The Ethics of "Project Harpoon"

[Dizchu]

If there is no reasonable expectation of getting hit by a car, why do people look left and right before crossing the street? Are we all blundering into traffic blindly? (I'm not)

This comparison would only work if drivers deliberately drove into pedestrians that didn't look both ways. If Project Harpoon took these photos and edited them "accidentally" (for example, they were under the assumption that they had permission to do so) then you'd have a point.

 

[FireAza]

Goddamit 4chan! This is why people think gamers are all psychotic man-children!

 

[WonkyWarmaiden]

These people on 4chan are being colossal assholes to be quite honest, which is thoroughly unsurprising. They're also stupid if they think that photoshopping a few video game characters is the same as doing it to actual pictures of women.

Quaint little name, too. I guess they're fighting all the 'whales', aka fat women, that are trying to steal away their hot lady characters. Because everyone knows that was the end goal of that video game photo set. /sarcasm

Christ, people are idiots.

 

[Fallow]

Look, there are risks to pretty much anything you do. By going outside you risk being mugged, by living in certain places you risk being caught in an earthquake, tornado, flood, volcanic eruption etc. By crossing the road when the traffic light indicates you can cross the road, you risk a driver ignoring the red light and hitting you.

The level of "responsibility" you are expecting of people is unreasonable. You compare publishing photos on social media to jumping off a bridge. I know you don't think the two are as severe, but the fact that you associate such an benign thing as uploading some selfies to Facebook or Tumblr with something that is guaranteed to cause harm is quite disturbing. Just because there are some socially inept misanthropists on 4chan, conveniently hiding behind shrouds of anonymity and holding no regard for social etiquette (whether out of being thick as shit or cruelty) doesn't mean that everyone should live in constant paranoia.

I don't know, I think it's more forethought that I demand.
Going with the "don't walk around in bad part of town at night" scenario, it's pretty obvious what happens when you dun goofed, and the desire to not get assaulted is pretty innate. Posting your photos on FB the consequents are much less black/white, and I'm speculating that the common response is "What's the worst that could happen, everyone else is doing it". The connection between antecedent and consequent is thus less obvious. And this is after the events of the Fappening.
Given how many stories, how many "news" articles, how any "private" videos, how many scandals etc there have been where online photos are stolen/altered, it doesn't seem like a faraway thought to me that one should be careful. I absolutely believe that the level of forethought required is inverse to the amount of thinking that is needed to see the consequents, and here that level is low. Very low.

The bridge thing isn't actually a bridge thing - it's a classic zen koan for "If everyone was doing it, would you?", and even when I was growing up it was a classic, as I first saw it in Calvin and Hobbes. Here [http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/If_All_Your_Friends_Jumped_Off_A_Bridge] is the first thing I find on the koan, and here [https://xkcd.com/1170/] is another.

Also, misanthropists implicates a dedication that isn't present on /b/. It's for poops and giggles by people that do not care, not any hatred of humanity at large.

You know what? People in general might be a bit too eager to share things online, not knowing that anonymity allows for strangers to do pretty awful things. But that doesn't mean that the anonymous strangers are in the right.

This I feel is the center of the issue. Not the anonymity thing, that's tangential, but the vast distance between action and consequence when it comes to the internet (especially for those who do not understand the internet).
Essentially, you are doing stuff in the privacy of your own home (a private, safe, space), that is published in an international, vast, public space. You apply your private sensibilities (showering, walking around naked, speaking your mind without filtering and all those things you would never do in public) to stuff you say/do in a public space because you feel far more safe than you should. Not only that, but it's a massive space that includes all cultures, not just your own kind that sort of understands you.
This is not how we have grown up to understand these spheres, and it's very different from how we perceive and interact with the physical world (IRL stuff). One needs to understand that it's different, not merely scream at the moon that it shouldn't be so.

 

[Fallow]

If there is no reasonable expectation of getting hit by a car, why do people look left and right before crossing the street? Are we all blundering into traffic blindly? (I'm not)

This comparison would only work if drivers deliberately drove into pedestrians that didn't look both ways. If Project Harpoon took these photos and edited them "accidentally" (for example, they were under the assumption that they had permission to do so) then you'd have a point.

No, because it works both ways. The drivers wouldn't resonably expect pedestrians to be crossing the street without looking, and as such shouldn't bother to look for them.

 

[RedRockRun]

Oh, like hell 4chan would ever have anyone's best interests in mind. Let's forget that fat shaming or any counter and counter-counter movements exist. This is about 4chan bullies making fun of people. There is no chance that any of these dregs want to help anyone. All they are interested in is making other people sad and angry so that they can in turn feel happy. Of course they will say that it's a social reaction, that it's important for people to care about body image and stay healthy, and that telling people that it's okay to be overweight encourages unhealthy lifestyles, but only in Bizarro World would 4chan actually be telling the truth about caring. They don't care. It's trolling, and that's all it will ever be. The only reason they are hiding behind this veneer of social responsibility is to further enrage people, given it's harder to argue with people acting sanctimonious. So please, people - don't trust them, and regardless of whether you are for or against fat shaming, let's call this what it is: bullying.

I don't see anyone being ridiculed. Hell, on the FB page and on their subreddit people are lining up REQUESTING to be shopped for these exact reasons.

As a matter of fact, many coaches that get paid heaps of money to help their clients to be motivated to attain their goals employ this EXACT strategy: Do away with negative thoughts and doubts ("Why am I so fat?") and instead formulate a positive, enthusiastic goal. ("I want an awesome attractive body with a fit physique and visible muscle definition!")
This is precisely this.
All this butthurt is just the result of the current trend to label stating anything but cuddly feel-good hugbox "everyone is perfect <3" phrases as "offensive", "shaming" or "discrimination."

You use the word "hugbox" a lot. The only other place I've seen that used is Encyclopedia Dramatica. Why do you like watching the butthurt as well? It's one thing to like the idea of something, but what do you get from seeing other people angry? What's it do for you?

Make no mistake, I'm all for the root idea behind fat shaming i.e. not pretending like being overweight is okay, and I'm also against the storm of political correctness and hair trigger offense going around, but I'll never be okay with bullying or those who take pleasure in others' sadness and anger.

 

[Jux]

If there is no reasonable expectation of getting hit by a car, why do people look left and right before crossing the street? Are we all blundering into traffic blindly? (I'm not)

You think it's reasonable to expect that cars run through red lights and mow down pedestrians?

[/quote]If there is no reasonable expectation that people will save/download/alter your photos, why is there a 'make private' option for photos? Are we all putting our private pics on public platforms? (I'm not)

You aren't arguing with me; you are arguing with reality at this point.[/quote]

I find it bizarre that you jump to the conclusion that just because private settings exist, that must mean a public setting makes one fair game for shit like this. The fact that privacy and publicity laws exist pretty much blows this notion out the water. The one 'arguing against reality' here is you, not me.

 

[RobertEHouse]

I do not agree with what they did but....

In the past 30 or so years people have been told not to post private things on the web because the web is not private!

Understand that anything posted into Facebook gives Facebook the right to use it as they wish for marketing purposes. The same can be said with Twitter and other social media sites, in essence you handed them rights to those images unless you copyrighted them. So if you want to bash about privacy, you should have read the fine policy.

Also national privacy laws "do not extend" to the web because of the international community of nations which all have different or not existent privacy laws.

As for 4Chan, it is the wild west for trolling and Lulz you can't expect it to act any different then it does.

 

[RedRockRun]

I do not agree with what they did but....

In the past 30 or so years people have been told not to post private things on the web because the web is not private!. Also understand that anything posted into Facebook gives Facebook the right to use it as they wish for marketing purposes. The same can be said with Twitter and other social media sites, in essence you handed them rights to those images unless you copyrighted them. So if you want to bash about privacy, you aim at those sites first for having such policies.

As for 4Chan, it is the wild west for trolling and Lulz you can't expect it to act any different then it does.

Still, you can't blame the victims of this stuff by saying that they should have known better. Trolls aren't weather events or wild animals that can't be controlled. They're people who have chosen to purposefully hurt other people.

Also I don't know why there isn't a copyright of sorts for personal pictures. It's your face, after all. Unless the picture in question was taken by an ad agency for the specific purpose of being part of a company, your face is your property and no one else's, and if someone wants to do something with your likeness I think they should need your approval.

 

[Thaluikhain]

As a aside, this is one of those times when Jux's avatar seems really appropriate.

But you shouldn't have been doing it, for your own sake. That's not blaming you instead of the attacker.

It is. You cannot say something should have done something different to avoid something happened without blaming them, at least in part, for that thing happening.

Privacy?! People online are complaining about "Privacy"?! How Ironic, I suppose when it's 4chan it's immoral but when it's the government trading nude selfies like baseball cards in the NSA it's okay!

Ok according to whom? Plenty of people are against the NSA doing it as well.

 

[Jux]

Understand that anything posted into Facebook gives Facebook the right to use it as they wish for marketing purposes. The same can be said with Twitter and other social media sites, in essence you handed them rights to those images unless you copyrighted them. So if you want to bash about privacy, you should have read the fine policy.

Unless Facebook was the one heading up project harpoon, this is a complete non sequitur. Giving facebook the rights to use your images isn't the same as giving anyone the right to use your images. If you're going to admonish people for not reading the policy, maybe make sure you know what's in the policy first.

 

[RobertEHouse]

I do not agree with what they did but....

In the past 30 or so years people have been told not to post private things on the web because the web is not private!. Also understand that anything posted into Facebook gives Facebook the right to use it as they wish for marketing purposes. The same can be said with Twitter and other social media sites, in essence you handed them rights to those images unless you copyrighted them. So if you want to bash about privacy, you aim at those sites first for having such policies.

As for 4Chan, it is the wild west for trolling and Lulz you can't expect it to act any different then it does.

Still, you can't blame the victims of this stuff by saying that they should have known better. Trolls aren't weather events or wild animals that can't be controlled. They're people who have chosen to purposefully hurt other people.

Also I don't know why there isn't a copyright of sorts for personal pictures. It's your face, after all. Unless the picture in question was taken by an ad agency for the specific purpose of being part of a company, your face is your property and no one else's, and if someone wants to do something with your likeness I think they should need your approval.

First I am not blaming the victims, this was a horrible act. But they acted naïve how do you expect privacy when you post private photos?. How do expect privacy when web-sites have been hacked and millions of names and addresses from some social media sites have been sold to Black-market sites? you can't and should not. Naivety will always make someone a victim, the question is how many people will learn from this and realize the web is not private.

No Joke! You can copyright your body at the US patent office, my cousin did this. All you have to do is send in several full nude body turn around photos and paperwork then send that to the US patent office. They will look over them and see if you have you have a right for a copyright. You can look it up at their website or even just search the web about it. So if you have privacy issues already, I am sure you will have them after having patent clerk browsing your nudes.

 

[Thaluikhain]

First I am not blaming the victims,

If you are saying that they shouldn't not have done certain things, or that they should learn or should have learned, then that is what you are doing.

 

[Somekindofgold]

Well the argument "don't post your photos online if you want privacy" is kinda a solid arguement. Once you're out there online it's not that easy to keep it entirely private for all. There's concern for privacy, then there's the reality of privacy on the internet.

Sure, but can you really defend the people that invade people's private social media accounts to do these things without their consent? The "don't post your photos online if you want privacy" argument is essentially the same as "don't get drunk if you don't want to be sexually assaulted" or "don't cross the road if you don't want to be hit by a car". Almost everyone that uses Facebook or Twitter will post pictures of themselves, why should they be expected to grow thicker skin or refrain from sharing such images just because there's a chance some troll from 4chan will humiliate them?

People should know the dangers of the internet, yes. But that doesn't mean that people like those behind Project Harpoon are free to do as they please without consequences.

If you post something to the public sphere (i.e. a social media account people didnt have the intelligence to mark PIRVATE- FRIENDS ONLY with) then that image is no longer private, its that easy. You can argue that its vile or cruel or whatever but none of them care because its funny.

And you people fell right into their hands. The media that cried about it, the fatties demanding boycotts on national television, you all gave them what they wanted. You gave them the justification to continue because their joke is getting across with the added benefit of the message behind the joke getting across as well. Because this hypocrisy behind outrage at making fat people thin compared to the cheering support of making thin people fat is what they were trying to expose.

And PorjectHarpoon is hilarious now. This is Zimmerman trial, exploding van, SVU episode, Darren Wilson funding, Time Magazine poll changing levels of entertainment now and its because of the reaction. You play into their hands everytime, you cant help it apparently.

Congratulations.

Goddamit 4chan! This is why people think gamers are all psychotic man-children!

You do know 4chan is more than just people that play video games right? And this wasnt 4chan, this was /pol/, this inferno is art far beyond the ability of /v/ or /b/.

 

[Qizx]

First I am not blaming the victims,

If you are saying that they shouldn't not have done certain things, or that they should learn or should have learned, then that is what you are doing.

No.
That's not what it means. Also "Shouldn't not have?"

 

[Thaluikhain]

As a aside, this is one of those times when Jux's avatar seems really appropriate.

But you shouldn't have been doing it, for your own sake. That's not blaming you instead of the attacker.

It is. You cannot say something should have done something different to avoid something happened without blaming them, at least in part, for that thing happening.

Privacy?! People online are complaining about "Privacy"?! How Ironic, I suppose when it's 4chan it's immoral but when it's the government trading nude selfies like baseball cards in the NSA it's okay!

Ok according to whom? Plenty of people are against the NSA doing it as well.

When did the Tu Quoque fallacy become the central dogma of so many online anyway?

I don't remember it ever not being so. However, I don't know if that is what this is, it seems like "Why talk about X when Y is more important?". Which isn't much better.

 

[Popido]

Eh... #FreeBleeding was worse. Atleast this is funny to watch at.

And they're doing it in the name of good, which obviously means they are just.