What are you talking about? There's PLENTY of resources availble to victims of cyber-threats
-
Yes. So? Why are you so sure that has anything to do with the attention it's getting?
Because it's the only measurable difference between the cases. As I pointed out, the other breaches had fewer victims, similar potential for identity theft, and WAY more financial impacts (actual credit cards stolen).
Why are you so sure that it has nothing to do with the attention it's getting?
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Yes, that's my point. But I'll point back again to what the only differences ARE between this and the other data breaches...
This one isn't about credit cards. It's about the possibility of extortion.
@Lorne_Kates said:
If I were to tinfoil this: So maybe AM is being massively hyped because the rich, powerful men involved in OPM want to distract the media from their case, so are throwing slightly less rich, powerful men under the bus with AM
Eh...OPM is already forgotten (in the media). If nothing else, we have Trump, the EPA flushing out mines and Americans saving France from terrorists.
@Lorne_Kates said:
As I pointed out, the other breaches had fewer victims, similar potential for identity theft, and WAY more financial impacts (actual credit cards stolen).
Credit cards...booooring! Seriously, the companies deal with that stuff all the time. How massive does an investigation need to be to look for the people who committed the breach? When the AM information wasn't released to the public, presumably the potential for extortion was pretty limited. Now anyone can download it and go to town.
Lots more potential bad guys to chase and it can't be fixed by cancelling a card.
-
If you were following the am thread, you might have read a blog by the maintainer of haveibeenpwned, about the types of mail am users had been sending. One of the points was that nobody gives a shit about their stolen credit card data, it's all about people's secrets getting out. So, given that there appears to be a lot more fuss about this than other, larger, data breaches, what's your hypothesis?
To me, credit card theft seems like more of an issue for regular people—just considering the percentage of a person's wealth that it's at stake—while politicians tend to have a lot more at stake when it comes to infidelities being exposed.
-
This one isn't about credit cards. It's about the possibility of extortion.
Possibility is extremely low. You can't extort / blackmail someone with information that is already released. So, according to the earlier quoted supreme court ruling, those are idle threats that don't pass a sniff test. At best, the police response should have been "Hey, dumbshits. Your emails are already exposed. The threats are empty. Ignore them. Idiots."
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Possibility is extremely low. You can't extort / blackmail someone with information that is already released.
Just because it's released doesn't mean that your spouse / boss / kids have noticed that you're in there. How many people are going to download gigs of stolen data and go reading through for people they might know? Very few, I think.
And of course, extortion doesn't have to be about a single payoff or even a monetary payoff at all.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
what's with the massive media front-end of the AM investigation? The Secret Service is on the AM case (along with FBI, Homeland, federal, provincial/state and local police).
Massive? Just because they hyped it and created a hashtag doesn't make it a "massive" effort...
"On the case" can mean adding the issue to weekly conference call - "oh and don't forget to invite the locals for that part of the agenda."
They can get (mostly) good publicity for leading the charge against cyber-crime™ and can't really get blamed for not fixing the whole problem.
OPM gets no publicity because there is blame... and what they have said they would do (monitoring) they can't do yet because they can't agree on the rules for setting up a contract award for a website to allow people to sign up for monitoring (and how secure will that be, folks?). Much less the monitoring itself or an actual solution - like burning down the ssn system.
In other news, our school superintendent makes the robo-calls to welcome us to school :) ... the communications director makes the calls when afterschool activities are cancelled due to rioting
.
-
Anyway, the sexist moron responsible for this thread needs to solve the problem with suicide rates. Men commit suicide more than women! This must be a result of the homonormative communist matriarchy!
-
They die at work a lot more, too.
-
Seriously, it can only be a conspiracy. Why is this being ignored?
-
Seriously, it can only be a conspiracy. Why is this being ignored?
We should riot until this issue gets the attention it deserves!
-
Seriously, it can only be a conspiracy. Why is this being ignored?
Obviously because of a deep-seeded cultural stigma against mental health, especially it's toxic assumptions about male self-identity, combined with the overwhelming limited to non-existant resources available to diagnose or treat mental health, or support for those struggling with it.
Or because Internet femensist want men to kill themselves. What's your point again?
-
Massive? Just because they hyped it and created a hashtag doesn't make it a "massive" effort...
The fact that they've had multiple press conferences about it. Not just a note in the daily ledger that gets reported by some AP who happened to read it. But full blown press conferences with a logo and hash tag, and making red-face impassionate speeches about how "this behavior is unacceptable", etc.
It has it's own project name. "Project Unicorn". (I guess we know what @remyporter has been up to lately)
It has it's own division, task force, and dedicated PR manager (Staff Superindendent Bryce Evans, quoted earlier).
The press conference had "representatives of some of the Canadian and international law enforcement agencies" TPS is working with.
http://torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/32616
There's been more news conferences and interviews than I care to count-- with a PR person specifically to do news conferences and interviews (hence media front-end).
compare to, as @boomzilla even pointed out, the fact that locals and the feds don't normally talk about this shit. Compared to Home Depot & Target, which just had a brief "oh by the way" mention in an unrelated testimony by the AG. Despite the fact that other victims of death, rape, harassment, extortion, what have you-- well, they don't get any of this. Comparatively speaking "massive" may be an understatement.
-
My point is that just because something affects one arbitrary group more than another, it does not follow that there is some great conspiracy. Some things just work out that way. All you have is a correlation.
-
That's easy.
The men committing suicide did so because they were being forced into stereotypical gender norms for men.
It's all about gender.... everything.....
It's like the french language. Gender on everything, only with political correctness thrown in.
-
My point is that just because something affects one arbitrary group more than another, it does not follow that there is some great conspiracy. Some things just work out that way. All you have is a correlation.
Except, as this thread points out, the affected group is not arbitrary.
And I've never once claimed there was a conspiracy. Go ahead and scroll back and see where that word appears.
Just kidding. This is Dipyork. You can't "scroll".
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Except, as this thread points out, the affected group is not arbitrary.
Right, right, I forgot, only white men can be rich. Sorry for forgetting about that.
-
Right, right, I forgot, only white men can be rich. Sorry for forgetting about that.
That's a whole other argument. You want race relations, down the hall by the fried chicken stand.
-
rasins of his own
I thought all I had to say about why I changed it was boring. Unfortunately, it seems to be more interesting than most of the rest of this thread.
-
ITT: @Lorne_Kates takes issue with the police doing their fucking job.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
compare to, as @boomzilla even pointed out, the fact that locals and the feds don't normally talk about this shit. Compared to Home Depot & Target, which just had a brief "oh by the way" mention in an unrelated testimony by the AG. Despite the fact that other victims of death, rape, harassment, extortion, what have you-- well, they don't get any of this. Comparatively speaking "massive" may be an understatement.
You should also consider that the breaches at Target and Home Depot were primarily announced to the public so that people would be aware that their information had potentially been leaked. Other than that, the companies involved and law enforcement were trying to keep things quiet, which is also in the best interests of the hackers involved.
Contrast that with the Ashley Madison breach. The hackers want the information about the breach to get out. Publicity helps further their agenda. Once it became big news, the only way for law enforcement to maintain a good public perception is to step up their PR campaign in relation to the breach.
Given the different goals of the hackers, of course you are going to see different PR on the investigations.
-
Given the
different goals of the hackersgender and race identities of the victims, of course you are going to see different PR on the investigations.LKTFY
-
-
Contrast that with the Ashley Madison breach. The hackers want the information about the breach to get out. Publicity helps further their agenda. Once it became big news, the only way for law enforcement to maintain a good public perception is to step up their PR campaign in relation to the breach.
Given the different goals of the hackers, of course you are going to see different PR on the investigations.
Valid point. I was going to pick out one of many that refute it (such as Adult Friend Finder). But then-- jesus christ the sheer volume of data breaches lately:
World’s Biggest Data Breaches & Hacks — Information is Beautiful
Data visualization of the world biggest data breaches, leaks and hacks. Constantly updated. Powered by @VizSweet.
Just what the fuck, IT world?
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Just what the fuck, IT world?
tl;dr: Being a part of an agile fast-evolving app-based ecosystem doesn't mean you get a free pass when it comes to security basics. News at 11.
-
Expect a SWAT team to knock politely at your door within 3 to 6 hours after reporting the error.
Hey, that's better than the usual response times I get from Oracle Support and probably at least as helpful.
-
To me, credit card theft seems like more of an issue for regular people—just considering the percentage of a person's wealth that it's at stake—while politicians tend to have a lot more at stake when it comes to infidelities being exposed.
Credit card fraud is a hassle, but it doesn't cause the end-consumer to lose money. Even the CC companies don't lose much. They typically pass those losses on to the retailer that did not verify well enough.
-
And the more often it happens, the easier it becomes, right? So really we should be thanking all of these big companies for being so cavalier with our data, because it means we can have fraudulent charges reversed without getting the third degree.
The only people that lose out are the ones who like to keep secrets, which is a group that doesn't include me, so fuck em.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
compare to, as @boomzilla even pointed out, the fact that locals and the feds don't normally talk about this shit. Compared to Home Depot & Target, which just had a brief "oh by the way" mention in an unrelated testimony by the AG.
Well, you know...Canada. Also, I hadn't realized that AM was owned by a Canadian company, so this makes more sense. I will also speculate that Canada is more boring than the US, so your choices are limited.
For instance, no one here currently cares about AM. It's all about the crazy gay black dude who shot up a TV news crew.
@Lorne_Kates said:
Despite the fact that other victims of death, rape, harassment, extortion, what have you-- well, they don't get any of this.
Yeah, we totally didn't lose our shit last year about what turned out to be bogus rape accusations. I guess the difference between a threat to millions of people vs a single person just isn't very important in your calculus. This sounds like a personal problem.
-
edit: FUCK YOU DISCOURSE THIS ISN'T THE RIGHT THREAD!
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
You want race relations, down the hall by the fried chicken stand.
No, the arguement is kind of the same.
Every single successful black man I've talked to.
Either his parents were already middle class.
Or his story is exactly like mine.
"Grew up in (mild to extreme) poverty. Worked my butt off. Got into college. Studied like hell. Got a job."
Never does he mention that seeing only white men on the show "Big Bang Theory" taught him that he couldn't be successful.
-
It's all about the crazy gay black dude
Will have to remember that the next time that black guy on the internet tells me only white people do shootings.
-
Will have to remember that the next time that black guy on the internet tells me only white people do shootings.
I can't imagine that such a
persontroll would be worth interacting with at all.
-
Well, he reasoned that school, business, and church shootings are a white person crime.
Last time I checked, innocent black people being killed by white people becomes supernational news, so there's no failure to report there.
If they reported on every drive-by, however, we wouldn't have room for other news. Nobody cares about Crip A killing Blood B during a drug buy, but shoot up a bunch of kids in a school that are just trying to study, and that's newsworthy.
Honestly both are a tragedy, because they're all lives taken.
But if black people want the news to report on criminals being killed by criminals, they'll need to take that spot from the Middle East.
-
seeing only white men on the show "Big Bang Theory"
He must've not watched it very carefully then.
Filed : i don't blame him
-
It's all about the crazy gay black dude who shot up a TV news crew.
I think the single most useful word there is “crazy”.
-
I think the single most useful word there is “crazy”.
You never know. The last crazy guy who got in the news for shooting up a bunch of people, the most important word was "white." I'm just trying to cover my bases.
-
It's just funny to me. A cheating site is obviously gonna be used by mostly men. But then we've got fucking PC-police over here making out like we're not supposed to acknowledge this shit that we all know is true.
-
What, that powerful people have more clout?
Of course that's true.
But it's tin-foil if you think there's a collaborate white male conspiracy theory, and that the only reason there is a hashtag is because men use the site.
If Hillary was on the site, that alone would merit a hashtag.
-
I don't see any conspiracy here. People know which way the wind blows, and the fact of the matter is that Ashley Madison's entire target market consists of the type of entitled jerkwad who has money to burn and believes that gives him the right to be an asshole to anyone less powerful than he is. And gamesgaters are the same.
-
That's a broad stroke though.
You can't say everyone in either group is like that.
-
I don't see why not. I'm sure if I looked hard enough i could find that one cheater or video games activist with a heart of gold, who never meant to hurt anybody but just got caught up in the excitement of it all. But if they're still an active member in either group, why should I have to cut them a break? They are doing a thing that is fundamentally selfish; I guess that doesn't prove that they are fundamentally selfish people themselves, but it's close enough for me.
-
Point #1, that broad stroke is essentially profiling.
Replace gamer with Muslim.
I don't see why not. I'm sure if I looked hard enough I could find that one Muslim with a heart of gold, who never meant to hurt anybody but just got caught up in the excitement of it all. But if they're still an active member in that religion, why should I cut them a break?
You don't like profiling and stereotypes, then stop doing it.
Other thing to consider?z
The Gamers are Dead topic is the reason that there are people in GamerGate that had nothing to do with the threats. It's retaliation for that topic that people jumped on the bandwagon. When you have a girl that is a hardcore gamer and she's trying to get recognized for it, and some other feminist comes by and said that "gamer" is dead, that's offensive to her.
That's like saying programming is dead because of Frontpage (or more recently, WordPress)
-
Again with the pc bullshit. If you disagree with something I say just tell me. But if you're telling me I'm not even allowed to say certain things that's gonna fall on deaf ears.
I don't know it there are just a lot of asshole Muslims where you are or what, but I personally have never had an issue with any Muslim, so I don't see where you're coming from with that.
Gamers, on the other hand, are just another stupid special interest group; one whose entire identity revolves around spending shit loads of money on their own entertainment. If someone wants to be respected, they should do things that are worthy of respect, not sit at home twiddling their thumbs and then throw their weight around to get ESPN to fire any presenter that thinks video games aren't a real sport.
-
I don't see where you're coming from with that.
I think what he's saying is that saying
I'm sure if I looked hard enough i could find that one X with a heart of gold, who never meant to hurt anybody...
is unfairly disparaging X with an overly broad brush, and attempts to illustrate this with a value of X that you would agree is unfairly disparaged by such a statement.
From your comments, I think you agree that one of his value of X is unfairly disparaged in that context, but that the values you used deserve the disparagement. I tend to agree; whether the statement is fair or unfair depends on the value of X.
Game activists? I dunno; I haven't been following the controversy, because I really don't give a.
Cheaters? Yes, there were single people who weren't cheating on a partner, and there were probably people in "open" relationships who were using the site with their partners' knowledge and consent, and people who weren't active. None of those, however, were their target market. Their target market, their whole raison d'être, was to cheat on a (presumably unknowing) partner. This is fundamentally selfish behavior (I hope there's no disagreement with this), and it is not unreasonable to characterize the people doing this as selfish. The fact is that at least 86% (or whatever; CBA to go over to the other topic to double-check the exact number) of their members were male; if subsequent stories are to be believed, it was nearly 100% of their real membership, and it is not unfair or unreasonable to point this out.
Is there a stereotype that men are more likely to engage in this sort of behavior, or to use such a site to facilitate it? Yes. However, the statistics strongly suggest that the stereotype has a basis in actual, verified behavior. Pointing out that the vast majority of cheaters (at least of this sort) are men is not unfair or unreasonable, although one must be careful not to draw fallacious conclusions about men as a whole, as this situation provides absolutely no data whatsoever on men who do not cheat (nor, for that matter, on men who cheat without using such web sites).
Now I should go to bed, because it's after 01:00 local, and I'm starting to lose whatever coherent grasp I may have had of this argument.
-
Pointing out that the vast majority of cheaters (at least of this sort) are men is not unfair or unreasonable
(Emphasis by me)Good that you added this. Considering the fact that after successful conception, a man has a down time measurable in hours, and a woman, measurable in months, it does matter way less to a man whom he choses as a casual sex partner than to a woman. I am too lazy to look it up right now, but iirc there are several studies that show that women are equally prone to cheating on their significant others as men, just much more picky.
I hope there's no disagreement with this
not from my side, anyway.
-
Pointing out that the vast majority of cheaters (at least of this sort) are men is not unfair or unreasonable
Yeah, that is fair.
But saying that because the majority are men, that there is some conspiracy to ignore women, by comparing a large international event to a series of small individual events, does not follow.
I could give you a series of small complaints from men that are overlooked, or black men, and the whole argument from the OP falls apart.
That's the discussion here.
But as most political discussions go, it's just a battlefield of strawmen burning each other down.
Yes, we do ignore women complaining about threats, but we ignore similar cases from other groups too.
