Jennifer Lawrence Nude Photo Leak Who is responsible?

ecofarm said:

Being a racist is like having pics stolen?

Click to expand...

Having a private conversation recorded without your knowledge and leaked to the public is like having private pictures leaked to the public, yes. I know you like to simplify things to fit into your narrow little agenda driven world view but read what I actually said. I was commenting on the "privacy" notion. And you highlighted my point well.

Sterlings private comments wrongfully leaked to the public caused people to think he was a racist, so the fact they were wrongfully leaked to the public wasn't given much outrage.

These celebs pictures wrongfully leaked to the public haven't largely caused people to think negatively about them (and despite your pathetic attempt to put words in my mouth, I don't think a woman or a guy is "slutty" for taking a naked picture), and thus there's great outrage over the fact they're been wrongfully leaked.

Which to me tells me that the supposed concern over "privacy" is bull**** and is simply a tool to use as a good sound byte to push the agendas related to each (in sterlings case, fighting racism. In the celebs case, fighting sexism.)

No vote , as usual..
Why ?
No "other" option ...things simply are NOT that simple .
The woman was naïve, the people "semi-criminals" ..Of which I am one ..

Zyphlin said:

Having a private conversation recorded without your knowledge and leaked to the public is like having private pictures leaked to the public, yes.

Click to expand...

Not really. The pics served to show boobies, fundamentally that's laudable. The audio was merely support for an accusation. Is there an accusation involved in the first case that demands evidence?

Zyphlin said:

I never claimed my "rant" was aimed specifically at anyone on this forum or just this forums responses to things. If I was meaning to comment on SPECIFIC comments made on this forum I would've linked to them. My "rant" was me posting my views on an attitude towards this and other situations recently that I've seen in a multitude of different places and locations. For example the fingernail polish I referenced above, where a detractor (in a news story, let me clarify since you seem to think the extent of my experience is just this forum) came out condeming it because it'd just continue the trend of "making women responsible for not being raped" and that there simply shouldn't be violence against women.

Click to expand...

Um, Zyphlin...I did not say "on this forum" for a reason. It is because I was not meaning "on this forum". I literally have not heard any one make the statements you seem to be arguing against. Your example so far is one idiot on some news story that you are paraphrasing.

Have to say, Upton in particular is a moron. The pics she took were not the selfie in the mirror sort but rather fully involved, unflattering, week's stubble, pull those cheeks apart grossness. Not to mention many photos of her husband's junk while he slept. He has nothing to wrote home about in that department, yikes!

clownboy said:

So, Anthony Wiener? These folks lead and profit from leading public lives. That is the distinguishing characteristic of their chosen career, a total lack of privacy.

Click to expand...

what the **** does Anthony Weiner have to do with anything? If these women sent you a sext message, you might have a point

Lutherf said:

We're talking about celebrities here. These are people who have a whole posse of paparazzi chasing them everywhere they go. The KNOW that there is a premium on any picture of a slipped nipple or whatever. These should be the people MOST interested in protecting themselves from a hacker but what do they do, they go full Carlos Danger with the stuff.

This kind of hacking isn't some new enterprise. It's been around as long as digital photography has been (or at least as long as the technology has been readily available). Yeah, the hackers are bad guys in this but the "victims" are just plain idiots.

Click to expand...

I agree, the celebrities should definitely be more aware of how today's technology operates, or at least hire experts to help them secure their digital lives, but these are not tech savvy or even common sense individuals as a rule.

Identity thieves can ruin just about anyone's day with little info. It's one of my greatest fears in using today's technology. I'll tell you one thing, I sure don't want to do my banking online. Bank of America keeps trying to encourage me to go "paperless" and tell me how secure their system is, while they get hacked every other month. I keep as little sensitive info on my PC as possible, though in today's world you need a credit/debit card for online purchases and some other info to interact with gov't agencies. I use the standard Windows OS, firewall and antivirus, but short of that I don't use anymore protection, because it can actually be a redflag to hackers. They're interested in what someones hiding, when there's a lot of locks and blocks being used.

I bet Hollywood is less impressed with Apple software...lol

Redress said:

And again, you are creating this weird spin. The reason the privacy issue was not focused on in the Sterling case(though in fact I and many others did comment about it) was because it was overshadowed by what was revealed. I did not see any one try and justify recording private conversations(it should not be done), but you cannot put the genie back in the bottle, and that was a big ****ing genie for many people. In this case, the genie is some tits. Kinda a whole different level of thing. If you look at two different events and wonder why they are treated somewhat differently, the problem might be with you.

Click to expand...

But that's fine if your complaints...in EITHER case...is about the GENIE.

Also notice I didn't say no one cared about privacy in the sterling case. I suggested the fervor, anger, and focus on it was significantly less. Which it absolutley is. I recognize you were one of the people I saw who seemingly did condemn that aspect a bit more than just as a casual aside.

If one is suggesting they're upset about PRIVACY, then BOTH cases should have gotten a good bit of crusading. But it isn't, because it's not about privacy. Privacy is just a nice buzzwork to add onto this to sound good.

The reality is that the "Genie" in the Sterling case was viewed as "bad" and the "Genie" in this case isn't just viewed as good but is viewed as something that we need some social agenda to promote in the name of combatting sexism (see Eco's desprate need to insinuate that somehow I think these women are "sluts").

I've had no issue with people I've seen jumping online complaining about the sexism angles of this. My issue is with some that I've seen making this out as a giant PRIVACY issue, which is utter bull**** because it's clear they don't care about peoples privacy, they simply care about privacy for things they agree with.

ARealConservative said:

what the **** does Anthony Weiner have to do with anything? If these women sent you a sext message, you might have a point

Click to expand...

Private between him and the recipient. And are you seriously saying Upton and the others took these photos with a communication device and never shared them electronically with anyone? She just saved them for ****s and giggles? These are show off pics in most cases and were shared with friends.

I do not know the law (is it actually "hacking" if they just guess a password after a few hundred thousand tries?) - but it seems illegal to me.

But I will say anyone who posts suggestive photos and such online needs a lesson in common sense.

If I make an online purchase, I EXPECT my billing information to be kept private, even if it is stored online.

Those of you who are blaming J-Law for uploading nude photos to a secure server are basically telling me that I should never make another purchase online.

earthworm said:

Wrong !
But for a Libertarian, NOT wrong ...They live in a perfect world..

Click to expand...

What on earth are you talking about? What's wrong?

Zyphlin said:

But that's fine if your complaints...in EITHER case...is about the GENIE.

Also notice I didn't say no one cared about privacy in the sterling case. I suggested the fervor, anger, and focus on it was significantly less. Which it absolutley is.

If one is suggesting they're upset about PRIVACY, then BOTH cases should have gotten a good bit of crusading. But it isn't, because it's not about privacy. Privacy is just a nice buzzwork to add onto this to sound good.

The reality is that the "Genie" in the Sterling case was viewed as "bad" and the "Genie" in this case isn't just viewed as good but is viewed as something that we need some social agenda to promote in the name of combatting sexism (see Eco's desprate need to insinuate that somehow I think these women are "sluts").

I've had no issue with people I've seen jumping online complaining about the sexism angles of this. My issue is with some that I've seen making this out as a giant PRIVACY issue, which is utter bull**** because it's clear they don't care about peoples privacy, they simply care about privacy for things they agree with.

Click to expand...

Apparently I was not clear. The idea is that in the Sterling case, the genie was so massive and drew so much attention that how the genie got out was hugely overshadowed. That is not to say that the how is not important. If I stub my toe at the top of the stairs, it sucks. If I stub my toe at the top of the stairs and it causes me to fall over down the stairs and I break my back, stubbing my toe still sucks, but it isn't the focus of my complaints.

Phys251 said:

If I make an online purchase, I EXPECT my billing information to be kept private, even if it is stored online.

Those of you who are blaming J-Law for uploading nude photos to a secure server are basically telling me that I should never make another purchase online.

Click to expand...

Obviously that's the point, NOT a secured server and you may wish to rethink making purchases online. I purchase online, but I don't let them keep my CC info and I keep track.

Again, these folks are in the business of leading public lives. They KNOW everything they do online can be exposed to the public. Their management knows.

Btw, there's a simple setting in the iPhones that sends all saved content to the iCloud by default. It can be turned off. A stupid default I know, but get used to it if you're going to use Apple products.

Phys251 said:

If I make an online purchase, I EXPECT my billing information to be kept private, even if it is stored online.

Those of you who are blaming J-Law for uploading nude photos to a secure server are basically telling me that I should never make another purchase online.

Click to expand...

I expect my online credit card information to be private too. That being said, I have ONE card I use just for online purchases because although I expect privacy I also understand that such privacy can be compromised.

Phys251 said:

If I make an online purchase, I EXPECT my billing information to be kept private, even if it is stored online.

Those of you who are blaming J-Law for uploading nude photos to a secure server are basically telling me that I should never make another purchase online.

Click to expand...

All too true. Purchases on line - like the current information as well as the Home Depot hack which has now inflicted a possible 70 million people are not secure. Fact is NO information is secure online. It's a bad expectation to think otherwise. The FBI, the CIA have been breached in the past. No system online is secure - ever. The only way to keep something secure is to not allow it online at all. Every purchase, every banking transaction on the internet, every bit of information, every password, picture, event.... all of it is at risk.

clownboy said:

Private between him and the recipient.

Click to expand...

how was it private between him and the recipient? prove it!

Porchev said:

I heard they can be found at some places called 4chan and AnonIB.

Click to expand...

"at some places called 4chan and AnonIB"

The most trolliest sites ever made in the history of mankind. Pretty much up there with reddit.

These sites are the ones people go to to have their brain cells fried.

The "hackers" themselves weren't even that smart. A glitch on Apple's part simply allowed them to try as many times to get the password as they want (normally the account locks after X tries).

Sorry about that little aside, it was just in case people here didn't know what these sites were.

As for the OP...

Lawrence, upton, rafael, etc. are all morons for:

#1 having nude photos in the first place (what's the point?)

#2 putting said photos on any kind of internet storage (you got looks, but clearly no brains)

#3 whining that this happened

clownboy said:

Have to say, Upton in particular is a moron. The pics she took were not the selfie in the mirror sort but rather fully involved, unflattering, week's stubble, pull those cheeks apart grossness. Not to mention many photos of her husband's junk while he slept. He has nothing to wrote home about in that department, yikes!

Click to expand...

Kate Upton "fully involved"? Even with that criticism this might require some more research.

ARealConservative said:

how was it private between him and the recipient? prove it!

Click to expand...

What? I think you're lost the thread of what we were discussing.

Ockham said:

All too true. Purchases on line - like the current information as well as the Home Depot hack which has now inflicted a possible 70 million people are not secure. Fact is NO information is secure online. It's a bad expectation to think otherwise. The FBI, the CIA have been breached in the past. No system online is secure - ever. The only way to keep something secure is to not allow it online at all. Every purchase, every banking transaction on the internet, every bit of information, every password, picture, event.... all of it is at risk.

Click to expand...

I have an acquaintance who programs MMOs(he is working on the new MMO from the guy who created Ultima Online down in Austin right now). His advice as far as online security(and he does some security programming for the games he has worked on)...nothing is safe, ever. If a group of hackers decides to hack into Microsoft or Amazon or whoever, they will succeed. It might take awhile and cost alot, they probably won't get away with it, but it can be done. Perfect security on the internet is a pipe dream.

Lutherf said:

Kate Upton "fully involved"? Even with that criticism this might require some more research.

Click to expand...

Heh, rubbernecker! :mrgreen:

I don't think you'll be glad if you do. The glossy illusion in this case is far superior to the reality.

Redress said:

I have an acquaintance who programs MMOs(he is working on the new MMO from the guy who created Ultima Online down in Austin right now). His advice as far as online security(and he does some security programming for the games he has worked on)...nothing is safe, ever. If a group of hackers decides to hack into Microsoft or Amazon or whoever, they will succeed. It might take awhile and cost alot, they probably won't get away with it, but it can be done. Perfect security on the internet is a pipe dream.

Click to expand...

That's why it's best to educate yourself in how not to be the low hanging fruit.

Redress said:

Apparently I was not clear. The idea is that in the Sterling case, the genie was so massive and drew so much attention that how the genie got out was hugely overshadowed. That is not to say that the how is not important. If I stub my toe at the top of the stairs, it sucks. If I stub my toe at the top of the stairs and it causes me to fall over down the stairs and I break my back, stubbing my toe still sucks, but it isn't the focus of my complaints.

Click to expand...

However, if you stub your toe and don't fall down the stairs you may complain a bit more than you would in the latter example, but you're still not going to complain much because it's just a stubbed toe. You're not likely going to make it out to be like you just broke your leg.

Admittedly, as I ALREADY SAID, a lot of my musing and expression of my thoughts on this is based off other things I've read be it on my facebook feed, articles, or other forums.

One particular person I was dealing with on another forum (and likely shaped some of my heated response here) who said not a peep about the privacy issues of the sterling case but whose suggested this "invasion of privacy" is a "non-consexual form of sexual violence" ala rape. An "invasion of privacy" that should make us "terrified". That "privacy is everything" and that it's "repulsive" that people seem to not be bothered by this because "women are hot so it's okay". That anyone seeking out these pictures in any way are "engaging in violence against a womans body". That this invasion of privacy is an act of "psychic violence which constitues a form of assault".

If this is one's views on "privacy" in this issue, and your views on "privacy" on the Sterling issue were "that's too bad, but..." at best, then I call "bull****" on the notion that your care is about "privacy" and not something else. This isn't like stubbing your toe in both cases, but one you fall down the stairs. This is like stubbing your toe in both situations, but one you fall down the stairs and say next to nothing about the toe and in the other you act like you just got sliced in half from your toe to the tip of your head with a long serated knife.

And this persons responses and attitudes hasn't been that much off base with some of the random comments I've seen on my facebook feeds or some of the various articles headlines and excerpts I've seen linked about this.

The disconnect between this and the sterling case, when one is simply going on about "privacy", is the width of the grand canyon which is why I roll my eyes at the screams of some about "privacy" when it's crystal clear and transparent that they give two ****s about privacy from a principled level, but rather they believe privacy should exist on things they morally don't have an issue with and could care less about it on things they morally do.

This is all rather amusing. We ignore hacking going on daily that affects peoples finances and lives. Some people even CELEBRATE certain groups of hackers...especially if they can 'stick it to da man!'. But we are supposed to be outraged because a hacker found their way into nude photos and videos of 'starlets'?

Does anyone NOT know by now that EVERYTHING you put on your phone or computer (if said device is connected in any way to the network) is visible and in fact fair game?