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

Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 141 posts

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#51

Post by celticmusic »

progval wrote: post #49
ColanR wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment, however, implies a naivete that we should trust others - to do only what they say they will, with things that are precious to us. The people shooting the video are frauds, but allowing the video to be shot at all was naive at best and stupid at worst.

> implies a naivete that we should trust others - to do only what they say they will, with things that are precious to us. We trust strangers all the time. For example when driving, because we expect dangerous people to be sufficiently de-incentived from driving. Or when doing groceries, because we expect companies not to poison us. Or when riding in a stranger's car, even though they could rob and/or harm.

terrible examples, in all instances we have laws in place and people who's jobs it is to ensure the safety.

Your point has some legitimacy, but your examples are severely flawed.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#52

Post by fenwick67 »

wruza wrote: post #13
userbinator wrote: post #2

“I’m always paranoid when I meet new people that they have seen my video or [when I] meet new people [they] are going to say, ‘I know you.’” That reminded me of a comment I saw in a discussion about being worried that someone would find out your real identity by noticing your profile on a fetish site --- and thus the correct response to that is "I know you watch porn."

We discuss porn industry and porn site’s implementation and ux details at work, both men and women. It’s 2020. Do you know I breathe air and eat food?

Please don't talk about porn at work. Sincerely - anybody who has a shred of professionalism

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#53

Post by ajmurmann »

> In November 2015 60 emails and phone calls called for her to be expelled. The emails went to the dean of the law school, and to the head of the student body with links to the video.

What kind of evil person does this? Is there anything these monsters can be prosecuted for? At least the people who made the movies had a motive in greed. The people who sent these emails wouldn't even gain anything. They are clearly nothing but malicious, bigoted and evil.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#55

Post by [deleted] »

celticmusic wrote: post #51
progval wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> implies a naivete that we should trust others - to do only what they say they will, with things that are precious to us. We trust strangers all the time. For example when driving, because we expect dangerous people to be sufficiently de-incentived from driving. Or when doing groceries, because we expect companies not to poison us. Or when riding in a stranger's car, even though they could rob and/or harm.

terrible examples, in all instances we have laws in place and people who's jobs it is to ensure the safety. Your point has some legitimacy, but your examples are severely flawed.

[deleted]

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#56

Post by mysterydip »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #42
mysterydip wrote: post #22

(no disrespect intended to the victims in this story when I say this) This is a cautionary tale in the world we live in today: Once something is recorded, it could be anywhere. Even without willful intent on the part of the owner, phones get lost or stolen, old hardware gets sold on ebay, cloud accounts get compromised, etc. Have fun, but be careful.

This does indeed come off as disrespectful. These videos weren’t “leaked”, they weren’t found on someone’s old phone. The people who shot the video LIED to the participants in order to coerce participation. They paid other people to lie to them as well in order to create a more complete deception. Then they posted the videos in exactly the way they said they would not do. They also provided drugs and alcohol to the p…

My comments were not about the people in this story directly. I am certainly not blaming them for what happened.

My point is, if you don't control the source of the recording (whatever it may be), you can't control what happens to it. With how easy it is to share any data these days, it could go places you don't want it to very quickly.

"Have fun" was a general comment for people. Look at all the political fallout that has happened to various people over pictures from decades ago that have resurfaced, for one example.

Here's another (older) example of what I mean: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Kid

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#57

Post by ascorbic »

karmajunkie wrote: post #41
hawaiianbrah wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve always wondered about that stat. What does “watch porn” mean? 1x a year? 1x a month? 1x a week? I think people assume the rate is higher than it really is.

If you can recognize the face of someone you met randomly from an ocean of porn online, I think it’s safe to say that person watches more frequently than once-a-anything.

These weren't randomly recognised: their contact details were published on another site, and the sociopaths who visit those sites then contacted their families, employers etc.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#58

Post by ffdjjjffjj »

wruza wrote: post #13
userbinator wrote: post #2

“I’m always paranoid when I meet new people that they have seen my video or [when I] meet new people [they] are going to say, ‘I know you.’” That reminded me of a comment I saw in a discussion about being worried that someone would find out your real identity by noticing your profile on a fetish site --- and thus the correct response to that is "I know you watch porn."

We discuss porn industry and porn site’s implementation and ux details at work, both men and women. It’s 2020. Do you know I breathe air and eat food?

Are you in the US?

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#59

Post by PeterStuer »

fenwick67 wrote: post #52
wruza wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We discuss porn industry and porn site’s implementation and ux details at work, both men and women. It’s 2020. Do you know I breathe air and eat food?

Please don't talk about porn at work. Sincerely - anybody who has a shred of professionalism

I don't think the poster is from the US or even an anglosaksen country.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#60

Post by [deleted] »

mysterydip wrote: post #56
erikpukinskis wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does indeed come off as disrespectful. These videos weren’t “leaked”, they weren’t found on someone’s old phone. The people who shot the video LIED to the participants in order to coerce participation. They paid other people to lie to them as well in order to create a more complete deception. Then they posted the videos in exactly the way they said they would not do. They also provided drugs and alcohol to the p…

My comments were not about the people in this story directly. I am certainly not blaming them for what happened. My point is, if you don't control the source of the recording (whatever it may be), you can't control what happens to it. With how easy it is to share any data these days, it could go places you don't want it to very quickly. "Have fun" was a general comment for people. Look at all the political fallout th…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN