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

481–490 of 783 posts

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#481

Post by throwaway0292 »

samstave wrote: post #413
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…

If the CEO and Founder of AWS can be easily hacked by Saudis then what does that mean for the rest of silicon valley in general and 99% of YC funded startups who rely on AWS?

And that's why there's demand for private, on-premise cloud. Hip startup don't care about your data. Some boring companies do.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#482

Post by rsynnott »

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Important note: This is written by Jeff Bezos himself . Normally, the Bezos affair story would be gossipy, but this alleges extortion , extraordinarily. (Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.)

He owns a newspaper company, but the newspaper isn't his personal blog. It would be quite improper to use it as such, and a decent editor probably wouldn't allow it. He could maybe write an opinion piece, though even that seems dubious.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#483

Post by ethbro »

michaelt wrote: post #474
laurentl wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the second case, one might hope that those entities will check their audit logs and make sure no-one used the tools of the state for their own end.

If I was the director of the CIA I'd cover up any internal corruption, to avoid being subject to additional oversight or public criticism. We've already banked the public trust from having audit records exist , actually checking the audit records can only reveal bad news.

That's the point of a Congressional summons and testimony.

You can cover up things quietly, but lying to Congress when asked about it carries a very different set of penalties.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#485

Post by rsynnott »

hbosch wrote: post #156
minimaxir wrote: post #2

Important note: This is written by Jeff Bezos himself . Normally, the Bezos affair story would be gossipy, but this alleges extortion , extraordinarily. (Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.)

Personal stuff is for blogs. The Washington Post is a business, a respected newspaper, an internationally renowned journalistic publication. It’s not a soapbox for Bezos... In fact, why not bring up that he owns one of the most heavily trafficked websites on the planet. Why didn’t he publish this letter to Amazon.com front page? Equally valid question, no?

Actually, it'd be far less improper to do that than to put it in the Post.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#486

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

willvarfar wrote: post #402
jjeaff wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won't publish them. But I'll guarantee you they will anonymously leak out on the internet. There is no way to prove they are the only people with these photos. (and they of course aren't the only ones)

Can Bezos get a US court to impound the photos? Something akin to the UK 'super injunction'? That would make being caught leaking the photos perjury. The stakes are so high that AMI might well not dare to do that. Its easy to imagine that Bezos, whatever he is saying publicly, is also getting excellent legal consul privately and that two can play at the games that AMI is so infamous for.

Why? Because he doesn't want everyone to know that he has a penis?

The kind of people who care about "celebrity gossip" will have no idea who he is, and the people who do know who he is won't care. There is no market for these photos.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#487

Post by Slartie »

rnvhhynr wrote: post #391
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is the correct way to handle such things. Yes, with conditions . Bezos himself writes, in the article we're discussing: I asked him to prioritise protecting my time since I have other things I prefer to work on and to proceed with whatever budget he needed to pursue the facts in this matter. - emphasis mine. And that: On that point, numerous people have contacted our investigation team about their similar expe…

Someone without that net worth won't be blackmailed by the US and Saudi governments.

In order to be blackmailed by the US and Saudi governments, you do not need to have a lot of money. They don't really care about that, because they also have a lot of money.

What they care about is whether you have something that poses a danger to their (hidden) agendas.

If this is true, it may also mean that it is more likely that you have a lot of money (because there appears to be a statistical correlation between having lots of money and having stuff that's dangerous to the agendas of state-level global actors, likely because having lots of money means having lots of power and influence, which results in getting access to "stuff" you wouldn't have otherwise), but the former does not automatically result in the latter, and it also isn't a requirement for the latter.

Hence you can very well, through an infinite amount of random circumstances, come into possession of material deemed "dangerous" by the US and Saudi governments, while still being just a normal person living a normal life with a 5-digit net worth. Resulting in you being blackmailed by the US and Saudi governments. Most likely with quite some success.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#488

Post by rsynnott »

auganov wrote: post #475
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to push back against this characterization as "ghastly personal behavior". For one, it's not clear if he and his wife were already separated, at least at a personal level, before this affair. But this general idea that it's somehow "ghastly" to send a paramour love notes and sexually suggestive pictures is a sad remnant of our puritanical history, and the sooner we rid ourselves of this notion, the better.

The status of his marriage is the key thing here. And there's plenty indicating he is very much a classical cheater. Whatever the right adjective is, I'd definitely pick a negative one. The way he cheated only makes an already dirty act so much nastier.

If they're separated, then the status of their marriage is irrelevant.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#489

Post by belorn »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #461
paxys wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politically motivated - 100% Government entity accessed them? I'd say it is much more likely that someone got the texts off his mistresses phone (whether willingly or not).

I don't understand, isn't a government entity someone who can get the texts off his mistress' phone?

- '

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#490

Post by rsynnott »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #354
kumarvvr wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am curious, if you were in Jeff Bezos place what would you do? I mean, what would you do after you get that email from NE lawyer?

I said in my post I would probably make a carefully worded statement through a spokesperson for the public record, possibly including the email, and avoid in any way creating something the press or anyone else could buy into as clickbait narrative. Stay out of the public eye entirely, no photos, personal quotes, attacks etc.. Bezos will not win if this blows up. He'll win in the eyes of a few people, and lose in othe…

> He'll win in the eyes of a few people, and lose in others, and it will only create a stain on his record

I think fewer people than you think are still willing to defend Pecker.

Post reply on HN