Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 783 posts

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#111

Post by Balgair »

creaghpatr wrote: post #95
stupidcar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a lot in his favour. On the very remote chance…

Although, it did, I assume, trigger the divorce which will cost him a couple billion dollars

Then all the more kudos to Jeff for doing this.

Taken from the point of view of the divorce court, this is a LOT more ammo for his soon-to-be-ex-wife and her side. These photos are very soon to hit the greater web/papers and WILL be used against him in the proceedings.

You are correct, this decision by him to speak out is likely to cost him Billions.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#112

Post by WrtCdEvrydy »

mejari wrote: post #86
romanovtexas wrote: post #21

Slightly off topic, but the fact that the world's richest man who owns a tech giant chose to publish this on a closed platform like Medium should be worrisome for the future of the open web. On the other hand, this might just be the biggest brand endorsement for Medium till date.

Only HN could turn Jeff Bezos publicly outing a company attempting to extort him with naked photos into a threat to the "future of the open web".

This is good for bitcoin?

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#113

Post by josephcooney »

hirundo wrote: post #56
minimaxir wrote: post #18

Granted, this strategy is very high risk unless you're one of the richest people in the world.

Unless he's proud of his body, and either doesn't care or feels positively about strangers looking at it.

There were some photos of him recently looking like a bit of a unit - e.g. https://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-before-and-after/...

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#114

Post by ghostbrainalpha »

weston wrote: post #40
exolymph wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You come at the king, you best not miss. Also, never take notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy ;P

It’s amazing how many people in Trump’s inner circle love quoting mob movies, calling people “rats” and “stoolies” but can’t seem to get down even the basics of being a half-decent criminal. I mean, Roger Stone literally told people to lie to Congress via an email. One can quote mob movies all day but that doesn’t make them a smart criminal.

There is a good reason for this. Real criminals don't aspire to be criminals... they just are, for whatever reason, necessity or lack of certain morals.

People who idolize criminals show an entirely different character defect, one that is in opposition to being productive in any task criminal or otherwise.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#115

Post by ocdtrekkie »

monkeydreams wrote: post #106
stupidcar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a lot in his favour. On the very remote chance…

I agree. One thought did occur to me is that he is basically daring AMI to release the pictures. What if he knows the providence of these pictures, knows how they got into AMI hands, and knows that if AMI publish them he can sue them, Gawker (not Buzzfeed) style, into the ground?

If AMI committed a crime by threatening to post them if he didn't keep quiet, and he posted this, AMI definitely also committed a crime if they then posted the pictures in retaliation.

Bezos is reasonably safe in airing this, because AMI will only dig itself a deeper hole if they post them. AMI botched the crud out of this operation by leaving a paper trail: They made accepting their offer completely unnecessary; I don't think there's any chance the pictures get posted now.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#116

Post by pertymcpert »

phowon wrote: post #92
jlmorton wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true at all. > Blackmail is the crime of threatening to reveal embarrassing, disgraceful or damaging information about a person to the public, family, spouse or associates unless money is paid to purchase silence. It is a form of extortion. Because the information is usually substantially true, it is not revealing the information that is criminal, but demanding money to withhold it. https://definitions.usl…

So I'm curious - is this considered blackmail if the object isn't money?

Wikipedia says this: Blackmail is an act of coercion using the threat of revealing or publicizing either substantially true or false, and often damaging, information about a person, to the public, family members, or associates unless certain demands are met.

It seems its considered blackmail but in the strictly legal sense I'm not sure. There's probably a law to cover that though, extortion?

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#117

Post by ocschwar »

lapnitnelav wrote: post #98
stupidcar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a lot in his favour. On the very remote chance…

All the money in the world can't buy your pride / dignity back, especially if some "embarrassing" evidence get out there. It's something in the way people would look at you, talk about you, etc ... If you combine that with the Streisand effect, there's no way a public figure can take this kind of hit and walk away unphased. It's very much human nature, and that's why Jeff's move is bold.

Standing up to that fucker does, in fact, buy you your pride and dignity back.

The only thing missing here is Bezos offering to up the ante with a newer dickpic.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#118

Post by function_seven »

monkeydreams wrote: post #106
stupidcar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a lot in his favour. On the very remote chance…

I agree. One thought did occur to me is that he is basically daring AMI to release the pictures. What if he knows the providence of these pictures, knows how they got into AMI hands, and knows that if AMI publish them he can sue them, Gawker (not Buzzfeed) style, into the ground?

Gawker style?

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#119

Post by romanovtexas »

danso wrote: post #33
romanovtexas wrote: post #21

Slightly off topic, but the fact that the world's richest man who owns a tech giant chose to publish this on a closed platform like Medium should be worrisome for the future of the open web. On the other hand, this might just be the biggest brand endorsement for Medium till date.

I mean, Amazon doesn't really have an associated "official" blogging platform, not in the way that Google has Blogger, Yahoo has Tumblr, and Twitter has Medium. Also worth noting that Amazon's spokesperson used Medium when writing a rebuttal to a high-profile investigation of Amazon's business practices in 2015: https://medium.com/@jaycarney/what-the-new-york-times-didn-t...

Blogger and Tumblr aren't like Medium; maybe a good comparison for them would be Wordpress. Twitter's official blog isn't on Medium. So doesn't "have" it - blog.twitter.com

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#120

Post by [deleted] »

creaghpatr wrote: post #95
stupidcar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a lot in his favour. On the very remote chance…

Although, it did, I assume, trigger the divorce which will cost him a couple billion dollars

[deleted]
Post reply on HN