TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Nude Photo (iCloud?) hack affecting celebs (Jennifer Lawrence/Kate Upton...) via 4chan
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by Lews Loosed in the henhouse? They were using legal means to try to protect the world from people like ISIS. They may have overstepped themselves slightly in their efforts to do so, and there are certainly a few examples of rogue employees doing bad things, but the NSA operations weren't purposefully malicious, like this "fappening."

Right, they're not the same thing, as Nou was seemingly arguing(?)

I was merely borrowing a phrase- appointing the fox to guard the henhouse. And yes, when you hear of the sheer "wealth" of people looking to join ISIS from Europe anymore, it's difficult to not think "huh, guess maybe it's good that communications are being monitored for this sort of thing?"

And let's go with sorta-legal. I am glad the NSA as a collective was accountable; it says everything about the difference in this case.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Right, they're not the same thing, as Nou was seemingly arguing(?)

Not on a "civil liberties" axis perhaps, but certainly on a moral plane. It's not just the actual hackers who went to all that malicious effort to get the information, it's the millions of people currently gleefully revelling in the utter violation of the privacy of individuals in a way that directly, publicly and lastingly humiliaties those individuals. If you're happy - no, make that joyous - to throw away the precepts of your beloved Constitution if it means seeing a pair of famous tits then how can you credibly claim to hold that Constitution so dear when it suddenly dawns that you might become a victim?

Do only women take nude selfies or because hackers are male they only leak female nudes or no one would give a dam about male nudes except for gheys? Btw I was underwhelmed by the pics.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Not on a "civil liberties" axis perhaps, but certainly on a moral plane. It's not just the actual hackers who went to all that malicious effort to get the information, it's the millions of people currently gleefully revelling in the utter violation of the privacy of individuals in a way that directly, publicly and lastingly humiliaties those individuals. If you're happy - no, make that joyous - to throw away the precepts of your beloved Constitution if it means seeing a pair of famous tits then how can you credibly claim to hold that Constitution so dear when it suddenly dawns that you might become a victim?

No disagreement from me, it's why I brought up the "spirit" of the constitution in this case, as this same community was crying foul over PRISM and is now happy to share some very dire and similar violations among themselves. But to be more specific, the US constitution -by its letter- is a bulwark against the potential abuses of federal government, hence why the NSA violating certain articles was particularly egregious. Individuals cannot typically violate the US constitution, as they are not laws or agencies unto themselves, and the spectrum of accountability cannot be legislated into sweeping precedent... or at least I can't think of any comparable examples?

quote:

Originally posted by Jon_Snow Do only women take nude selfies or because hackers are male they only leak female nudes or no one would give a dam about male nudes except for gheys? Btw I was underwhelmed by the pics.

How do you not know the answer to this having been on TA so long?

I'd say the number of well known female TAs that don't have nudes or somewhat compromising pictures out there is in the minority.

It was a rhetorical question.

Some of you guys are dense, so ill provide two clear examples of what the differences i alluded too earlier.

If your neighbor peeks over the fence while your wife is butt-naked in your yard, you can go over and punch him in the face. On the other hand if the police do it, you're not going to do shit about it because you value your freedom. Fuck.

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange Some of you guys are dense, so ill provide two clear examples of what the differences i alluded too earlier. If your neighbor peeks over the fence while your wife is butt-naked in your yard, you can go over and punch him in the face. On the other hand if the police do it, you're not going to do shit about it because you value your freedom. Fuck.

If you went over and punched your neighbor he could very easily sue you and you would most likely be arrested.

Reddit will not get in trouble for this because of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act

quote:

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996) is a landmark piece of Internet legislation in the United States, codified at 47 U.S.C. � 230. Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by others: No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. In analyzing the availability of the immunity offered by this provision, courts generally apply a three-prong test. A defendant must satisfy each of the three prongs to gain the benefit of the immunity: The defendant must be a "provider or user" of an "interactive computer service." The cause of action asserted by the plaintiff must "treat" the defendant "as the publisher or speaker" of the harmful information at issue. The information must be "provided by another information content provider," i.e., the defendant must not be the "information content provider" of the harmful information at issue.

I've had to deal with numerous idiots over the years threatening me over stupid shit (bad reviews/etc.) - NONE of them followed through with legal action.... and even then it would be against the poster, not TA. The ones that always pissed me off were the ones in regards to images that were linked within a thread... why are you going after TA and not the server where the file is located? One of the main reasons I never allowed image attachments.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Not on a "civil liberties" axis perhaps, but certainly on a moral plane. It's not just the actual hackers who went to all that malicious effort to get the information, it's the millions of people currently gleefully revelling in the utter violation of the privacy of individuals in a way that directly, publicly and lastingly humiliaties those individuals. If you're happy - no, make that joyous - to throw away the precepts of your beloved Constitution if it means seeing a pair of famous tits then how can you credibly claim to hold that Constitution so dear when it suddenly dawns that you might become a victim?

I think most people understand that criminals and hackers are gonna be naughty and do shitty things to others. But one probably holds their government to a higher standard of behaviour, otherwise they are unfit for the purpose of governing. I grant that is a very lofty ideal, but I think this is how people feel. People are unhappy with either of the following:

1. The government legalises, for themselves, what we consider to be criminal activity (privacy invasion). That's not fair.
2. You could now logically conclude that we are ruled by criminals.

On a side note, you're treating an entire online community, thousands of personalities, as one person who is both against snooping but at the same time rejoicing in the gratuitous downloading of titties that they weren't allowed to see on the big screen.

this wouldnt be an issue if people werent so self obsessed feeling the need to selfie themselves in every possible angle and every possible naked pose.


there is a lesson to be learned through all of this....get over yourselves.

It wouldn't be a big deal if people didn't give a fuck about naked people.

it wouldnt be a big deal if people didnt exist

well people do nou. And as a person you should pretty much figure that if youre putting naked pics into existence...there is a chance one day someone will find them.


There is a risk in everything you do. So before you do dumb shit you should probably calculate the consequences.

I dont see what the big deal is in NOT taking naked pictures of yourself. its pretty easy actually...just get over yourself.

I mean for the vast majority of people (normal people) if you were to go through their phones you'd see pictures of parties of stupid shit they saw on the street, of family events etc.. retarded ppl you will find selfies and naked pics.


and dont get me wrong I am soooo fuckin happy we have those psychos and their shit spills over....its hilarious.... but im just pointing out here that maybe just maybe if you didnt want ppl seeing naked pics of you....you shouldnt be taking them and having them hosted on the internet or on any device that can access the internet. what the fuck is wrong with people??? and im supposed tofeel bad for these morons??


its like if you give jay permission to take a photo of you while youre sucking your cock. you shouldnt be too bewildered when it ends up on ta after you fuck him over lol.

its like if you didnt want to become a war vet, maybe maybe you should have thought about that before you picked up a gun and started shooting bullets into another country...

quote:

Originally posted by Vivid Boy well people do nou. And as a person you should pretty much figure that if youre putting naked pics into existence...there is a chance one day someone will find them. There is a risk in everything you do. So before you do dumb shit you should probably calculate the consequences. I dont see what the big deal is in NOT taking naked pictures of yourself. its pretty easy actually...just get over yourself.

Naked pictures are awesome though.

Everyone is missing the bigger question ...which was the hottest selfie?

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzQi I think most people understand that criminals and hackers are gonna be naughty and do shitty things to others.

Everyone who clicks on those links, let alone saves them to their hard drive, is engaging in a criminal activity and consciously violating the privacy of another individual. Not just the nasty hackers. Probably most of the people in this thread. I understand the principle and the ideal you're talking about, but what's revealing about this episode is how self-interested people are in their "idealism". The majority of people I've spoke to who are most vocal in their paranoia and criticism of privacy intrusion are only doing so because they're engaging in petty criminal behaviour and don't want to get caught. They aren't political activists or dissidents or anyone the government has any interest in suppressing. It's much like people I personally know in this country who argue voraciously for the welfare system to be untouched and accuse our right-wing parties of being monsters for not caring about the poor and the vulnerable, but they're actually abusing the welfare system and claiming money they shouldn't. They may incidentally be right but their motivations are utter bullshit.

quote:

On a side note, you're treating an entire online community, thousands of personalities, as one person who is both against snooping but at the same time rejoicing in the gratuitous downloading of titties that they weren't allowed to see on the big screen.

It's just a lot easier to go with the collective "Reddit" or whatever than type out "those Reddit users who criticised the NSA but have now clicked on these links" each time.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Everyone who clicks on those links, let alone saves them to their hard drive, is engaging in a criminal activity and consciously violating the privacy of another individual. Not just the nasty hackers. Probably most of the people in this thread. I understand the principle and the ideal you're talking about, but what's revealing about this episode is how self-interested people are in their "idealism".

Right on the money, basically. It also doesn't make sense to me that people lose their shit over a small trove of nudes when the internet is literally filled with porn that was put up with some form of consent. Go get your rocks off somewhere else, ffs.

And yeah, if you threw a shit-fit over the NSA stuff, and are currently right-click -> save-as'ing your way to a new folder full of nudes, you're a fucking joke.

So these guys are fapping to jennifer lawrence's saggy tits now. Oh the fucken travesty sweet jesus.

quote:

Originally posted by enydo It also doesn't make sense to me that people lose their shit over a small trove of nudes when the internet is literally filled with porn that was put up with some form of consent. Go get your rocks off somewhere else, ffs.

Yeah, that has never made sense to me, either. Maybe people feel special, somehow? Because they know deep down they shouldn't be looking at something illicit? Or that they now possess some sort of intimate knowledge of obviously powerful women, compounded by assumptions on possession in the first place? I think this take on the matter is pretty pointed:

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinio...sthetrolls.html

I looked through most of them and I had no idea who most of them were. It was basically the same as browsing gonewild on reddit.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Yeah, that has never made sense to me, either. Maybe people feel special, somehow? Because they know deep down they shouldn't be looking at something illicit? Or that they now possess some sort of intimate knowledge of obviously powerful women, compounded by assumptions on possession in the first place? I think this take on the matter is pretty pointed: http://america.aljazeera.com/opinio...sthetrolls.html

Read this earlier and it's a good examination of what's going on, I think.

I think the voyeurism combined with the cult of celebrity probably fuels a lot of this. The people claiming that famous people should just "not take nude photos" is pretty hilarious, along with all the bros trying to critique the physiques of the women in the pictures.

People on twitter started just reposting the uggo-ass avatars of dudes in response to them saying things like "omg Kate Upton is so fat".

meanwhile at the FBI,

Yeah, because the pictures were "leaked", weren't they?

Like when someone breaks in to your house by trying every possible key combination on your door lock and takes all your shit, it's not theft, it's just you leaking you possessions

honestly these pics just reminded me not to celebrity worship.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.