IanRees Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I keep hearing the US underestimated North Korea's hacking ability. I think we're also overestimating their ability to do anything other then attacking via the internet from thousands of miles away.i read a article that basically claims the hacking was done by kidnapped people from Japan who worked for Sony over there, or something along those lines, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 George Clooney 4 Prez 2016: http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/19/showbiz/movies/feat-george-clooney-sony-the-interview/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 noalarmplanet, ditc586, roadmonkey and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noalarmplanet Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I've never seen Star Wars but I'm going to assume that they're not going to make an Episode 12 Attack of the Kim. This movie's driving plot was about his attempted assassination, if NK did this shit to the release of Frozen 2 I'm sure the entire US would laugh it off. More importantly Sony shot themselves in the foot by leaving all this data out in the open, it seems like the attack wasn't done with brute force. You'd think a billion dollar company who dabbles in tech would be smarter about their correspondences and not keep shit like that sitting in an inbox or document folder. Perhaps you have forgotten that he was already portrayed in episode 1? In all seriousness look at the horrifying Colorado massacre during a Batman film. We didn't pull the film then and that was a legit carried out threat. Even if all they do is throw the fucking thing online, they need to do it and not let NK dictate what Americans should do. I know something about email (IT guy) and yeah 100% they had no security there and it had to be easy. Isn't it amazing how much unprofessional shit got leaked too? George Clooney 4 Prez 2016: http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/19/showbiz/movies/feat-george-clooney-sony-the-interview/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 He said it far better than I could have. Clooney is so dreamy. If Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas is allowed to exist why the hell can't the interview? Because some short little fuck is angry about it? (Not that there is anything wrong with being short, just being a fuck) albert, hippielauryn and Shameful Dread 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tipyourbartender Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 It would be awesome if the media refused to report on any of the hacked information. There isn't much of a difference between this hack and the hack of all those nude celebrity photos. That stuff wasn't shown and neither should Sony's information be shown. sacredheart 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippielauryn Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 "We cannot have a society in which some dictator someplace can start imposing censorship here in the United States." EXACTLY!!!!! Isn't that what we've been saying all along? http://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-behind-sony-hack-possible-china-u-152034211--sector.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agua Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 I don't know that that is a fair or relevant point. It's one thing to call out a Hitler when the WORLD (yeah yeah) is already at war against him. No one is at war with NK (should they be? not over a stupid movie anyway). Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't South Korean (allied with US forces) technically in a Cold War-like with NK. I know that border is pretty much one huge land mine/sniper land. And the one area that is free for travel is guarded at all times? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daegor Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 In all seriousness look at the horrifying Colorado massacre during a Batman film. We didn't pull the film then and that was a legit carried out threat. Even if all they do is throw the fucking thing online, they need to do it and not let NK dictate what Americans should do. I'm sorry, but you realized that you just said that you'd rather people die than limit people's ability to see a shitty movie, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daegor Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 I'm sorry, but you realized that you just said that you'd rather people die than limit people's ability to see a shitty movie, right? I realize that was not what you intended to say, but this is a super messy issue. As far as I'm concerned, any course of action (or lack there of) that potentially puts people in harm over a movie, entertainment, is the wrong course of action (or lack there of). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanRees Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 Apparently Annonymous is planning on leaking The Interview on Christmas as well as attacking North Korea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tardcore Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 I realize that was not what you intended to say, but this is a super messy issue. As far as I'm concerned, any course of action (or lack there of) that potentially puts people in harm over a movie, entertainment, is the wrong course of action (or lack there of). Free speech is sort of a big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGhostOfRandySavage Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Free speech is sort of a big deal. This isn't an issue of free speech though. The US government didn't step in and say "You can't show this movie." That's all our protection of free speech does. Enough theaters themselves decided not to show the film based on a terrorist threat, so Sony just pulled it. This is an issue of a foreign country trying to dictate what other countries can or can't do. It's not exactly the same thing, but it should not be ignored in the same way that Hitler's invasion of Poland was ignored, otherwise they'll think they, and any other country can pull this shit and get away with it. daegor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shitty Rambo Posted December 22, 2014 Author Share Posted December 22, 2014 Apparently Annonymous is planning on leaking The Interview on Christmas as well as attacking North Korea.4chan bumped it up to the #1 movie on imdb. So, yay? This isn't an issue of free speech though. The US government didn't step in and say "You can't show this movie." That's all our protection of free speech does. Enough theaters themselves decided not to show the film based on a terrorist threat, so Sony just pulled it. This is an issue of a foreign country trying to dictate what other countries can or can't do. It's not exactly the same thing, but it should not be ignored in the same way that Hitler's invasion of Poland was ignored, otherwise they'll think they, and any other country can pull this shit and get away with it. Not to be a 'good ol' boy' about it, but I miss the pre-9/11 days when our country would respond to a threat like this with, "We know you won't do it because we'll fuck your shit completely up."I do think the pull was primarily Sony's choice and not so much the government's decision. If something did actually happen the blood would be on Sony's hands, and truth be told there's probably some shitty James Holmes wannabe nutbag out there who would use this opportunity to make a name for himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dantheriver Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 4chan bumped it up to the #1 movie on imdb. So, yay? Take that hackers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippielauryn Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Tons of people went onto IMDB and gave the Interview a 10 out of 10 to make it the best movie. Lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecream Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Yeah I don't really see the point behind doing that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanRees Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Tons of people went onto IMDB and gave the Interview a 10 out of 10 to make it the best movie. Lame. 'merica! hippielauryn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tardcore Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 This isn't an issue of free speech though. The US government didn't step in and say "You can't show this movie." That's all our protection of free speech does. Enough theaters themselves decided not to show the film based on a terrorist threat, so Sony just pulled it. This is an issue of a foreign country trying to dictate what other countries can or can't do. It's not exactly the same thing, but it should not be ignored in the same way that Hitler's invasion of Poland was ignored, otherwise they'll think they, and any other country can pull this shit and get away with it. This statement makes no sense. Freedom of Speech is a protected right. If I threaten you to keep you from making a statement, I have violated your right to free speech. It does not matter who "I" am. If I am a private person, a foreign government, or the US government, it's still a violation of your rights. I think if we swapped the subject matter/players around, people would find it easier to take this seriously. What if Iran hacked Universal Pictures circa 1993 and said that they would release a bunch of data if they didn't cancel Schindler's List? And then subequently all other films relating to the Holocaust were subsequently cancelled out of fear of angering the Iranian government? it's the same thing. sacredheart and futures 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daegor Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 What if Iran hacked Universal Pictures circa 1993 and said that they would release a bunch of data if they didn't cancel Schindler's List? And then subequently all other films relating to the Holocaust were subsequently cancelled out of fear of angering the Iranian government? it's the same thing. And similarly, I would hope everyone involved would take steps to ensure no one got hurt over a movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGhostOfRandySavage Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 This statement makes no sense. Freedom of Speech is a protected right. If I threaten you to keep you from making a statement, I have violated your right to free speech. It does not matter who "I" am. If I am a private person, a foreign government, or the US government, it's still a violation of your rights. I think if we swapped the subject matter/players around, people would find it easier to take this seriously. What if Iran hacked Universal Pictures circa 1993 and said that they would release a bunch of data if they didn't cancel Schindler's List? And then subequently all other films relating to the Holocaust were subsequently cancelled out of fear of angering the Iranian government? it's the same thing. If you threaten me to keep me from making a statement, I couldn't give a fuck and I'd say it anyway. Our right to freedom of speech as protected by the 2nd amendment is our freedom from the government stopping us speaking out. That's the difference here. Sony could have ignored the threat and released it anyway. Are you one of those people who think yelling "Fire" in a public place is protected by the 2nd amendment? I don't disagree with you that something should be done, but Sony are the people who decided to pull this. They weren't forced to by our government, which is what the 2nd amendment protects us from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tardcore Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 And similarly, I would hope everyone involved would take steps to ensure no one got hurt over a movie. This sounds dismissive. I don't think you can disassociate "a movie" or any form of media from free speech. If that "step" includes censorship in order to appease an aggressor, it is completely unacceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tardcore Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 If you threaten me to keep me from making a statement, I couldn't give a fuck and I'd say it anyway. Our right to freedom of speech as protected by the 2nd amendment is our freedom from the government stopping us speaking out. That's the difference here. Sony could have ignored the threat and released it anyway. Are you one of those people who think yelling "Fire" in a public place is protected by the 2nd amendment? I don't disagree with you that something should be done, but Sony are the people who decided to pull this. They weren't forced to by our government, which is what the 2nd amendment protects us from. if an environment exists where a 3rd party can roll in and make a credible threat without any fear of reprisal, that is the U.S. Government's responsibility. Sony is bears a lot of responsibility for creating this situation. As a large corporation (aka target) they have a responsibility to safeguard themselves to an extent--and on numerous occasions, they have not done this. However, if I leave my front door wide open and somebody wanders into my home and stabs me, my rights have still been violated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daegor Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 This sounds dismissive. I don't think you can disassociate "a movie" or any form of media from free speech. If that "step" includes censorship in order to appease an aggressor, it is completely unacceptable. It's not dismissive, human life is more sacred than free speech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tardcore Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 It's not dismissive, human life is more sacred than free speech. That line of thinking has extremely dangerous repercussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daegor Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 That line of thinking has extremely dangerous repercussions. Yes. So does the line of thinking that protecting the right to free speech is a higher priority than protecting human lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tardcore Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Yes. So does the line of thinking that protecting the right to free speech is a higher priority than protecting human lives. So your opinion is that Martin Luther King Jr. Should have just kept his mouth shut? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.