Butthurt white guys, an Asian virgin and an angry lesbian walk into a bar...
- Thread starter Balthazar_sl
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
TrollfaceDeux
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 19,577
- 3,743
Regarding the fault:
"DON'T BLAME THESE WOMEN FOR POSTING SELFIES ON iCLOUD. BLAME THE HACKER."
It has already started.
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 80,150
- 160,365
TrollfaceDeux
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 19,577
- 3,743
Shaming men: women's brilliant social engineering tactic since men started to give a shit about their opinions.
Palum
what Suineg set it to
- 26,556
- 41,366
I knew the NAZIs were molesters, think of all the classical art they stole with nude women in it!well they finally got their messaging together after 24 hours, as nonsensical as it is
everyone who looked at those photos is a rapist and a molester
TrollfaceDeux
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 19,577
- 3,743
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
I dunno, I don't consider those valid qualifiers...
Anyway, it's clear that the privacy of these women has been violated, and that's not cool. I appreciate beautiful bodies more than most, and I'm not gonna pretend I didn't see any of the pictures posted on this board. But I don't think we should be using "just look at how muchfunthis is!" as a valid justification for violatinganyone'sprivacy. I also think it's disgusting to blame the actresses in questionin anyway, and I say this as someone whowants tocontinue living in a world where people can feel comfortable enough to have such photographs taken for the enjoyment of themselves and their partners, because that's awesome. I do not think "they should have known better" is a valid criticism. We're neck-deep in geek culture here, but they don't know everything we assume they should know. Fuck, if I had taken pictures,even if I knew my photos were going onto a cloud, I don't think I would have suspected for a second that other people could cheat their way into the system and get at my pictures. Why would I have? Apple's a secure company, if they can handle keeping payment information secure, why wouldn't they be able to keep my personalized, exclusively-visible-to-me photos secure? Call that naive if you look, but I'm very likely more tech savvy than many of those actresses. The blame, and any punishment, should go entirely to the peoplebreaking lawsto violate other people's rights, not to the people been violated.
You know what? I read that bit and I didn't feel a speck of shame. Not an iota. It's crystal clear that none of that was aimed at me. I'm not a hacker, and I'm certainly not one of the hackers that got these pictures. I don't know where some of you guys keep getting the idea that you are personally being attacked every time groups of men are criticized. Here's a handy guide: If a "feminist" begins a sentence with "All men are -", we don't even have to listen to the rest of the sentence. We don't have to because, as people capable of rational thought (including the capacity for criticism, and in particular criticism about one's held beliefs), we know that this person is stupid and their opinion is worthless. Even the peopleon their sideignore them and don't take them seriously. If the ASJWs would stop pretending that we have to pay attention to these people or that they are in any way representative of the side they claim to be defending, we could move on and actually explore valid criticisms of feminism. Constantly framing the argument to highlight exclusively the most extreme, poorly-thought-out opinions doesn't do anybody any favors. I mean, I get it: "Ha ha, look at this idiot." That's good and fine, but if you have real criticisms that actually bother you and that you'd like to be addressed in the real world, that's not gonna happen as long as you keep representing your opponent as a caricature.
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 80,150
- 160,365
Im more amused by the notion of all this teeth gnashing and screaming by people who are largely famous by selling 95% of their bodies and their looks to the mass populace, who then get upset that the populace wants to see the last 5%. I don't think it's so much a privacy violation as it is the loss of a marketable commodity. It's similar to when celebrities get pissed that when their baby pics get scooped and sold by someone before they have a chance to do it themselves.
Ultimately I'm not sure that people who spend their entire lives in a public spotlight by choice for fame and large sums of money, get to claim the same type of privacy rights that your typical American does.
P.S. How fast do you think FBI would react to the matter if it was Jane Doe housewife's sex video being uploaded to youporn by her ex boyfriend in Topeka, KS? Celebrity privilege.
Ultimately I'm not sure that people who spend their entire lives in a public spotlight by choice for fame and large sums of money, get to claim the same type of privacy rights that your typical American does.
P.S. How fast do you think FBI would react to the matter if it was Jane Doe housewife's sex video being uploaded to youporn by her ex boyfriend in Topeka, KS? Celebrity privilege.
TrollfaceDeux
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 19,577
- 3,743
wimmins are pussies and technologically illiterate. they can't even turn their computer on without their autistic kids helping them.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,656
Oh it's a violation. At the same time, this is what they sell.
Both parties are responsible. If jlaw doesn't make a documentary of her cock sucking skills then the flacid dicked basement dwelling pervs have nothing to steal.
And yes there is a clear double standard. Equally clear is that the discrepancy profits them obscenely.
Fundamentally, paparazzi hassling these people as they go about their daily affairs is a worse version of a similar violation. If a person profits from media attention but wishes to set terms and limits, that is both prudent and reasonable. But they have to abide their own strictures. This is why so many of them go reclusive. They understand the danger of playing with fire.
Think of the thousands that aren't on this list. And others take pics of their poonannies!
I do like the second group better.
Both parties are responsible. If jlaw doesn't make a documentary of her cock sucking skills then the flacid dicked basement dwelling pervs have nothing to steal.
And yes there is a clear double standard. Equally clear is that the discrepancy profits them obscenely.
Fundamentally, paparazzi hassling these people as they go about their daily affairs is a worse version of a similar violation. If a person profits from media attention but wishes to set terms and limits, that is both prudent and reasonable. But they have to abide their own strictures. This is why so many of them go reclusive. They understand the danger of playing with fire.
Think of the thousands that aren't on this list. And others take pics of their poonannies!
I do like the second group better.
TrollfaceDeux
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 19,577
- 3,743
looks like JLaw's fame is...
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
catching fire.
YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Palum
what Suineg set it to
- 26,556
- 41,366
It's not a clear violation of privacy, per se. By knowingly taking these pictures/videos you are submitting yourself to this risk. Even physical copies were stolen/sold/leaked/given before digital cameras.
Apple has a clear lawsuit, and likely the celebrities could very easily claim gross negligence on Apple's part if the 'lol brute force' password gateway was indeed the point of entry. I'm not sure the celebs could really do anything except file copyright claims against anyone distributing the pictures, though.
They weren't surreptitiously recorded (it appears, anyway) but rather distributed without permission. Their is no implicit privacy in IP law except what you can enforce through your own means. If Coke has a corporate break-in and someone steals their recipe, that person can and would be prosecuted for the theft and loss of profits and all that. However the cat is out of the bag at that point, anyone can use that knowledge to reproduce Coke because it is kept as a trade secret, not a state protected form of IP.