51–60 of 80 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One difference is that with a deep-fake the target knows it's not real, and is easier to shrug off, at least for themselves. If the target knows it is real then the feeling of shame and embarrassment would be a lot greater for many people (depending on personality and cultural attitudes).
Having deep fake photos pop up in the internet is going to make most people feel shame.
How could have her phone been hacked after creating a profile on a web site?
IIRC Facebook and LinkedIn did this in the past, they would say "Welcome to Facebook/LinkedIn! Let us go through your inbox to harvest email addresses so you can find your friends, we already have your email address, just enter your password here:".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the issue is that the law is unjust and shouldn’t exist.
If HN had to discuss every daft, wrong rule in every country that offended our progressive, post-national sentiments, we would never have time to discuss compilers. And that would be a crime itself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, I don't care much for the tone of the previous post at all. That said, I do think it would be wise to have a good think about what would happen if these photos were distributed – either maliciously or accidentally – and if you're prepared to take this risk. Unfortunately too many people somewhat naïvely don't think about this.
"wise to have a good think" is a good discussion to have BEFORE and for LATER. AFTER, it is simply victim shaming. "wise to have a good think" is something we do for ourselves. Hacking a person's phone is a violation that one person perpetrates upon another. The first is a personal mental activity. The second is a physical crime. The first is irrelevant now. Now, something real happened. Reality always takes preceden…
I don't get this insatiable drive some people have for passing judgement. God forbid if we try to actually understand situations, how they happen, how they could be prevented, etc. instead of merely angrily shouting "IT'S BAD!"
9 times out of 10 I see "victim blaming" being used it's some holier-than-thou moral superiority stuff. I'm not interested in moral judgements, I'm interested in understanding problems and seeing how we can prevent them from happening again. I don't care about any moral judgement good or bad in these types of discussions; that doesn't mean I don't have one, but I see no value in sharing it here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think it would be a crime, but definitely boring. In this situation I think it’s more newsworthy because of the nature of the violation is more unusual since a law against pornography seems to be intended to punish producers but this person isn’t a producer. Also, it’s an attractive lady, so that usually makes more people want to discuss. And Uganda has some other particularly bad laws related to sexuality.
> punish producers but this person isn’t a producer. Er, then who made it? Hint, when a common law document says "…the production of…" it means exactly that; they use "… and/or distribution of…" to capture the derived crime of, well, distributing it. Like kiddie porn, DIY nuclear weapons, and counterfeit money, some things are a crime to simply make - even in the basement their mother's house. Adults need to be caref…
No, they don't.
Proponents of such world view are those who feel that they cannot compete with regards to merit and talent, so they hope to do so via their "superior morality".
Bill Clinton did such an amazing job that he could have had orgies with Victoria Secret models in the WH every night for all I care.
Same with Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Eric Shmidt, Angela Merkel (Armani male models maybe?).
Mary Barra? With that mid-engine Corvette at 59k MSRP she can "dance with mr. Brownstone" every day for all I care, as long as they keep pumping them out in Dearborn.
Same goes for the Rwandan woman in the article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it's like going through a bad neighborhood in your expensive car to show off your new expensive watch. Not your fault you got robbed, but there may have been a way to avoid it.
As a citizen, it is reasonable to expect from government to provide you the ability to drive through any part of the country without risking getting robbed. If the government does not meet that expectation, it is time to hold politicians (and, where applicable, the police administration) accountable by voting them out.
It's a noble ideal but we're still not there yet so you can either shout at the Universe demanding it to be fair, or you can to try and live with what we have right now.
I do expect the roads to have no potholes, and car drivers vigilant but I still look where I put my feet when I walk and look the street both ways before crossing it. When I trip on something because I was distracted I first think "Who the hell put that there?", then "Probably should have watched where I was going" second. Am I subconsciously trained to victim-blame myself?
Sorry, what am I missing? 1. its illegal to produce pornographic material in Uganda* 2. she produced pornographic material (of herself) 3. it came to light (its always a risk) 4. she has been charged. If you play silly games… * I don't think it should be, but that's their law.
1. A gentleman retires and starts a bar 2. Stock it with liquor 3. One night a kid breaks in and gets drunk 4. Cops show up. 5. Bar owner gets prosecuted for supplying alcohol to minors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generally we shouldn't be glad when inhumane laws are enforced, yes? Even if you supported anti-pornogrophy laws (I know you aren't saying that), another reason why this should be challenged is because it's going to be enforced in gender-biased ways. Primarily women will share a disproportionate burden of scrutiny for this law, particularly so in the case of revenge porn or deepfake. It's important to advocate for tr…
Indecent exposure laws tend to primarily target men. Anti-pornogrophy laws tend to primarily target women. What conclusions can we make of a culture that have both laws that get enforced in their gender-biased ways?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If HN had to discuss every daft, wrong rule in every country that offended our progressive, post-national sentiments, we would never have time to discuss compilers. And that would be a crime itself.
If you want to discuss compilers, why did you click on this thread?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> punish producers but this person isn’t a producer. Er, then who made it? Hint, when a common law document says "…the production of…" it means exactly that; they use "… and/or distribution of…" to capture the derived crime of, well, distributing it. Like kiddie porn, DIY nuclear weapons, and counterfeit money, some things are a crime to simply make - even in the basement their mother's house. Adults need to be caref…
> Adults need to be careful in life. No, they don't. Proponents of such world view are those who feel that they cannot compete with regards to merit and talent, so they hope to do so via their "superior morality". Bill Clinton did such an amazing job that he could have had orgies with Victoria Secret models in the WH every night for all I care. Same with Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Eric Shmidt, Angela Merkel (Armani male…
> No, they don't.
Atheists like me can go to Saudi Arabia (or Uganda) and say and do as we like without pause for the consequences (unreasonable as they may be) to myself and the people that dependent on me?
Come now, this thread is just getting silly.
I will have to bow out now.