(July 31, 2017 at 10:28 pm)pool the matey Wrote: I mean, normally when we fall for something like phishing, not all but some of the blame is on ourselves. A server getting hacked is another issue where we have no control but phishing..I mean, we have *some control*. If there ever was a solution it would probably be getting educated about how people do these sneaky stuff so that we ourselves don't fall for it but a lot of people are calling this victim blaming, so I want to make it clear that it is NOT. Taking precautions doesn't have to mean that you're being blamed sometimes it's just about being smart.

It's being smart, yes. It's taking precautions, yes. But it's not the solution.

(July 29, 2017 at 2:39 pm)Mermaid Wrote:

(July 29, 2017 at 2:19 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Anyone who thinks that any part of the web is "secure" is simply deluding themselves.  If you must take nude photos of yourself copy them to a flash drive and wear them on a chain around your neck.

I think this is victim blaming.

 Min and I rarely see eye to eye but in this case I think Min and FFaith are right, if you do not want things like this seen then keep them off the internet. I do not think either Min nor FFaith where victim blaming. They were just saying be smart because everyone knows what can happen when things get uploaded. She is a smart person and she did neglect to think it through. I will not put any personal info on my computer that I do not want people to see or have and I'm certainly not going to put it on the web. Hopefully this will be a lesson to others. It was wrong what happened and it's wrong to view them. If people would not view such things then other people wouldn't have a reason to do such things.

GC

(July 31, 2017 at 11:15 pm)J a c k Wrote:

(July 31, 2017 at 10:28 pm)pool the matey Wrote: I mean, normally when we fall for something like phishing, not all but some of the blame is on ourselves. A server getting hacked is another issue where we have no control but phishing..I mean, we have *some control*. If there ever was a solution it would probably be getting educated about how people do these sneaky stuff so that we ourselves don't fall for it but a lot of people are calling this victim blaming, so I want to make it clear that it is NOT. Taking precautions doesn't have to mean that you're being blamed sometimes it's just about being smart.

It's being smart, yes. It's taking precautions, yes. But it's not the solution.

Then I don't think there is a solution

---

There's this guy called Madara in Naruto who thinks the solution to all problems is casting a worldwide illusion on everyone and create a perfect world within that illusion/dream. Maybe it's time we started going that route? xD

Here's an anti question!

What if an old geizer stumbled across these pics on his PC, got excited and had a heart attack!
Can Mrs old geizer sue the Lawrence estate for indirectly causing his death?

(July 31, 2017 at 7:20 pm)J a c k Wrote:

(July 31, 2017 at 4:58 pm)FFaith Wrote: I said in a way, but I know that's not technically consent, so I probably shouldn't have put it exactly like that, but what I meant is that it's like these people are begging to have their pictures leaked. They could choose to be a million times safer with it but decide not to think it through. It's like if you're a rich white guy who decides to take a walk through the hood showing off your nice watch. You're basically saying, please take my watch.

No, that's not what the rich dude is basically saying.

On another note:
Girl has a drink. The two dudes she's hanging out with offer her another drink. They mess with her drink. She stumbles out. They catch her at the corner. They sneak her into a house through a window. They rape her. They record the whole thing. She wakes up in her own vomit. She has bruises. She's sick. Everything hurts. How did she get home?
Days go by and she's finally able to go to work. She shows up. The attackers show up. They tell her about the recording. They'll show everybody if she says a word. She keeps her mouth shut. Except for her pastor. She tells her pastor. The pastor says she shouldn't have been drinking. She shouldn't have been hanging out with two dudes. She put herself in danger. She was basically asking for it. Perhaps the video is out there. Perhaps people watch it and she will never know. I say,
if one of those viewers knows it wasn't with consent, fuck them. They're human waste.

I know some things can't compare to others, but I will never stand for the whole... if she doesn't know, it won't hurt. I will never stand for the whole... she was basically asking for it. I will never understand thinking it's ok, because you weren't the one to do the actual crime. As long as people watch, there will be supply and demand.

If she didn't want you to see it, and you still see it, you lack human decency. Might not be a crime, but it doesn't make it right.

And before anyone says this was an extreme example... don't. I can imagine you understand the point.

And yet on another note:
I don't care if a woman knew the risk she was taking when she sent her boyfriend a nude, or if the rich guy knew the risk of wearing his watch. She's not asking you to forward it to all your friends and he's not asking you to steal his watch.
-An open window is not an invitation to trespass.
-An open purse is not an invitation to grab the wallet.
-A nude in iCloud is not an invitation to look.

Call these people irresponsible all you want, but if a person finds it too difficult to respect boundaries, they need to do some introspection. Why is it so important to look? Why must you take it?

And the whole thing about people needing wanking material... there are thousands of images online. To excuse looking at stolen pictures with that argument is lazy.

These celebs consented to having those pics and vids taken of them, and then uploaded them to the internet where in this day and age, there should be no expectation of privacy on the internet. Embarrassing things get leaked about celebs all the time. Did you listen to the secretly recorded tape of billionaire Donald Sterling humiliating himself taking about race? If so, why? It's a conversation recorded without his consent, which was humiliating and very damaging. More damaging than these celeb nudes. I guess anyone who listened to that is a piece of crap as well.

(August 1, 2017 at 12:23 am)ignoramus Wrote: Here's an anti question!

What if an old geizer stumbled across these pics on his PC, got excited and had a heart attack!
Can Mrs old geizer sue the Lawrence estate for indirectly causing his death?

Do I have to pay her for my penis coming back to life?

(August 1, 2017 at 1:06 pm)FFaith Wrote:

(July 31, 2017 at 7:20 pm)J a c k Wrote: No, that's not what the rich dude is basically saying.

On another note:
Girl has a drink. The two dudes she's hanging out with offer her another drink. They mess with her drink. She stumbles out. They catch her at the corner. They sneak her into a house through a window. They rape her. They record the whole thing. She wakes up in her own vomit. She has bruises. She's sick. Everything hurts. How did she get home?
Days go by and she's finally able to go to work. She shows up. The attackers show up. They tell her about the recording. They'll show everybody if she says a word. She keeps her mouth shut. Except for her pastor. She tells her pastor. The pastor says she shouldn't have been drinking. She shouldn't have been hanging out with two dudes. She put herself in danger. She was basically asking for it. Perhaps the video is out there. Perhaps people watch it and she will never know. I say,
if one of those viewers knows it wasn't with consent, fuck them. They're human waste.

I know some things can't compare to others, but I will never stand for the whole... if she doesn't know, it won't hurt. I will never stand for the whole... she was basically asking for it. I will never understand thinking it's ok, because you weren't the one to do the actual crime. As long as people watch, there will be supply and demand.

If she didn't want you to see it, and you still see it, you lack human decency. Might not be a crime, but it doesn't make it right.

And before anyone says this was an extreme example... don't. I can imagine you understand the point.

And yet on another note:
I don't care if a woman knew the risk she was taking when she sent her boyfriend a nude, or if the rich guy knew the risk of wearing his watch. She's not asking you to forward it to all your friends and he's not asking you to steal his watch.
-An open window is not an invitation to trespass.
-An open purse is not an invitation to grab the wallet.
-A nude in iCloud is not an invitation to look.

Call these people irresponsible all you want, but if a person finds it too difficult to respect boundaries, they need to do some introspection. Why is it so important to look? Why must you take it?

And the whole thing about people needing wanking material... there are thousands of images online. To excuse looking at stolen pictures with that argument is lazy.

These celebs consented to having those pics and vids taken of them, and then uploaded them to the internet where in this day and age, there should be no expectation of privacy on the internet. Embarrassing things get leaked about celebs all the time. Did you listen to the secretly recorded tape of billionaire Donald Sterling humiliating himself taking about race? If so, why? It's a conversation recorded without his consent, which was humiliating and very damaging. More damaging than these celeb nudes. I guess anyone who listened to that is a piece of crap as well.

Actually they took the pictures of themselves with their own cell phones, which then goes to their secured cloud account. The only way for an outsider to access the photos is to illegally hack into their private, secured cloud account. It's no different from hacking into your bank account or breaking into your home. I dont see how you can consider that consent.

(August 1, 2017 at 2:52 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(August 1, 2017 at 1:06 pm)FFaith Wrote: These celebs consented to having those pics and vids taken of them, and then uploaded them to the internet where in this day and age, there should be no expectation of privacy on the internet. Embarrassing things get leaked about celebs all the time. Did you listen to the secretly recorded tape of billionaire Donald Sterling humiliating himself taking about race? If so, why? It's a conversation recorded without his consent, which was humiliating and very damaging. More damaging than these celeb nudes. I guess anyone who listened to that is a piece of crap as well.

Actually they took the pictures of themselves with their own cell phones, which then goes to their secured cloud account. The only way for an outsider to access the photos is to illegally hack into their private, secured cloud account. It's no different from hacking into your bank account or breaking into your home. I dont see how you can consider that consent.

No, I meant consent as in they knew that they or someone else was taking pictures of them or videotaping them as opposed to the example I was given where someone was drugged and raped on camera while they were passed out.

(August 1, 2017 at 2:52 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Actually they took the pictures of themselves with their own cell phones, which then goes to their secured cloud account. The only way for an outsider to access the photos is to illegally hack into their private, secured cloud account. It's no different from hacking into your bank account or breaking into your home. I dont see how you can consider that consent.

Yes and the more people steal these pictures the less likely I am to get a pic from Mrs Pumb to keep me warm when shes at work. "I'm not sending that " shed say, look what happened to "Kim Kardashian".

(August 1, 2017 at 3:18 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Yes and the more people steal these pictures the less likely I am to get a pic from Mrs Pumb to keep me warm when shes at work. "I'm not sending that " shed say, look what happened to "Kim Kardashian".

She got rich and famous while maintaining her stupidity?