother to find out what happens with their information.

It comes down to this. If you have something, and you don't want others to have it, you need to make sure that it's safe. These people did not.

[–]samm1t 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is a problem I've seen to a lot of these arguments; ignorance of technology is not exception to technology.

Just because you're not good at technology, doesn't mean other people aren't.

Just because you're from an age where privacy was respected because there weren't as many ways to violate it, doesn't mean you don't live in a world where it does get violated.

Just because you thought you deleted kiddie porn off your phone and you expected privacy in viewing it, doesn't mean you're not responsible for the digital footprints it left. And when your privacy is, inevitably and wrongly violated, you're responsible for the ramifications of owning that content. (wait, did I say CP? I meant nude selfies)

[–]FlaccidExplosion -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

That's not really a great analogy. I get the safe part, sure, but "in the middle of a town for everyone to try their luck on"? Come on. These cloud systems are billed as secure locations to store your files so you (or people you choose) can access them anywhere, from any device you want. All of these providers tout their cloud platforms as being safe and secure (all taken directly from company sites):

Google Drive

  • Photos, videos, presentations, PDFs – even Microsoft Office files. No matter what type of file it is, everything can be stored safely in Drive
  • Here, you can save any attachment to your Drive to organize and share them in a single, safe place.

OneDrive

  • Keep your favorite photos and videos safe
  • Send an email with a link to only what you share and everything else in your OneDrive stays private

iCloud

  • And with features that give you peace of mind and make sharing simple, iCloud is also great with just one Apple device
  • With iCloud, you can share exactly what you want, with exactly whom you want
  • Apple takes data security and the privacy of your personal information very seriously, and iCloud features are designed with your privacy in mind

Dropbox

  • Everything's automatically private, so you control who sees what.
  • Dropbox secures your files with 256-bit AES encryption and two-step verification.

I have an expectation of cloud storage to be secure because they are billed as secure and something you can trust with your content, and they sure as hell need to be as secure as possible.

A lot of people are throwing around "expectation" and "assumption" over this topic. The expectation with cloud storage is, and should be, privacy. It should be EXPECTED that privacy is treated with utmost importance and that your stuff remains yours and no one else's. The expectation should NOT be that people will try to steal it just because it's there. I'm not saying that's not the reality, but it should not be expected. Yeah, I understand people's argument that these are celebrities and people want to get at their stuff, don't bash me over that. But if you became a celebrity would you be automatically fine with degradation of your online privacy just because of your status? I bet you wouldn't. I bet you'd want your privacy just like every other average person.

All of these analogies about "waving money around in public" and crap like that are complete bullshit. One person on here previously said incorrect analogies like these are equivalent to celebrities going out and saying "hey guys, nudes on my iCloud, have at it!" I agree with that, and this is not at all what these celebrities are doing and it's bullshit that people say it is their fault. Would you consider it to be your fault if someone hacked your cloud storage? Probably not. I get the difference is celebrity vs. average person but that's not the main point here.

Yeah, it's a stupid idea to put private nude pictures on cloud storage. I'm not arguing that. But I am arguing that it's not this person's fault it happened to them. If they went around advertising what was out there, then fuck yeah, it's their fault. But them using cloud storage for private stuff in and of itself does not make it these people's faults. There's a big different that I think a lot of people ignorantly gloss over or just plain won't acknowledge because they don't want to. Or because they're too busy fapping and not giving a fuck.

[–]Noltonn 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I get the safe part, sure, but "in the middle of a town for everyone to try their luck on"?

The analogy here is that there is only one thing between you and what's in the safe: The password/combination. They didn't need to break into a bank, or a house, or whatever to just start trying shit. Hell, iCloud doesn't even have an attempt limit.

I have an expectation of cloud storage to be secure because they are billed as secure and something you can trust with your content, and they sure as hell need to be as secure as possible.

Then you're naive. If the only thing between anyone and the inside of the safe is a combination, it's not a secure safe. From what I've read that is exactly what happened, socially engineering, guessing, and just trying got this guy in. They didn't use some backdoor, they didn't find a flaw in the system. The flaw was the human element.

Do you, a generally normal and in the wider scheme of things, unimportant and low valued target, have a reasonable expectation of privacy from these services? Yes. Because nobody cares what you have in your safe. But there is a reason nobody with sensitive information in the business world uses Dropbox (or at least shouldn't use it), or similar cloud services, to store that sensitive information, and it's the same reason these celebrities should've known better. The reason is, they are targets. The know they're targets. They know what people will do for any tiny piece of what is in that safe. I'm sorry but saying that privacy, for these people, should be expected in painfully naive. They shouldn't expect privacy because the past has shown time and time again that there are people, a lot of people, who don't respect it. I mean this is a big scale thing, but on a smaller scale this has happened countless times. Would I be fine if this happened to me? Of course not, but it is a reality of the world we live in. It's sad, but true.

And I'm not sure what you mean by it's stupid but not their fault. I mean, stupidity implies at least partial fault for what happens next. Is it their full fault? Of course not, that's unreasonable. Like you said they didn't wave it around in public, that would be a completely different argument. Do they partly have themselves to blame? Yes, definitely.

[–]Edthecrunkskater -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

To add to this with a personal anecdote. When my ex girlfriend and I started dating back in 2009/2010 she would NOT send nudes over her phone or computer. She flat out refused to do anything except suggestive pictures because she was paranoid they'd be intercepted or someone would see them. Even in person should would be adamant about not being video'd or have pictures.

These celebrities not only took pictures of themselves while nude, they also uploaded them to an online cloud. Like you've iterated a dozen times it's wrong for their belongings to be stolen, but when you take personal pictures/videos and then upload them you're just asking for trouble even though you are very much so legally entitled to your privacy.

If you take sensitive pictures then don't let them get near the internet. If they are on the PC and someone hacks your PC then you are fucked. It's bad someone hacked you but you shouldn't have anything you wouldn't want anyone to see online. It's like Facebook. Don't put any information on there you wouldn't want a random person to see. Yes there is privacy settings but it's another companies website your'e using and nothing is sacred. People are so relaxed about trusting websites and companies when you shouldn't.

I feel bad for them but why upload sensitive documents to a cloud in the first place? This is why governments don't use yahoo mail. Treat sensitive data accordingly because people are shit.

[–]Noltonn 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your ex is a smart woman. Even if you have the reasonable expectation of privacy and you're sure nobody will hack in, there's always the angry-ex angle to think about. Hell, a good portion of amateur porn is exactly that. It shows a kind of almost adorable naivety that they did shit like this. It's just stupid from any angle. Still sad it happened, but undeniably stupid.

[–]samm1t -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Government bonds are sold to me with the expectation that they are a very safe investment, but there's no guarantees in life. If the government goes broke and those bonds are worthless, it's still my fault for investing in the first place. I EXPECTED that it would be a very safe investment, but then it wasn't. My 'expectation' isn't worth shit.

[–]cpxh 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (45子コメント)

Eh it was an analogy, not a perfect comparison.

But lets look at this:

Their personal storage space was broken into.

If you rent a storage locker, and keep naked pictures in the storage locker, and it gets broken into and someone finds your nudies, at some point I have to ask "If those nudies were so important and you didn't want them getting out, why did you put them in a storage locker and not something more secure?"

[–]AnnaKarenina7423 37 ポイント38 ポイント  (29子コメント)

What if they were in a safe? A bedside table? What if someone broke into their house to get them? It's not security that's the issue, it's that someone felt entitled to their private photos and was willing to break into whatever in order to obtain them.

[–]MRProf 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (4子コメント)

The analogy of breaking into their house to get the selfies is like saying they got their phones stolen and the images taken from the memory card. Once those photos were uploaded they no longer had the selfies in the palms of their hands, they were on a server somewhere. The problem was that they most likely didn't understand the technology but trusted it anyway. The photos weren't in a safe but in a warehouse with everyone else's photos, and that warehouse got broken into to, not their houses.

[–]manofruber -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Except that iCloud was supposed to be secured like a safe; just because they are digitized pictures doesn't make it any less of a violation. Its a violation when the NSA spies on us and this is a violation just the same. Granted I get that we should hold our government to a higher standard than criminals, but for now I would just settle for them following the law.

[–]MRProf 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I'm not saying it's not a violation. I don't agree with those that did it and feel bad for looking at the photos myself. What I'm saying is that the celebrities didn't keep the nudes secure enough.

iCloud is like a safe that is kept outside. Sure it's built to keep things private but you still shouldn't put it where safe breakers can get to it. iCloud should be used for backup, not as a vault.

There is a simple lesson to be learned from this and it is that you shouldn't trust anyone but the intended recipients of private files. Keep your nudes on a memory card or on your phone and make sure they don't go anywhere near the internet. If you want the extra security, only have one copy yourself and only let your intended audience see them on request.

[–]SingularityGuy 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think this "victim blaming" crowd has just got it in their heads that we're saying it's the victims fault and not actually reading anything we have to say. Read is so hard amirite?

[–]EnterBandNameHere 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Really, though! If I were them, one of the first things out of my mouth upon realizing what had happened would be, "I'm a fucking idiot." I'm paranoid about pictures anyway (phobias and all) so it wouldn't be an issue for me, but I like to think there would be no way in hell I put anything even remotely risky on the Internet: A SERVICE MEANT TO CONNECT THE WHOLE WORLD, even if the place on the web I put it was my own personal "safe". Fuck that. It'd stay where I was the one in TOTAL control of its safety so I'd have only myself to blame if something happened.

[–]gearofwar4266 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (19子コメント)

But they were stolen from the cloud, the Internet version of the storage unit. His analogy was perfect, and they should have made sure such sensitive information wasn't in such a non secure place.

Is it still wrong? Yes. Should the victims have protected themselves better? Absolutely.

[–]Lenford95 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (5子コメント)

I never quite got this one Firefox add-on to work. It always annoyed me, because I've heard nothing but good things from the users. So I left it installed, but forgot about it.

I guess there must have been an update, because you just said "But they were stolen from my butt".

This is my new favourite add-on.

[–]gearofwar4266 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

How does that even work?

[–]Lenford95 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Cloud to Butt, scans web pages for the word cloud and... Well. Butts happen.

[–]olleroma 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Say what?

[–]gearofwar4266 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Beautiful

[–]NO_TOUCHING__lol -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Somebody the other day had typed "upload some more nude selfies straight into the cloud" or something close to that.

What it said on my end was "upload some more nude selfies straight into my butt" and I nearly choked on my coffee, and spent the next five minutes trying to keep my giggling to an inaudible level.

Best extension/add-on ever.

[–]superdude523 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

People that aren't as tech-savvy probably assume it is a safe place. Its unfathomable to me that people blame them for any of this, although it is a lesson to learn for them as well as teens and young adults that do store private pictures.

[–]lonelyalien 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I wouldn't call it blame, but rather encouraging caution. The fault lies entirely with the perpetrator. I get into similar arguments telling friends to keep their doors locked when driving through Camden; telling female friends not to walk home alone at night; telling people not to wear rival jerseys to sporting events. Encouraging caution is not the same as victim-blaming.

The main point, I think, is that people need to be wary not to confuse "nothing bad should happen" and "nothing bad could happen".

[–]BrownNote -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nobody is "blaming" them. People saying "Here's why it happened, here's what a better option would have been, others should take this to heart so it doesn't happen to them" isn't blaming the person at all. The ones saying that, and the ones not saying it, both are well aware that the person who stole the photos is to blame.

[–]neomaverick05 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (7子コメント)

The difference is, nobody's coming down on the thief. We're all yelling at celebs to secure their shit better. Can they secure it better, maybe. Should it have been stolen? NO!

A person who waves $100 dollars around in a bad part of town is stupid, but the thief is the one who should go to jail!

[–]I_work_for_a_living 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

The difference is, nobody's coming down on the thief.

Can you find a single instance in this discussion of 579 comments where someone is excusing the thief and putting all the blame on the celeb?

Or is that just you creating a strawman so you don't have to listen to dissenting opinions?

[–]neomaverick05 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Thanks for the accusation into my thoguht-process. No, that's not what I'm doing. In fact, I agree a lot with @cpxh's approach to this.

And the OC is an excellent summation of the debate at hand.

What's happening is we're treating this as theft. It's actually more akin to a sex crime. Porn stars take pictures knowing they'll be sent out. These pictures were for private use.

Imagine if I turned on your webcam, and then sent out the pictures I took. Your job, your school, your love life-- could be inexorably damaged. Just ask any girl on GoneWild who's had their identity revealed by the same assholes over at 4chan.

This boils down to an old argument that celebrities somehow don't the same privacy protections as individuals (as established by actual court cases Gallela v Onassis, Smith v Daily Mail ). By stepping into the limelight, intentionally or otherwise, they no longer have a legal right to privacy. I find that fucked up, that's all.

Edit: For Sources

[–]Nick-Cage -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

By stepping into the limelight, intentionally or otherwise, they no longer have a legal right to privacy.

which no one in this thread who isn't downvoted to oblivion is saying.

[–]SingularityGuy -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

No one is saying what you are saying we are saying.

[–]gearofwar4266 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Agreed and I don't mean to blame them and the FBI is indeed going after the thief.

The media is also blowing this way out of proportion in all the wrong ways.

[–]neomaverick05 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Indeed they are. But that's a whole other rant.

[–]pwnsaw -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think everyone agrees with that exact sentiment. The girls were ill informed of the risks(Stupid is a bit strong), but the thief should be held accountable.

[–]ButtsexEurope 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Believe it or not, celebrities aren't cryptographers. They shouldn't be expected to not even think their phone is safe. Besides, they could have deleted those photos right after they took them and they still would have been uploaded. You HAVE to use iCloud if you want to back up your data. He didn't hack the cloud, he hacked their individual accounts. They could have been using an encrypted service and it wouldn't have mattered because the point was he had their passwords.

[–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I do not think this can be considered a singular issue. stealing from someone is obviously wrong but it is a separate issue from not taking proper precautions to not be robbed.

[–]avrus -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Let me pose this to you:

How much do you think each of those celebrities have spent on home alarm systems?

Now which of them would trade any items in the house in exchange for taking back the leak of those pictures.

Now ask, why aren't they spending more time, money or attention protecting something this valuable?

Is it their fault the pictures got stolen? Hell no, that was some repugnant shit. But I'd be willing to be their online security now matches or exceeds their home alarm systems.

Edit:

It's not security that's the issue,

I'd absolutely disagree with this point. I do a webshow, and cigar reviews and as soon as I moved from a casual poster on Reddit into the 'limelight' I went through and ramped up all of my online security. As soon as you are in the public eye you become a target for all kinds of whacko's. Is it right? No of course it's not right but it's also the world we live in.

If my PIN code is compromised on my bank card as a result of my carelessness my bank will not reimburse me any of my lost funds.

[–]hairyotter -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

"Entitled" is the wrong word. They worked for and earned those nudie pics!

[–]Crimsoneer -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Considering we still don't know exactly how the images were hacked, I'd say you can hardly call it a storage locker. The current theory that they were obtained from the wi-fi in the venue isn't exactly a "pry open" sort of job.

[–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

you are right. However I would counter with if these images were stolen over the wifi then that is actually an easier job than the metaphorical prying open of the storage locker.

[–]Crimsoneer 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Right, which is completely wrong. Nobody knows how the hack was performed, as of yet. Obtaining iCloud passwords over wifi should be impossible. This is like blaming somebody when they come home and all their possessions have been stolen, despite the fact there was no security vulnerabilities.

[–]codymariesmith -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (8子コメント)

A safety deposit box? I think you're describing a safety deposit box.

No one would blame a victim for having nudes in a safety deposit box if a bank was robbed.

[–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (7子コメント)

No one is blaming the victim here either.

[–]codymariesmith -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I mean, the implication that they are somehow at fault for what happened is... blame. Not all of the blame, but blame none the less.

[–]cpxh 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

No, I am blaming a person of having poor judgement. I am not blaming the person for being a victim.

[–]Nick-Cage -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think this is </thread>

[–]codymariesmith 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Poor judgement like expecting a reasonable right to privacy and that their safety deposit box doesn't get robbed?

I never said you blamed them for being a victim, but you are none the less laying blame on the victims.

Do you know how much personal information you have online? Do you know how easy it would be for someone with the know how and desire to find that information?

[–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Do you know how much personal information you have online?

I know exactly how much information I have online, and I also have a relative idea of how much disinformation about me is online.

Do you know how easy it would be for someone with the know how and desire to find that information?

Extraordinarily difficult because I've gone to great lengths to avoid such things, and bury the things I can't avoid under piles of BS.

[–]codymariesmith 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

My point is, if someone puts a key logger on your computer before you go buy a bunch of shit on Amazon, we don't have this conversation if your identity/credit card information gets stolen.

[–]Lily_May -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You mean like Pamela Anderson's safe?

Fact is, it doesn't matter where/how she kept them--you'd act like she was unreasonable no matter how deep the security.

[–]derpderpdonkeypunch -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think the better analogy would be storing vital and essential private documents or nude photos in a storage locker in a building that got broken into so frequently that the news had covered it extensively and everyone either knew, or should have known, that if you kept stuff in that building, there was a substantial chance that, at some point, your shit would get stolen.

Hell, my fiancee and I (and, honestly, all of my past significant others) have had clear policies that there were no compromising photos or videos of us that were to be produced, solo or together. There was too great of a chance of a break in or account theft. Hell, this started when I was in college in the early 00's, in the infancy of digital photography becoming accessible to normal consumers. It was common sense then and it's common sense now.

[–]Korvar -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Apart from anything else, the storage locker was a lot less secure than it should have been. It would have been reasonable to expect it to have kept the stacks of 100's (or whatever the metaphor is) safe, except there was a flaw that shouldn't have been there.

[–]GenerativeSeeds 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

But none of the women were doing anything similar to "waving around a stack of $100 bills" in a bad part of town.

$100 bills is an object of desire just like the photos.

The internet is a bad part of town.

The comparison is pretty solid.

[–]AnnaKarenina7423 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Did any of them even acknowledge that they had nude photos before the news broke? My point is that no one know about them, until someone went actively seeking them out. No one was waving them around or hinting or teasing about them.

[–]GenerativeSeeds 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you're completely ignorant of the fact that the internet is massive and people are going to be after your data CONSTANTLY as a celebrity, then I can see how you might think that. Why do celebrities usually have good secure gates around their house? Or rich people in general? Why do I feel fine with no gate in front of my front door as lower middle class, but these people have security cameras outside theirs? Obviously they are a target of special interest and they should protect themselves as such. They do in every other aspect of their lives.

[–]pixl_graphix 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

But none of the women were doing anything similar to "waving around a stack of $100 bills" in a bad part of town.

Actually, I completely disagree with that statement.

waving around a stack of $100 bills

Is JLaw a wealthy star? Yes. there is your stack of $100's.

in a bad part of town.

The Internet. Case closed. The internet is a high risk dangerous place. If you do not understand the risk your data is at on the internet you will suffer the consequences.

[–]Haljegh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The internet is nowhere near equivalent to a safe.

It's not secure and may never will be, so don't treat it like it is.

[–]aleisterfinch 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I hate the word entitled. It's fine in a legal sense. But people usually don't use it that way. Do you really think that the person who did this thought he was legally entitled to post those pictures? I doubt that he believed that, and I doubt that you think he believed that.

So do you really mean he knew he knew it was illegal, but thought he had good enough reason to break the law? Perhaps. But then you don't think he felt "entitled." You think he felt "justified." There are lots of other motives and attachments you could suggest, but "entitled" isn't the right word for any of them.

And at the end of the day his justifications for doing what he did matter far less than the fact that he was capable of doing it.

[–]ChiefBromden -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (16子コメント)

It's more like saying they shouldn't store their extreme valuables in their unalarmed/unlocked house.

[–]mike8787 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Except this isn't an unalarmed, unlocked house. This is a very secure storage space that a hacker broke into.

It's like saying you shouldn't store your valuables in your alarmed, locked safe because an expert thief and locksmith could sneak in and steal them. And that's ridiculous.

[–]YungSnuggie 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (7子コメント)

with the NSA and all that jazz i thought it was pretty common knowledge that nothing stored on the cloud is "secure" or "private"

pretty much everything you do on the internet is public access to anyone who cares enough. if they didnt know that before, they definitely know now. the entire internet is an unlocked house.

i know that everything on my phone could be stolen if someone wanted to steal it. i dont take pictures i wouldnt want the world to see. If someone sends me compromising photos, I enjoy, then delete them. That's just how it is out here b

[–]mike8787 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

  1. A number of these photos were deleted on the women's devices. Things don't get deleted permanently from the Cloud.

  2. The Cloud is as secure as any other secure system. These women likely did not know that their photos even were synced to another server.

[–]YungSnuggie 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

look, I understand what happened seems fucked up. but there's a reason there are rules of engagement when it comes to nudes. rules that nobody is immune from, celebrity or not. actually, celebs probably have to adhere to these rules way more than the every day citizen since people actually want to see them.

rules of nudes:

  1. no nudes are safe. once the picture is taken, its out there.

  2. no face, no tattoos.

taking nudes is a game of russian roulette. for all of us. unfortunately these ladies got the bullet. let this be a warning to the rest of you. its so easy to just go in the bathroom and send nudes to your bae but when you're in a position of power and influence, you can't do shit like that. you just cant. its an unfortunate trade-off of their profession.

as a celebrity, people idolize you. they want to be you. they want to know everything about you. what you like, dislike, what you eat, dont eat, everything. even what your tits look like. in exchange for a lifetime of wealth and prosperity and never having to work an actual day in your life ever again, certain liberties are relinquished from you. thats the game man. you cant do what normal people do anymore. you arent normal anymore. you've been elevated into an upper echelon of society.

Ask yourself: if you could be rich and famous in exchange for never being able to take nudes again, would you do it?

[–]mike8787 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

You act like those random rules you just listed are some generally agreed upon convention. They are not, and these women never said that they accepted their private materials being invaded and published. Period. I don't care if they're they damn president of the moon. They didn't agree, and being a celebrity does not create some implicit agreement.

[–]YungSnuggie 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

rules are rules b. just because you didnt know what the speed limit was doesnt mean you're no longer binded by the speed limit. i think that at that level of fame and status you should have some idea that you have no privacy and that you need to take extra steps to protect yourself. if they didnt know that then they're just naive about who they are. thats not my fault. its always been like that. its their job description.

when you are a commodity; not just your skills or services, but your physical being, is a sought after commodity, you have to take that into consideration in every facet of your life. you just have to. you cant do what us plebs do.

[–]mike8787 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Lol. And rules aren't rules just because you think they should be.

[–]FlacoSamurai -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This might be the best explanation. I didn't realize my photos were being stored anywhere else other than my phone until I upgraded my phone and found ALL of my pictures were on the new phones memory.

[–]someguyfromtheuk 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

very secure storage space

No, it really wasn't.

The Cloud isn't a very secure storage place, a private computer not connected to the internet is a very secure storage space, storing things on the cloud is like storing your valuables in a rented storage locker on the other side of town.

If the nudes really were stored in a secure manner, we wouldn't be having this conversation because they never would've been stolen.

[–]bartonar 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The Cloud isn't an "alarmed, locked safe". Having it on your hard drive with decent security measures is. The Cloud is leaving it in a gym locker with a $5 padlock on it.

[–]ChiefBromden -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's where we disagree. You see, we have precedence that says that even more secure companies have had even more important data stolen (RSA, Visa, Mastercard, LexisNexis).

Based on that, I'd asses the value of my nudes against a service that has absolutely no reason to implement any government sanctioned compliance regulations (like PCI) .

Im not sure what would give anyone the impression that apples iCloud would be more secure than RSA, Visa, Mastercard....

[–]TiredMold 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Why the hell wouldn't you trust Apple's servers? They're a massive tech company, one of the biggest in the world.

It's like saying "you shouldn't have kept that in a safe deposit box at the bank, you should know that banks get robbed sometimes."

[–]ChiefBromden 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why? because data has been stolen off more secure servers with more important information in the past. PII, CC, CVV, etc...

Visa and Mastercard are big companies too....

[–]OneBigBug -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

There are two fundamental differences between a safety deposit box and the iCloud servers. For this analogy to make sense, what you'd need to accept were:

  • The bank keeps their safety deposit boxes between a single lock requiring a single key, available for access in their lobby.

  • Access to any bank in the world allows you access to all the safety deposit boxes in the world.

Their cloud servers really are much more akin to post office boxes than they are to safety deposit boxes. You have a key that will open your box. The post office has a key that will open all post office boxes. Anything that goes in your post office box can be intercepted by any number of low level government workers, or criminals on its way through to your box. The only difference there is the second point, again. Storing data in the cloud is like mailing yourself your data to your PO Box, only your PO Box is in the same building as every other PO Box in the world.

You should still expect some privacy in that respect too, certainly, but there are more secure options.

[–]d-cent -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is what I think too, and that is a stretch. I mean even if they decided to take the pictures with a digital camera that has no internet connectivity and put it in her unalarmed/unlocked house. It is still more secure than what they did.

[–]Shagoosty -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The cloud wasn't hacked, their accounts were attacked because they were dumb with their security. Putting your mother's maiden name as your security question is pretty dumb when you're a celebrity.

[–]GoldenBath42 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You sound like the idiots in my town that didn't trust a bank and put all their lifesavings in a safe in their house. They bolted it to the floor. Left for a weekend and guess what happened?

[–]GyantSpyder -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Just to be pedantic, it's probably not accurate to say that only their personal space was broken into. The thieves probably got a whole lot of pictures by social engineering the accounts of their boyfriends or husbands, who were perhaps not as on guard against an attack like that, by being less famous, but still had pictures sent to them automatically backed up on the cloud as a default setting they might not have even known about.

[–]Heff228 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think there is a difference between a personal safe and the WORLD WIDE WEB.

[–]lmo2th -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The analogy wasn't great, it was a bit extreme, but it got the basic point across: sometimes the world is shitty and we don't get treated the way that we should and it's worth taking that into account when you do something. Obviously the person in the analogy is tempting fate and making them self more of a target, but the notion that just because you shouldn't be treated some way, doesn't mean that you won't be is pretty solid. It's not that the victims deserve any sort of blame, just that there is a risk associated with taking nude pictures (it's pretty damn small, but it is there) and that's something that needs to be considered when taking them.

[–]ButtonFury -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

iCloud was hacked.

Has that been confirmed? A lot of those pictures were taken with Android phones, which doesn't use iCloud at all.

[–]NGC2392 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Where as I agree. The girls I question made a poor, mostly uninformed decision. But the point still stands that what this guy did is a criminal act. In your scenario, nobody would tell me that it was entirely my fault. Sure I'd have been called an idiot, but nobody would say the guy that took my hundred wasn't a thief. Nobody would have said that what he did was a public service, or that he was a hero. And that is exactly the kind of reaction I've seen from many people on reddit.

[–]cpxh 53 ポイント54 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Well thats where the analogy breaks down.

If the guy was part of a gang, and he stole $200 from you, and went and bought a bunch of weed to bring back to his buddies to smoke, then yeah his buddies would call him a hero and say he was doing a public service.

I mean, he wasn't, he's a thief and an asshole, but his crimes did make some people happy.

Same thing with this 4chan guy. Joke. He's a thief and an asshole, but some people got to metaphorically smoke his ill gotten gains, and those people are pretty happy about it.

I think deep down everyone knows this was a dick thing to do. But some people think with their dicks, and thus don't recognize other dickbaggery.

[–]Tranger 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Agreed, yet I still think it's half assed to shrug at their actions and tell to ourselves "They didn't know better" or "she should have known better"; most of JL's life, and the other victims of the leaks, revolve around being a public figure and have to constantly deal with the fact of the sinking land of privacy beneath their feet because a bunch of a-holes feel like they deserve to know because 'she/he is a role model'. Hell i don't want to get them some sort of penalty, I want to let them know that the (hopefuly) mayority of us aren't okay with this and that condoning this is not as bad as invading privacy but still a fucked up thing to do.

[–]Easilycrazyhat 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This brings up an interesting point. Ordinary individuals have a decent reason to expect privacy in most of their lives. Not many people know about them and that small group of people are likely to be friends or at least well known acquaintances. Except for random circumstances, they have no reason to expect running into an asshole that will target them specifically.

Celebrities, on the other hand, put there image and identity out there for money/"success". Most do this willingly, and spent a significant amount of resources to maintain their fame and renown. With this fame, though, a much, much wider selection of people are know very aware of them. Most of these people are likely good or at least ordinary, but you have to expect a significant chunk to be cruel/malicious. While this doesn't make the actions of these people any less cruel/illegal/immoral, I find trouble gathering sympathy for people who knowingly brought these people into their lives. Privacy is becoming less and less sacred, but it is still a choice, particularly for celebrities. They had no reason to expect their lives to remain utterly private.

All this said, the actions of the hackers was undoubtedly illegal, and the actions of those spreading the pictures is immoral at the very least. It's going to be an interesting point of discussion for the next few weeks.

[–]iKickComputers -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And at the same time, there are plenty that acknowledge and will tell you that Mr. 4chan (ahahaha) is a complete prick for leaking the stuff, they feel sympathy for the women and Justin Verlander, but they will still enjoy the fruits of his crimes. The damage has been done, whether they make use of the content and fancy a wank or not doesn't make a damn difference, and every realist gets that.

Some take a principled stance against that, which is fine when it comes to their own actions, but those bitching about what others do in the privacy of their own homes need to take a step back, realize the hypocrisy in that, and choose to only be the master of their own domain, which is the only domain they have any right to judge.

Every realist also gets that it is not intelligent to stash sensitive data on the cloud, especially when you are a very high profile individual. It has not been any sort of secret for the past decade, in actuality, that your data is not private and it is not secure. It is willful ignorance to simply tune out the NSA revelations that have been happening not only since the Snowden whistleblowing, but before that as well. This expectation of using common sense to prevent being a victim in a crime doesn't absolve the hacker of fault, and I dunno why everybody who hears these criticisms automatically assumes that is what is being argued, but the fact is that these women (and Justin Verlander) could have very easily taken sensible actions to prevent their involvement in this scandal. At the very least, pointing out their mistakes can hopefully teach others to be responsible with their data.

[–]SingularityGuy -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nobody is saying the thief isn't a thief. A safe-cracker isn't magically free from retribution just because you made the safe easy to crack and left it on the side of your house. He's still a criminal. Still, you should use common sense. It's not your fault at all. Still, you should use common sense. It shouldn't happen. Still, you should use common sense.

[–]BigBangBrosTheory 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (39子コメント)

But this isn't a perfect world. You can't walk through a back alley in detroit waving around a stack of $100 bills and expect that just because you shouldn't be robbed, you won't be.

Sure but after you've been robbed, you shouldn't have to deal with people who are saying, "it's your fault for having money". It's not their fault.

[–]cpxh 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (26子コメント)

You've missed my point.

Its not their fault they got robbed, but at the same time you have to take a step back and say "is there anything you could have done to avoid this, and if so why didn't you do it?

Like I said, this isn't a perfect world, and all of the blame falls on the criminal for the crime they committed, some portion of blame does fall on the person who could have avoided being a victim but didn't, not blame for being robbed, but blame for not being secure enough. Its two separate issues.

Doesn't make it right to steal from someone, even if they're asking for it, but you also can't say the victim was entirely blameless.

[–]bisonburgers 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (5子コメント)

I don't think recognizing that a victim's actions created a situation in which he or she was victimized means they are blamed or at fault. They could have been smarter about it, of course, but I think that's different than "at fault". At this point it's semantics, but yeah. I guess I think there's a slight difference. Or maybe it just doesn't sit well with me to blame them, so I'm changing the words to mean what I want them to mean (I think we all do this in arguments), who knows.

I'm sure half the people blaming these girls didn't question their online security just like these girls didn't question it. But now it's convenient to say they should have known better. Yeah, Jennifer Lawrence is super famous, so you could say she should have assumed people would try to hack her, but many of these women are not nearly as famous, and many of the pictures were deleted years ago precisely so that they wouldn't be accidentally distributed.

I have a long distance relationship and I'm never gonna take nude selfies to send to him, ESPECIALLY after this ordeal, because if they were hacked and put online, I know half the world wouldn't give a shit about how I feel about it.

[–]cpxh 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree with you completely. I probably should have found a better word to use than at fault.

[–]daekano -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Half the world also wouldn't care about your nude selfies.

:P

[–]bisonburgers 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha, woohoo!

[–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]bisonburgers 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'm not sure if you meant to comment to me or not, but it seems like you meant to comment on another comment. If you did mean to comment to me, then could you explain how what I said is victim blaming? It's what I'm arguing against, so I really hope I didn't mislead anyone into thinking otherwise.

    [–]redmumba 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    The interesting point is that these people thought it WAS secure. I don't use Apple's iCloud, but I operate under a widely shared assumption that it is heavily encyrpted and password protected. If that WAS how they were stolen (and we don't know for sure), I would say that they DID have it in a heavy duty safe--it's just that one person happened to know a group of people had that safe, and had a good way to get into it.

    Most of us were raised in a time where we were taught NOT to trust anything. Do I have a Dropbox account? Yes. I keep my important documents on there. However, I also know that my account information can get hacked--so I use a TrueCrypt volume to hold those--so that I have multiple levels of protection.

    If you think these celebrities are the ONLY ones who could fall victim to this, you need to take a very close look at all of your things--for example, your iTunes backups, your various email accounts, etc.. Do you use the same password for multiple services? How many people are verifying they're using HTTPS? And so on.

    All I'm saying is--people have a certain trust in the things that they use, and it just so happened that whatever these were stolen from was vulnerable. And any developer in the world will tell you--if someone wants something bad enough, chances are they will eventually find out a way to get it.

    [–]ButtsexEurope 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    "Even if they're asking for it"? The paparazzi doesn't go hacking into people's personal accounts. Asking for it would be posting their credit card information on a twitter post. They had a reasonable expectation of security from Apple. They don't care if the NSA sees it. We're not talking about dangerous state secrets.

    [–]cpxh -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    The paparazzi doesn't go hacking into people's personal accounts.

    Yes they do... That was a hide scandal.

    [–]meatboysawakening 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I can agree with this, if no nude photos were uploaded to the cloud, there would be no nude photos to steal.

    A better analogy might be Bernie Madoff--lots of people trusted him without really looking into what was happening or how SECURE their money was, and when their shit was lost, they were partly to blame for not being careful.

    [–]avrus 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Agreed. The last time I checked with my bank, they were pretty clear that if my PIN was compromised it was too fucking bad for me if my money was taken as a result.

    [–]neomaverick05 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I absolutely can. The victim may be stupid, naive, and innocent-- but they're not guilty of anything. A girl with a short skirt, a drunk guy waving his money around, a child in a playground-- doesn't matter how susceptible of a target they are, they're guilty of NOTHING. They're not stringing along rapists/thieves/pedophiles!

    They're just outside! Your logic implies if I encounter danger in my life, I am at least 10% at fault. That a girl has to look at herself and wonder, why would anyone want to rape her? Or a mugging victim says, well I guess I shouldn't go outside anymore, or a mother is at fault for--

    I need to live my life with a 12 gauge behind a locked door and drinking distilled rainwater to avoid blame? You know who's guilty? The thief. And the sad part is, nobody's going to wrap their head around that until it happens to them. When society turns to them and says, 'You know... it's you really your fault because...'

    [–]cpxh -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    No, just no. I will not play into strawmen arguments.

    [–]RubyPinch 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

    what that line of logic comes down to is, the only way to avoid having your privacy violated, is to just have no private moments

    private talk? someone could of put a bug in the room, you shouldn't of talked to that other person. having a shower? once again, don't do that because there might be cameras, you could of avoided that.

    in this case, you would need an offline camera and computer to photo and encrypt, you would need to go though Trusting Trust to make sure the computer's encryption has not been compromised, after which you can send it freely assuming no flaws get exposed in the encryption tool you use across the next 20-40 years. then the other person downloads, copies to some media, copies to an offline computer and decrypts, using a key that was shared in the desert several miles away from any electronics.

    and then someone gets those pics somehow and the same responses crop up, "they could of prevented that, the victim wasn't entirely blameless"

    if you put something behind lock-and-key, then it requires someone to try and get around that to access the data.

    you don't blame someone breaking into a house though the locked front door, on the person who locked the door, do ya. generally you would give 100% of the blame to the person who broke in

    [–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Sure. If thats how you want to look at it.

    [–]RubyPinch 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    well, is there any point where you would not say "but you also can't say the victim was entirely blameless."?

    [–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Yes plenty.

    [–]RubyPinch 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    like? what would the minimum be?

    edit: I realize in my example I was giving an extreme case, but I'm more just wondering what level of precautions would be required before the victim becomes blameless?

    [–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    In this case, not putting their pictures on the internet, since the internet is pretty well known for not being secure.

    [–]that__one__guy -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    So you're victim blaming, is that it?

    [–]cpxh 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

    No. I quite clearly said I was not victim blaming.

    [–]that__one__guy 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    is there anything you could have done to avoid this, and if so why didn't you do it?

    some portion of blame does fall on the person who could have avoided being a victim but didn't

    but you also can't say the victim was entirely blameless.

    That's the definition of victim blaming.

    [–]cpxh 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    No, I am blaming a person of having poor judgement. I am not blaming the person for being a victim.

    [–]that__one__guy 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    I am blaming a person of having poor judgement

    Yeah, that's victim blaming.

    I don't think you actually know what victim blaming is.

    [–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I don't think you do.

    Sorry, maybe I should clarify.

    Jennifer Lawrence is a victim here.

    I can say with authority that she made bad choices.

    This is not victim blaming. This is addressing two very different concepts that both stem from the same issue.

    You are throwing around the term "victim blaming" like its some kind of trump card against my argument. This does not make any kind of logical sense.

    [–]I_work_for_a_living -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    No one is responsible for any irresponsible or bad choices they make in life.

    Except one day naive college aged redditors will wake up and realize that's now how the world actually works.

    [–]nedarb06 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It's an interesting debate. in this example, the distinction would come from whether or not he was "waving money around", and that where the argument falls apart. These women had a reasonable expectation to privacy on their cloud storage, so they really weren't "waving" the pictures around.

    Devils advocate to my own argument, though: In this day and age, celebrities have to know they are high profile targets for shit like this. I'm not blaming them for not knowing the inner workings of the icloud encryption setup or the nuances of using social engineering to steal passwords(which is the likely culprit for this leak, I'd say) That would be ridiculous. Only that the vast majority of users are woefully unaware of what happens to their data, and stuff like this is a tough lesson to learn for everyone.

    [–]Giblet_McGravy 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    If my friend got robbed after waving a wad of cash around in a back alley, I'd offer my sincere condolences and then say "You're a fucking dumbass. What did you think would happen when you go waving a wad of cash around in a back alley."

    [–]bisonburgers 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    I see your point, but the analogy doesn't fit. It's like saying Jennifer Lawrence was waving around her nude photos, and then getting upset when someone grabbed them out of her hands.

    [–]FartherAwayx3 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    You just turned an analogy into another analogy. That's somewhat impressive.

    [–]Devian50 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'd say "being a celebrity" is kinda similar to waving around your goods. Everyone sees you, and some people aren't happy with just seeing you normally. Just like some people aren't happy with the amount of money they have. Like a lot of people here, I'm not saying the criminal was right here, he should not have done this. What I am saying though is Jennifer should have already known about all the previous leaks that have happened, and not just assumed nobody would target her. Nobody needs to take selfies. It wouldn't have hurt her to not take any selfies, same goes for everyone else who got leaked. but she did, then trusted complete strangers (the entire planet) to NOT try to find them. Everyone makes stupid decisions and get hurt at some point in their lives. But the important thing is to learn from those mistakes, both yours and others. All these celebrities didn't learn from all the other leaks. They sure as hell knew that it's happened before, but they still took the chance anyways.

    I think a more appropriate example would be deciding to walk through a neighborhood that's known for theft and assault, and expecting nobody to try anything, instead of walking through the mall that's packed with families. It's a stupid decision.

    [–]shartofwar 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I think you're missing the point of the analogy:

    Just because someone walks around waiving $1000 in the ghetto, doesn't make it right to steal from them. But the consensus that stealing is immoral isn't a protection against being robbed.

    Just because JLaw had photos on icloud doesn't make it right to steal them from her. However, the consensus that stealing photos from JLaw is immoral isn't going to protect her photos from being stolen.

    [–]bisonburgers 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Ah, I see, the analogy wasn't saying it's exactly like the situation, just commenting on a portion of it. Kind of like how when driving, if someone runs a stop light and hits you, and you're like "hey, I had the right of way!" it still doesn't stop you from getting hit. I see.

    [–]Guy9000 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    My friend had some things stolen out of his car. He fully admitted that it was his own stupid fault because he left the windows down and the items in the front seat.

    [–]Champion_of_Gnomes -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    That's why I've been putting it this way: "It's not their fault. You can say they should have known better all you want, and even if that's true, it's still not their fault. The point here is we shouldn't be handing blame out to anyone. The blame is clear and will be handled by the proper people. However, this should be a lesson to everyone. It's not about them anymore, that's over. It's about everyone else. If you don't want sensitive things to be found and spread online, don't record information with a device or on a service that's online. You now know the risk. You still won't be at fault when it happens to you, but you do know better."

    [–]RageOverdose -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Unfortunately, information security doesn't really work without responsibility on the user's end. It's just how it works. The system tries to tie everything up on it's end to be secure so someone can't get access to information through there, but if a user's end is weak and that's how access was granted, the only one that can do anything about it is the user.

    The women are victims and the hacker deserves punishment. But information security isn't like being robbed at all because frankly, that's just unlucky for most people. They end up in the wrong place at the wrong time and there isn't anything they can do about it. Keeping your account secure is your responsibility and you are hopefully given the tools to do it.

    [–]SingularityGuy -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    NO ONE IS SAYING IT'S HER FAULT.

    [–]ThatRedHairedGirl 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    Very, very true! People do need to learn how to protect themselves better when it comes to these things.

    [–]thewaitaround 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    While this is true, it seems like a lot of people want to place the blame only on the victims of what was still an illegal and amoral act. The only one who's done something "wrong" here is the guy who stole the private pictures. Just because it was preventable doesn't mean that the people who took the pictures, and were well within their rights in doing so, should be blamed for not preventing it.

    [–]ThatRedHairedGirl 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yeah I don't want to blame the victims like that. I was just saying that the victims should better inform themselves as well. :) Especially considering the fact that this is an illegal act. I agree with your points completely.

    [–]stabbytastical 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I agree. I mean. It wasn't like these were sent to a person who was then an asshole and leaked them online. These were stored in what they thought was a secure location.

    [–]Easilycrazyhat 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Better analogy: Putting your money in a bank where a significant chunk of everyone else's money in the entire world is kept as well. This bank is known to be fairly secure, but due to the nature of the bank, it is hit with an incredible amount of robberies. Some of these robberies work out, some fail, but with the number of attempts, the number of successes are not insignificant.

    Now, on top of knowing this, you also have significant status in the public image. Everyone knows you're rich, and everyone knows where you keep your money. Would you really seem sympathetic when your surprised when people attempt to get this money over and over again until they succeed?

    This is not saying robbery isn't wrong, it's just saying people should understand the situations they put themselves in. Privacy on the internet is NOT a given. Individuals will seek your information, hacker-groups will seek your information. Hell, even the government will seek your information. People need to understand that steps need to be taken if you want any amount of privacy in today's society. Sucks that it happened, but it could have been avoided.

    [–]Zorkamork 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    But this isn't a perfect world. You can't walk through a back alley in detroit waving around a stack of $100 bills and expect that just because you shouldn't be robbed, you won't be.

    Putting photos in your personal, private, account is nothing like raving a stack of 100 dollar bills around though?

    [–]captain_thrace 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Shoot in film and make single copies.

    [–]cpxh 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Or you know, shoot with a digital camera, and don't upload the photos to the internet.

    You can't hack my digital camera. You realistically can't hack my encrypted hard drive where I keep my nip slip pics.

    [–]wibc -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I have no idea if this is true or not but someone on reddit said that you should have cash if you visit detroit. Something like a 5 or 20 note. People can get angry if they try to rob you and they get nothing.

    [–]codymariesmith -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Do you use a debit card? Has anyone besides hackers ever been blamed for financial hacking? What about the time my card was deactivated because I bought something at Target, my fault for putting my info out there?

    This is a whole fucking different sport than waving cash around in an alley.

    [–]Vaansinn -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Didn't I read this exact text somewhere else before?

    [–]curtisharrington1988 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    I mean, you can wave $1000 around in your home though. Uneven comparison.

    [–]cpxh 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Every comparison breaks down at some point.

    [–]curtisharrington1988 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Immediately?

    [–]SaintLonginus -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    What you're talking about is naivety, of which the celebrities in question are likely guilty, but their naivety has no affect on the culpability of those who uploaded (and even merely looked at) these images.

    It may be stupid to wander alleyways waving around money and to then complain when it is stolen, but that doesn't justify theft.

    A very similar analogy would likely draw the ire of reddit. If a woman walks through an alleyway dressed provocatively, is she naive or perhaps even stupid? Of course. Does she deserve to be raped?

    [–]cpxh -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    but their naivety has no affect on the culpability of those who uploaded (and even merely looked at) these images.

    I don't think anyone said it did.

    t may be stupid to wander alleyways waving around money and to then complain when it is stolen, but that doesn't justify theft.

    I specifically said that it doesn't justify theft.

    A very similar analogy would likely draw the ire of reddit. If a woman walks through an alleyway dressed provocatively, is she naive or perhaps even stupid? Of course. Does she deserve to be raped?

    This is not even remotely related to the discussion at hand.

    [–]Dosinu -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    i think thats the only real point to be made out of this event. IF you don't want this shit to happen, you gotta change society in some way.

    The reaction of hollywood and the media to this is fucked. All JLaws PR team is thinking of is how they may not get a big disney deal out of it and that her potential profits for the future have decreased.

    They only care about privacy issues as far as it influences profits.

    High level industry execs are scared they are vulnerable, that the shitty things they do day to day may be uncovered so they decide to make this a huge deal.

    Reminds me a lot of how hollywood attacks piracy, they try and turn it into a moral issue and bring all these different elements into the discussion only because it effects profits.