Live data from Hacker News

The Max Headroom Incident

allthatsinteresting.com

201–208 of 208 posts

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#201
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internet archive is doing actual archival work. But at an even more basic level old methods to archive stuff are still in active use.

> Internet archive is doing actual archival work. SPA-all-the-things takes care of that.

You can archive SPA’s, the vast majority aren’t worth the trouble.

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#202
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could ask the same of you: develop some empathy and shame, but it would seem that you don't really care about others so long as you are entertained. More charitably, I imagine that you care at least a little bit, you just think the entertainment value to you outweighs any inconvenience it caused others to the extent that no one should feel at all embarrassed by having behaved that way. I disagree. > you don't seem…

You are just arguing to "win" the agument. It make no sense. No one was actually harmed by the incident. I bet if you asked the people who got pranked today, they would remember it fondly.

You're defining 'harm' in a very literal fashion. I'm arguing regardless that no one was injured or, from what we can tell, fired or anything, they still caused a lot of inconvenience for some people. Yeah, the hack is kind of funny, and it is likely pretty much everyone remembers it fondly[0], and none of this is really a huge deal in the end, but what I'm saying is that it is perfectly understandable to be embarrassed by having behaved this way in the past, I believe it is a sign of maturity.

[0] However, it is not unknown for soldiers, even one's with PTSD, to have an overall fond recollection of their time in the war either, so it's not clear that means anything.

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#203
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My values? You mean having empathy for people you don't know? Yes, I'd say that people not sharing that is indeed why the world is going to shit. Though of course most people do share it, probably even you. It is a mystery to me why you seem to be saying that no one should care at all about the people negatively affected by this. An argument for the funnieness of it, or the art of it, outweighing that would be unders…

You are actually the one who strikes me as cold and lacking empathy here, because you don't understand that no one got hurt in any serious manner. You also talk about things that are obvious (why they aren't said), like the sheer joy of the prank.

The reason I continue to argue this point is that I can't seem to grasp the mindset of people who think there's no shame in fucking with people they don't know. Like, how do you square that? Do you like getting fucked with by people you don't know? Is it made better if they thought it was funny?

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#204
Hacking was different then. I attended a few 2600 meetings in the Citigroup Center building in NYC back in the late 80s/early 90s, and HOPE in 1994. Sad to see they are pushing for the vaccine to attend without mention of natural immunity, or lack of long-term studies coupled with yet another $40 to $60bn of booster sales for big pharma. but hey, times change. Yesterday's subversive group has been incorporated into the pablum purveyors. Kind of ironic for the group to tow the line without question. I had already done analog red boxing with a microcassette player/recorder and a homemade pickup coil at payphones in the early/mid 80s. I was working on video tape encryption and satellites where I could then too. No real internet, just BBSs. I loved ECHO founded by Stacy Horn in NYC after coming off of GEnie BBS. I miss those days! I liked the US TV show for what it's worth. Very cool for the time and a bit subversive compared to the drivel on TV now.

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#205
post #8
post #2

It's always fascinating seeing the internet catalog and consolidate knowledge, especially regarding events that occurred pre-internet. Back when these events happened, a blurb appeared on TV news and in papers, but there was no easy way to get the big picture as the investigations evolved.

This wasn't pre-Internet though. This happened in 1987. EDIT: "the Internet, as we know it today, was not deployed until 1983" -- people who know more about this than you.

Wikipedia:

> Access to the ARPANET was expanded in 1981 when the National Science Foundation (NSF) funded the Computer Science Network (CSNET). In 1982, the Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP) was standardized, which permitted worldwide proliferation of interconnected networks.

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#206
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are actually the one who strikes me as cold and lacking empathy here, because you don't understand that no one got hurt in any serious manner. You also talk about things that are obvious (why they aren't said), like the sheer joy of the prank.

The reason I continue to argue this point is that I can't seem to grasp the mindset of people who think there's no shame in fucking with people they don't know. Like, how do you square that? Do you like getting fucked with by people you don't know? Is it made better if they thought it was funny?

Does any of that change if you stop thinking about it as a prank and instead consider it as performance art? With art, provocation isn't shameful, it's often a goal.

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason I continue to argue this point is that I can't seem to grasp the mindset of people who think there's no shame in fucking with people they don't know. Like, how do you square that? Do you like getting fucked with by people you don't know? Is it made better if they thought it was funny?

Does any of that change if you stop thinking about it as a prank and instead consider it as performance art? With art, provocation isn't shameful, it's often a goal.

Typically art is not directed at unsuspecting bystanders and rarely breaks laws that carry potential prison sentences[0]. Even so, I would say that artist understand that they are fucking with people, but they believe that the value of their expression outweighs it. Weather I agree or not would be irrelevant, because they would either explain it as such (artists usually take credit for their work, unlike the Headroom prankster), or decide they were wrong and be embarrassed by it. The latter is offered as an explanation for why no one has come forward and I defend that possibility against naysayers who, for some reason, seem to believe there is no possibility of embarrassment.

[0] notable Banksy works come to mind as counter examples, and I would not not say that they were being a bit of an asshole. Sometimes you may need to be an asshole to make your point though.

Re: The Max Headroom Incident

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could have been put together in one of several schools in the area from consumer grade sources.

At that time, printers already printed yellow dots with the serial ID. I’m most surprised VHS wasn’t watermarked. It could have helped a lot in terrorist investigations (ransom videos). I’m always afraid when I hear someone copypasting Apple memos. Obviously they must have watermark, if not text glyphs (rn = m, and further UTF-8 incantations), at least subtly different phrasing depending on which department, or perso…

> At that time, printers already printed yellow dots with the serial ID.

No schools in 1987 had color laser printers with this technology (and I doubt many businesses did either). Any students trying to do something fishy would have had to make do with, at best, 24-pin dot matrix printers with color ribbons.

Post reply on HN