More nude photo leaks
- Thread starter Matthew Jabour
- Start date
Recommended Videos
With zero reasoning behind such a statement? Come on.mad825 said:
Who, the hackers? They might, though I fail to see how that paints them in any better of a light. They stole private property and viewed people in the nude that did not consent to it. That's sexual predation in my book.
I sense some serious victim blaming in the opening post. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for advice on how to stay safe - I believe teaching potential victims how to better defend themselves is more effective than trying to talk potential dirtbags out of their deeds - but at the end of the day the blame for nude photos being leaked is with the creeps who acquired and leaked them, not with the person who took a nude photo of themselves.
My girlfriend has tons and tons and TONS of pictures of herself, many partially clothed and completely nude. She says it's because she's 'extremely photogenic', but it really just means she likes taking pictures of herself.
She doesn't give them to anyone or upload them anywhere. She just has them to have them. She actually got really pissed when she thought I saw her bare breasts in a picture, enough to cancel our date for the night after. Even though I hadn't. This from a woman who begs to be bought linguine for her birthday, and walks around the house in her underwear regardless of who is currently in the house at the time.
She doesn't give them to anyone or upload them anywhere. She just has them to have them. She actually got really pissed when she thought I saw her bare breasts in a picture, enough to cancel our date for the night after. Even though I hadn't. This from a woman who begs to be bought linguine for her birthday, and walks around the house in her underwear regardless of who is currently in the house at the time.
No, I meant lingerie. Autocorrect + I can't spell French words.Caiphus said:
God I hate French words.
Although she does ask for linguine too. And ramen. And steak. And basically everything that doesn't come from a pig. I swear she eats more than I do, and I'm 6'7", 265lbs while she's like 5'6" and 125lbs.
Off topic, but it was mostly just added to avoid a low content warning
I think the question of who to blame is rather... inane. Because as much as people believe blame is best placed on one and only one cause, real life is more likely to say that blame can be shared (and even distributed disproportionally, the alacrity!)
I think a better question is how to prevent this. My thoughts are three-fold in order of increasing safety and likelihood:
1. Hackers should stop intruding. (This is an ethical thing. Clearly they are not in the right.)
2. Developers should give a damn about security systems. (This is somewhat an ethical obligation on their part. Obviously there is a vast range here of intentional/unintentional/negligent and glaringly/very discreet exploits.)
3. Individuals shouldn't say/do/take pictures of things that might not want to exist in perpetuity. Because many of these things DO continue to exist. Even once deleted. (This is NOT an ethical obligation. However, just because people are not ethically responsible does not mean "consequence-free")
One of the things I wish this whole debacle brought up, which I'm surprised it hasn't, is the "right to privacy." Unlike a lot of indelible human rights ("religion," "property," "happiness"), the right to privacy is a lot more murky. It's actually fairly difficult to define what privacy is and why we have a right to it. Even legally, it generally is only defensible by combining other rights. (Privacy = the right to happiness + the right to undue search/seizure + etc.)
So I think it's quite interesting that the digital age is challenging privacy. It seems when people talk about these breaches, the criminal accusations are towards "breaching servers" while the people affected claim it is "breaching privacy." Hmm... will we see a digital right to privacy convalesce or is the Internet fair-game?
I think a better question is how to prevent this. My thoughts are three-fold in order of increasing safety and likelihood:
1. Hackers should stop intruding. (This is an ethical thing. Clearly they are not in the right.)
2. Developers should give a damn about security systems. (This is somewhat an ethical obligation on their part. Obviously there is a vast range here of intentional/unintentional/negligent and glaringly/very discreet exploits.)
3. Individuals shouldn't say/do/take pictures of things that might not want to exist in perpetuity. Because many of these things DO continue to exist. Even once deleted. (This is NOT an ethical obligation. However, just because people are not ethically responsible does not mean "consequence-free")
One of the things I wish this whole debacle brought up, which I'm surprised it hasn't, is the "right to privacy." Unlike a lot of indelible human rights ("religion," "property," "happiness"), the right to privacy is a lot more murky. It's actually fairly difficult to define what privacy is and why we have a right to it. Even legally, it generally is only defensible by combining other rights. (Privacy = the right to happiness + the right to undue search/seizure + etc.)
So I think it's quite interesting that the digital age is challenging privacy. It seems when people talk about these breaches, the criminal accusations are towards "breaching servers" while the people affected claim it is "breaching privacy." Hmm... will we see a digital right to privacy convalesce or is the Internet fair-game?
That is why I don't feel bad for people who have their houses broken into and robbed. Don't they know that if they didn't have a house or things this crime would never have happened??? Take some personal responsibilities, jeesh. Naked homeless people are so smart.
It's obvious why people would feel compelled to look for nude celebrity photos. Later in my post, I said there was nothing wrong with taking those photos - as long as you make some effort to conceal them. Hoping that putting photos on a cloud will be perfectly safe, in this day and age, may indeed be a pipe dream.Zeconte said:
But, failing that, surely the victims would try to prevent such thefts from happening. When people go abroad, they are urged to use fake wallets, even though the impetus should be on muggers to not steal.Don Incognito said:
But cloud data is not like a bank. It's more like a warehouse, filled to the brim with boxes upon boxes of photographs. If someone breaks into a warehouse and steals those photos, they have done wrong, but which photos they find depends upon you. If you have some private nude photos, just keep them in your house. Be cautious, is what I'm saying.LarsInCharge said:
Hoplon said:
to be honest apple and other companies warn of this way ahead of time in their terms of service....... now because none of the "victims" read this or get educated on the basics of computer security(like do not email password to people you dont know, seriously how do you fall for phishing in this day and age). now they are getting toted on the same level as a rape victim.... because these pictures leaking is the same as a rape...... yeah....
I don't put shit on electronics unless said electronic is a personal device for storage. You send sensitive imagery or information you do so with a more personal transport method, don't be so fucking stupid. The people who leaked them are at fault, but if you want to try and reign in the entire negative force of humanity with a keyboard and some spare time, you are beyond optimistic. I would love to have it be different but as it is the world is way too fucking big to get a good hold of so just generally don't keep nude photos on the internet....you scrubs.
From what i read the photos were transferred to the icloud via iphone, something it does automatically. Yet Apple stuck fuck all protection on the icloud. Thing is, if your doing something connected to the internet, dont do anything you will regret later. People are naive with technology these days.
But at some point you have to be a realist. A person should be able to walk safely down a bad neighborhood alley at night while wearing a fur coat, diamond rings, and tons of gold jewelry. But common sense tells you that may be a bad idea. It should be safe, but it isn't, and you have to take that into consideration when making a decision. It's called personal responsibility. Is it the victims fault if something bad happens? Not really, the criminal is the one who decided to do something immoral. But the fact is that those people exist, and we need to take that into consideration when making a decision. We have a right to privacy, and criminals, companies, governments, or mixture of those things should be held accountable for infringing on those rights. But understanding that there are people will infringe on those rights is a sad truth we need to consider in order to protect ourselves.Zeconte said:
But it shouldn't have to be such an egregious risk to take pictures of yourself in the comfort of your own home.Fox12 said:
If it's uploaded to the internet (encrypted or not), it's not "in your own home." It's on RAM and a hard drive in a server in a data-center in some region of the world. And as time goes on, it gets backed-up to another server or on magnetic tapes. And so on and so forth.LarsInCharge said:
This is why I explicitly mentioned Polaroids because of duplication difficulties & physicality.
It shouldn't be, but it is, and most people don't realize it. There's the danger. The culprits and companies should be held accountable, but more than anything people should be made aware of the risks involved in modern technology so that they can make informed decisions.LarsInCharge said: