I remember poor old Weiner and his nudie photo scandal. Leaving aside his position as an elected official...I remember people shitting themselves about how gross!!! how disgusting !!! perv!! and practically accusing him of sexual abuse by 'sexting' photos to his ladyfriends to begin with.

Don't remember a hue and cry about his privacy issues tho

Weiner tweeted his Weiner to the world by mistake while he was using his position in Congress to troll for ladies.

The women in this incident were hacked.

Someone willingly tweeting a pic isn't the same thing as a pic stolen by a hacker.

Weiner took major, major heat on forums as some kind of pervert for even texting explicit photos to his ladyfriends to start with. No one, and I mean NO ONE, is going to suggest any of these current actors are pervy for doing the same thing

So whatever point you thought you were making was fail.

These actresses took private pics for themselves or boyfriends.

Jennifer Lawrence and Scarlet Johansson got hacked. Weiner deliberately sent his photo to a woman who didn't want it.

difference

It's so mysterious.

He voluntarily sent his pic out to someone and they then put it out to the masses.

These women were hacked, that means someone broke in, so whatever that someone took was stolen property. What was done was a crime. Plain and simple.

He sent a solicited dick pic, it got leaked, widely broadcast by gawker, Brett got blamed.

I forgot that!

Better example

Weiner and his wife have a kink where she enjoys being publically humiliated sexually. Whatever. It is their thing and who are we to judge?

Except if you get caught that makes you unfit for elected office.

As to the rest of your post.... I don't even know what to make of it, I don't know if you are being serious or not, but it doesn't really matter I guess.

Favre was trying to entice the jets sideline reporter, Jen sturger, into having congress with him. After some back and forth he sent a picture of his genitals to her. He obviously did not intend for it to become public...since he was married with children. Ms sturger sent the pics to a friend ( while laughing at the old guy sending pictures of his junk) who then sold it to gawker. Who then published it.

Not all of the recent pictures are apace. But it is fair to say each of these pictures were sent to anothet person to tittleate them or to encourage them into congress. One does not put a curling iron into ones rectum then photograph oneself for your personal satisfaction, mostly. If a betrayal by a potential lover or a third party intercepts, both are an invasion of privacy.

That is why Favre and Lawrence are kinda the same. Get my point?

No one voluntarily gave the pics out, they were stolen. That is a crime.

The Upton pics were obviously stolen from Verlander. She gave them to verlander. She is still a crime victim.

But to think of it, the lawrence pics were stolen from her, but the pics were taken to be sent to someone else.

You just said yourself the pics were stolen from her.

That's quite a reach to say the pics were taken to be sent to someone else. Do you think that negates the fact that the server was hacked and the pics were stolen? It doesn't. It has no bearing what so ever on the situation.

Why are you so intent on making her guilty of something, whatever it is? Are you trying to clear the criminal of any wrong doing? If so, why? Do you think what s/he did is okay?

Men penis photos leaked: gross, never send.

Woman: it was a crime.

IT IS A CRIME FOR EVERYONE TO SHOW PRIVATE STUFF WITHOUT PERMISSION.

If you send me a picture of your dick and I blast pm it to everone here, is that not a violation of your trust at a minimum and a crime probably?

One was theft and one was not.

No, it is not a crime to show private stuff without permission. It is a crime to HACK into a server and STEAL property. You seem to be so caught up in trying to make this some discriminatory thing against men that you can't even see the difference between being given something and stealing something.

Once you email or text something to someone they can do with it what they like. You can hope it won't see the light of day, but you can't be sure of that.

And if I sent you a picture of my dick that would be a pretty amazing feat! I don't happen to have a dick. But if I sent you one of my tits or my landing strip and you sent it out it would only be a violation of trust, not a crime. And this is why I would never share any naked pics or video cyber with anyone, period, because when you break up they could have a recording somewhere and post it.

And it is my fault more than yours. There is a narrative out there that these were all hacked out of the icloud system. Look for a bunch of push back from apple one this.

It appears there is a set of "hackers" collecting celebrity nudes for some time. The common pictures of this group got into the public domain today and everyone went nuts.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems you believe one girl broke into the icloud, ripped a bunch of pictures and put them on 4chan.

I dont think that happened.

and posted them.

Jennifer Lawrence did not.

She decided to take pictures for herself?

....let us know.

"People here are saying that Jennifer Lawrence should have "known better" "


I haven't seen that.

the explicitly slut-shaming ones, have been hidden.

Some of them appeared in response to this OP:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5472520

rather this one. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5473755

were in response to your OP.

A lot of people don't understand how the cloud works, etc. --raising awareness might help protect some folks.

Not the absolutely determined hackers who are sure they're smarter than everyone else; but hopefully the garden variety hackers with nothing better to do.

But it's kind of like shredding your mail or not telling people your Personal information. Recognizing the vulnerabilities inherent in certain aspects of modern life is not necessarily a bad idea.

I'm serious......NO ONE SAW IT!

Theft of personal information should be heavily punished, to have the desire to hack is a conscious endeavor.

Doing time isn't enough. While he's in prison, he should have no access to computers, smart phones, computer magazines, or computer manuals of any kind. To do hacking, you have to know the software underneath it all. Limit both access and ability to keep his skills honed, and he'll be so far behind when he gets out that it will take him years to catch up again.

However, as pointed out, he will likely go back to hacking. I can only hope that in ten years the software he once used will have advanced too far for him to slip easily back into his old ways. Cyber-security companies might do well to hire him instead.

It does not have to be one or the other.

Many people use phones and computers who aren't technologically sophisticated enough to know that the photos could be hacked through the Internet. One of our own prominent DUers has a post today about how he accidentally put a nude photo onto photo bucket.

Pretty much by default, if its an iphone, your stuff is shared in the cloud.

the first time I used a phone which had this "feature". Granted I realized straight away and took care of it.

Automatically uploading things to the 'cloud' without warning is just a terrible idea. I have no idea why it is enabled to begin with.

But there is obviously a downside.

If you go to the park and take a bunch of pictures of the duck pond or the family picnic, it's nice to be able to pull them instantly to upload them to facebook, or to share them through all your devices. People like that ability without having to understand complicated (?) concepts like file copying or email attachments.

But, again, there's a clear downside. As we see.

You have to uncheck the iCloud feature or your personal info goes to the cloud. One of the reasons I use android and never put anything on it I don't want others to see. There were many ways to prevent all of this. If Apple isn't educating the user on how a cloud works and how to turn it off, they also deserve scrutiny. In 2014, though, everyone understands that putting sensitive information on any device connected to the internet is a massive security risk.

Although it's a good bet more people do now, than did a few days ago.

even he hadn't realized that a photo he'd taken, and then deleted, was already uploaded on photo bucket, for his friends and family to see.

The majority of Americans are high school graduates who aren't nearly as sophisticated about technology as many people here believe. Jennifer Lawrence is probably much more typical in that respect than you are.

using "internet based 'cloud' storage".

When you say "putting nudes on the internet" it sounds like they actually posted the pictures in a viewable form somewhere. In fact, they thought they were securely stored on a hard drive, not visible to anyone (of course whoever's servers those are can easily gain access.

That being said, I agree with you and would never use cloud storage for anything sensitive.

The guy did violate their privacy. No doubt about that.

n/t

or very wealthy...will ever have a chance when their accounts are hacked.

Tell me that you believe differently.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Putting the hacker in jail can only server to discourage future hackers from doing the same thing. It's not going to retrieve those photos from the ether.