Live data from Hacker News

Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

Post reply on HN

Print view View original

291–300 of 381 posts

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#291

Post by standardUser » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:00 PM UTC

bigyellow wrote: post #65

VortexDream wrote: post #4

I'm sick of people, so I'm not going to read the inevitable comments that are going to come. Look, face it, some people like taking nude photos of themselves and they like sharing them with their partners. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It's not their fault if something like this happens. People should be able to feel secure in the tech that they use, in the companies that they entrust their information…

> Look, face it, some people like taking nude photos of themselves and they like sharing them with their partners. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It doesn't have to be "wrong" for it to be stupid, and trusting your private life to a device you literally do not own is. This isn't victim blaming, this is recognizing the fallacious logic that most people have when approaching this subject. Call it tech ill…

I imagine a lot of people sharing nude photos don't especially mind if they become public (I personally don't, I've had many partners who don't fear this). So they aren't "dumb" for taking a risk they are comfortable with. Nor are they dumb to expect the criminals to pay if they do become a victim. Both things can be true without anyone needing to be "dumb" as you seem so desperate to assume.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#292

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:01 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #254

q1w2 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like a limitation of our ability to have constructive conversations online. Someone can be less than perfect and that can cause them to be victimized. We should be able to talk about both aspects of this story, perhaps independently. Some people want to discuss how the offender should be punished, and other people want to discuss how we can behave to prevent being victimized ourselves. I don't think it's v…

Absolutely. "They deserved it for sending in an unwiped phone" is victim blaming. "If you need to send in your phone, you can do X and Y to protect yourself" is absolutely NOT victim blaming. I cannot wrap my mind around why people would have a problem with the second statement.

There's a subset of people who get angry at any implication that people have agency they can use to make decisions to make their life less risky in these sorts of contexts. Fine, whatever, they're entitled to their world view.

What boggles the mind is the overlap this group appears to more or less be a subset of people who are up in arms anytime someone doesn't take steps to de-risk their life in any other context (like using an older car seat for your kid or not putting GFCI breakers into everything under the sun).

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#293

Post by MerelyMortal » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:01 PM UTC

tsrand0m wrote: post #101

Bud wrote: post #63

And people wonder why Apple wants to try to keep control of iPhone repair processes. This is one of the big reasons why.

Wasn’t there a similar case with apple repair. I vaguely remember seeing that on hacker news too. Apple repair nude will get you there

That, and I remember years ago, someone claimed their cryptocurrency was stolen while their Apple laptop was in for repairs (wallet unencrypted on the laptop).

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#294

Post by MerelyMortal » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:03 PM UTC

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #284

MerelyMortal wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just tried Bitlocker for the first time a few days ago. I enabled it, and next time I booted it up, it never asked for my password. It turns out it only protects the drive if it's removed from the computer. I just used VeraCrypt instead.

Really? My Bitlocker setup requires me to enter in a password to unlock the drive.

Maybe I did something wrong, but when I looked it up online when that happened, that's what I read.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#295

Post by olyjohn » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:03 PM UTC

ccn0p wrote: post #51

VortexDream wrote: post #4

I'm sick of people, so I'm not going to read the inevitable comments that are going to come. Look, face it, some people like taking nude photos of themselves and they like sharing them with their partners. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It's not their fault if something like this happens. People should be able to feel secure in the tech that they use, in the companies that they entrust their information…

>> I see it every time the topic comes up I hear you, and agree wholeheartedly that there is "absolutely nothing wrong with this", but maybe if the topic keeps coming up, people should have less trust in the companies (and their respective flawed human supply chains) that keep our information.... and act accordingly. Unfortunately that's easier said than done these days.

People here on HN get it. But usually average Joe who isn't into tech doesn't find out they can't trust in these companies until it's too late.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#296

Post by ryandrake » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:04 PM UTC

q1w2 wrote: post #252

aulin wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazing how most of the replies of your comment and the other comments too are still victim blaming, not for taking or sharing the nudes but for being so naive to send a phone unwiped. There's no excuse for violating and exposing someone's private life like this, being tech unsavvy (or you know, not being able to wipe a dead phone) is absolutely not an excuse to shift the blame to the victim. We get it you're good, y…

This feels like a limitation of our ability to have constructive conversations online. Someone can be less than perfect and that can cause them to be victimized. We should be able to talk about both aspects of this story, perhaps independently. Some people want to discuss how the offender should be punished, and other people want to discuss how we can behave to prevent being victimized ourselves. I don't think it's v…

> I don't think it's valid to argue that people discussing how to prevent victimization, are somehow "victim blaming".

Weird also, that talking about preventative measures is only considered "victim blaming" when it comes to certain specific topics. If you say it's a good idea to wear a seat belt or helmet in your car or motorcycle, it's not victim blaming. If you say people ought to lock their doors at night, it's not victim blaming. We tell our kids not to get into strangers' cars--not victim blaming. What is it about this topic that always seems to set off the alarms?

I used to really over-share online, and reading stories like these over the years has helped a great deal to educate me about good online OpSec and privacy best practices. I have data sharing/storage habits to this very day that stem from good advice received from others.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#297

Post by catlikesshrimp » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:04 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #254

q1w2 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like a limitation of our ability to have constructive conversations online. Someone can be less than perfect and that can cause them to be victimized. We should be able to talk about both aspects of this story, perhaps independently. Some people want to discuss how the offender should be punished, and other people want to discuss how we can behave to prevent being victimized ourselves. I don't think it's v…

Absolutely. "They deserved it for sending in an unwiped phone" is victim blaming. "If you need to send in your phone, you can do X and Y to protect yourself" is absolutely NOT victim blaming. I cannot wrap my mind around why people would have a problem with the second statement.

You are blaming the victim because you think you are beyond failure.

Someday you might be hacked. Is it your fault for using technology at all knowing you can be hacked?

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#298

Post by mijoharas » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:05 PM UTC

jfrunyon wrote: post #171

[dubious - discuss] There's a few things that make this pretty unlikely. Google doesn't triage or repair the phones themselves, they contract it out just like everyone else. And the people they contract it out to almost certainly have procedures in place which are meant to ensure that neither the devices themselves nor the data on them get out. I'm not saying it's false, but I would definitely take it with a grain of…

In addition a few months ago the exact thing happened to one of the subcontractors that apple uses for phone repairs[0] (as has been mentioned elsewhere in these comments). Unless you think the "procedures" that googles subcontractors have are better than those of these other subcontractors who did exactly this, it's clearly possible.

[0] https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/7/22522560/apple-repair-mult...

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#299

Post by lliamander » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:06 PM UTC

klyrs wrote: post #283

dahfizz wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. "They deserved it for sending in an unwiped phone" is victim blaming. "If you need to send in your phone, you can do X and Y to protect yourself" is absolutely NOT victim blaming. I cannot wrap my mind around why people would have a problem with the second statement.

> I cannot wrap my mind around why people would have a problem with the second statement. When the problem is that the phone was borked to the point that X and Y were not possible, it's tonedeaf at the very least.

There's nothing tonedeaf about exploring how the situation can be avoided in the future.

Obviously, the phone being borked is relevant, but in that case we need to ask what preemptive measures can be taken on a phone that isn't yet borked. It may be that the only answer right now is "don't keep nudes on your phone" then that's unfortunate and should be addressed.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#300

Post by WalterBright » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 7:09 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #185

VortexDream wrote: post #4

I'm sick of people, so I'm not going to read the inevitable comments that are going to come. Look, face it, some people like taking nude photos of themselves and they like sharing them with their partners. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It's not their fault if something like this happens. People should be able to feel secure in the tech that they use, in the companies that they entrust their information…

Thanks for posting this. I get why people do the victim-blaming thing; it lets them feel smart and superior, two feelings I have been known to enjoy. But it's a fundamentally bad way to approach analyzing safety issues. For those who really want to dig in on the topic, I strongly recommend Dekker's "A Field Guide to Understanding 'Human Error'": https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00Q8XCSFI/ref=dbs_a_def_r... It's nom…

This has entered programming language design. It's not longer "educate the programmer so he doesn't make stupid mistakes", but "design the language so that stupid mistakes are detected by the compiler". Mechanical verification is far more reliable than hoping people don't make mistakes.

Post reply on HN