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

441–450 of 783 posts

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#441

Post by sobani »

bitexploder wrote: post #273
rhizome wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I read Bezos's post, I noticed that at the section where he describes the photographs, I found myself simply scrolling past them to get to the next part of the story.

100% — Let’s be realistic. Between two consenting adults is there anything non-violent that is truly that weird? We have a few pleasure bits attached to our bodies. Some people get excited by objects (fetishes). When you step back a level, the window dressing becomes laughably irrelevant. You’ve seen my dick? Oh no. You saw me courting another female? Private, but oh, the horror.... it’s just so silly in the scheme o…

> is there anything non-violent that is truly that weird?

Weird and outrageous things I can think of that people have consented to:

- 'playing' with excrement (Gross! this is what the owner of Whole Foods thinks of basic hygiene)

- master slave play (Misogynist Bezos ordered this woman to ...)

- cuckolding (haha Bezos isn't enough of a man to satisfy his girlfriend himself)

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#442

Post by greendesk »

cm2187 wrote: post #418
slg wrote: post #285

It seems like a lot of people are not reading between the lines of this post. Bezos apparently believes that he was hacked by either the US or Saudi government and that now one or both of those governments are using the National Enquirer as an attack dog against him. That accusation is much bigger than any other piece of this story. EDIT: Here [1] is a reporter from the Washington Post backing that up. The Bezos' cam…

Given the open rows Trump had with the FBI and the CIA, that these agencies are filled with democrats and even republican sympathisers who think Trump should be impeached, and that an abuse of power is the very raison d’etre of the impeachment procedure, I don’t see how he would get to give such an order without the whole world knowing about it. Doesn’t pass the smell test. Foreign agency, different story. But there…

Replied to a different comment - but the same question applies here.

Are you sure that they are a single entity, where people are of uniform opinion? And every single person follows law to the letter of it? Trump could request this task unofficially from someone as a 'favour' - the agency as a whole might not have access to the request.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#443

Post by guilamu »

I'm not a fan of the guy. He (and all the GAFAs) is killing our public services all over Europe by not paying any taxes (legally, I know, we did this to ourselves).

I think he did good by reacting as he did, though.

However, something is bugging me: how can you be so stupid to make dick pics with a connected device nowadays?

I mean, the fappening happened, so much happened that you cannot ignore the fact that nothing you're doing with an online device is private.

Anyone, any entity with enough cash, can hack into all your devices in a glimpse.

When you're Jeff f*ing Bezos, you must know better, come on!

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#444

Post by c3534l »

danso wrote: post #4

> Well, that got my attention. But not in the way they likely hoped. Any personal embarrassment AMI could cause me takes a back seat because there’s a much more important matter involved here. If in my position I can’t stand up to this kind of extortion, how many people can? Can’t remember the last time I’ve seen a prominent person post the details of a personal extortion attempt out of defiance for all to see.

I remember David Letterman doing just that. Apparently that's the conventional wisdom on this sort of thing: announce it yourself rather than let the other person take the first public move.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#448

Post by fxfan »

Can anyone actually knowledgeable and not just rooting for one side tell me whether it would be illegal for NE to now go ahead and publish the said pics?

As of now, all I read from knowledgeable people is that there is no case- as is shown by the fact that mr bezos chose to make the 'evidence' public. My question is- does there still stay no case if they publish the pictures? Or does that change things? I'm assuming it won't because Mr bezos wouldn't risk publicizing the evidence considering that eventualit

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#449

Post by andyjohnson0 »

The astonishingly un-subtle words of the lawyer involved surprised me:

"That said, if your client agrees to cease and desist such defamatory behavior, we are willing to engage in constructive conversations regarding the texts and photos which we have in our possession."

Is there any way that this could pass a professional ethics review? After reading more about him [1], I have to wonder: why this person still allowed to practice law?

[1] https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/02/marty-singer-ho...

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#450

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

cm2187 wrote: post #409
jorblumesea wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

House of Saud, maybe, they are dumb enough to think this would work. Given their inept handling of the Khashoggi I wouldn't be surprised. I doubt anyone in the US intelligence profession would think Bezos would call off the WaPo because of some scandalous photos. "Just blackmail the richest man on the planet, that will totally work!"

> "Just blackmail the richest man on the planet, that will totally work!" Given the number of people and media who seem to be convinced without a doubt that Trump is being blackmailed by Russia...

We're talking about billionaires here, not Trump.
Post reply on HN