Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jikk]

My responses were on the subject of having sympathy towards these idiots that uploaded their stuff. You may not have asked for it, but a lot of people in this thread have. Nowhere have I said the thieves shouldn't face their own consequences. I don't care about moral vs legal agreements and contracts, it is just a very simple fact that if you don't lock your door you're just as much to blame as the guy going through it. Same with these pictures, if you upload them you're just as much to blame as the guy yoinking them off the servers.

As much as I find such planar outlooks amusing, I can't help but be dismayed at the conflation between acceptance of an event, and culpability of an event. After all, by the same logic one could argue that if one doesn't run a battery of chemical tests on the water one drinks, they are equally to blame when one finds cyanide in there (if one has a chance before keeling over). Saying that, we're all entitled to our opinions, no matter how fallacious.

[Kala]

Sorry no but that's just too naive. It doesn't matter where it's uploaded to. What matters is a) You uploaded it. Sorry, you dun fucked up. It's out there now and it's your fault and b) You took the damn things in the first place.

Unsure how making a distinction between uploading things to a publicly viewable place, and having them stored where they'd have to be hacked to be accessible, is "too naive".  Of course, not as easily, but the latter can be accessed as the former if someone is willing to put the effort into it. I don't think I implied otherwise. But one is freely accessible.  The other has to be illegally accessed i.e stolen.

With stealing, you tend to blame the thief, rather than the person who had things stolen for not storing them in a secure enough safe.

Rule one: If you upload it, it's no longer under your control. You have no one else to blame. You don't leave the keys in your car and your house unlocked. You don't use your password and login info on public terminals. You don't upload naked pictures and expect them to stay hidden.  Unless of course you either intend for them to get stolen or have suffered severe braindamage.

I think leaving the keys in your car and your house unlocked is a flawed analogy.  While the cloud evidently can (and was) hacked into, there were still security measures in place, however ineffective.  Or it wouldn't have needed hacking. The analogy would be more like not using the most advanced security system - sensitive car alarms, central locking etc.  An old cheap car is going to have crappier locks and be easier to brake into.  That doesn't make it your fault if someone broke into it. Is there more you could have done and less risks you could've taken?  Yes.  But the fault is still squarely on the criminal, rather than the victim.  Likewise with a house; leaving it unlocked is not what this was.  It's just the locks were ineffective to keep people out who were determined to break in.  You would still, presumably, blame the people for robbing the house, rather than the owners for not having better locks and alarms or - more accurately - trusting that the house was secure under the word of the letting agent or landlord (in this case, apple).

Edit: been informed that a better analogy would be an employee of the letting agent inspecting your house and stealing your things, given the hacker was likely someone working on the data center apple uses.  Can't speak for the veracity of that theory, just relaying.

[Mizhara]

Fair point, but that's the limitation on analogy in general. They're never quite entirely applicable, but close enough for the argument's sake. My point still remains as far as I can see, as anything ever uploaded to the internet is from that point not in your control. The thief is a thief and needs to be dealt with as such, obviously. If it hadn't been uploaded to begin with though, there'd been nothing to steal. Uploading shit you want to keep private is flat out stupid. It's an incredibly stupid move that eliminates any sympathy I could have had for these people because they should bloody well know better.

Don't want something circulated? Don't upload it. It's really that easy.

The good thing here is that this event juuuust might have opened a few eyes on matters of online privacy and basic security. Those that still can't wrap their heads around the fact that the internet requires a certain level of basic critical thinking to use safely... well, they're beyond help.

[Lyn Farel]

So, if I understand correctly, some people are laughing at or having no sympathy for individuals that got fucked by their ignorance in some matters ?

[Mizhara]

Well, I'm not laughing at them, but nor do I have sympathy for them, no. Take nude pictures of yourself, risky. Share them with others, you've practically given them away already. Upload them to the internet? Welcome to some message board. Self-inflicted injury like this does not gain my sympathy, especially in this day and age. Ignorance isn't a good excuse when they should have known better.

[Silas Vitalia]

I sense the victim blaming is strong in this thread.


Seek the wise words of Alfred Pennyworth!

Young Bruce Wayne:

"...if only I hadn't.."

Alfred:

"It wasn't your fault. It was him, and him alone."



Victim blaming is a ridiculous slippery slope, because you can -always- rationalize a way to assign blame to the victim after the fact, no matter how crazy it eventually sounds.

[Mizhara]

You're not doing them any favors by victimizing them. They're adult men and women and I'm pretty sure they can handle themselves.

[Tiberious Thessalonia]

I've been resisting all day but I just can't anymore. "If only they hadn't been wearing that skirt"



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Silas Vitalia]

You're not doing them any favors by victimizing them. They're adult men and women and I'm pretty sure they can handle themselves.

Excuse me?

Getting your private personal life hacked by a piece of shit and shared to a million pathetic internet lowlifes for masturbation fodder is not victimizing. 

It was a crime, and it's not their fault. They were victims of a crime.  It's pretty much that simple. 

[Mizhara]

You know, the only ones who ever seem to bring that sort of thing up seems to be the SJWs. If you have to invent problems and victims, you're doing it wrong. You're supposed to be doing empowerment, not victimization. I recommend reading this: An open letter to Emma Watson.

It's not entirely on this topic, but the gist of it applies.

@Silas: Yes it was a crime, no one's disputing this. The fact is though, it came about because they made a series of really stupid decisions. Hiding behind the "victim blaming" excuse does not magically make that go away. Their "private personal life" does not belong on the internet under someone else's control, the same way my "private personal life" does not belong out in public unless I'm damn sure I'm willing to share it.

[Silas Vitalia]

You know, the only ones who ever seem to bring that sort of thing up seems to be the SJWs. If you have to invent problems and victims, you're doing it wrong. You're supposed to be doing empowerment, not victimization. I recommend reading this: An open letter to Emma Watson.

It's not entirely on this topic, but the gist of it applies.

@Silas: Yes it was a crime, no one's disputing this. The fact is though, it came about because they made a series of really stupid decisions. Hiding behind the "victim blaming" excuse does not magically make that go away. Their "private personal life" does not belong on the internet under someone else's control, the same way my "private personal life" does not belong out in public unless I'm damn sure I'm willing to share it.

It's like it's going straight over your head.

[Havohej]

It's like it's going straight over your head.

It's the same way for us.

[Silas Vitalia]

Victim blaming is a slippery slope argument, because you can, by that stupid logic, ALWAYS find fault with the victim of a crime.   You can always find a point where they 'did something' that caused their victimization, or their rape, or their robbery, or their murder.


She shouldn't have worn that skirt

She shouldn't have gotten drunk

She shouldn't have taken a private photo, she should have known apple's cloud security inside and out

Those people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima should have moved, they knew cities would be targets.

Why even have a legal system? Shit's always the victim's fault for not being adequately prepared for being violated.

[Victoria Stecker]

Victim blaming is a slippery slope argument, because you can, by that stupid logic, ALWAYS find fault with the victim of a crime.   You can always find a point where they 'did something' that caused their victimization, or their rape, or their robbery, or their murder.


She shouldn't have worn that skirt

She shouldn't have gotten drunk

She shouldn't have taken a private photo, she should have known apple's cloud security inside and out

Those people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima should have moved, they knew cities would be targets.

Why even have a legal system? Shit's always the victim's fault for not being adequately prepared for being violated.

This is a bit of a stretch - and I say that as someone who passionately hates victim blaming, although mostly in the context of sexual assault and rape. The reason being that in cases of sexual assault and rape, victim blaming is used to silence and intimidate victims and allows those who assault them to keep doing it with minimal consequence. And it puts the onus on women to avoid being assaulted rather than on men to stop assaulting them.

So yeah. Victim blaming is terrible.

And going completely in that direction with this situation - hacked photos, etc - feels really ugly.

But this also feels different.

Blaming victims for doing things like not automatically assuming that a man will try to rape them is bad. But what do you do with a person who tells you, straight up, that he/she/it is going to hurt you? Yes, it's still his/her fault for hurting you, but at some point there should be some degree of responsibility for not walking into an obvious, vulnerable situation with a violent psychopath, right?

The internet is that violent psychopath. Or, more specifically, it is populated by them and puts anything and everything within their reach.

And victim blaming in the context of sexual assault is used to put the onus on women to avoid it rather than on men to stop doing it (broad generalization). And that's the opposite of what we need to be doing.

But in this case? We can't really put the onus on the sociopaths of the world to stop being sociopaths. Avoiding being a target is pretty much your only effective option. Yes, we absolutely should address the culture that treats women as objects and their bodies as property.

But we can't root out every single monster with a keyboard.


So this sucks. Because it feels like victim-blaming, and I fucking hate that. But it also doesn't really seem like there is a viable alternative. I can certainly still sympathize with the victims - they likely expected that those pictures would be secure and have been rudely informed that they were wrong.

But the only way to keep this from happening is to never take/post those pictures. Because the internet is a violent psychopath.

Fuck.

[Jace]

... victim blaming is used to silence and intimidate victims and allows those who assault them to keep doing it with minimal consequence. And it puts the onus on women to avoid being assaulted rather than on men to stop assaulting them.

This perfectly describes the environment of the recent situation. So yes, it absolutely is victim blaming.