This is the second weakest counter-argument. Now you've built a strawman of "porn pics" and valiantly smited it and claimed victory. But you know we aren't talking about porn pics. We are talking about stolen private photos of these people's sexual lives. You know this.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Can we talk about the apparent iCloud break-in?
- Thread starter Mr.Mike
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Winterfang
Banned
For the love of God people stay on topic, instead of going at each other's throat.
Teresa Palmer's leaked nudes are outdoors. Are those okay? I'm just curious.
Why do you keep arguing semantics?
Porn is usually or presumably consensual. These pictures are clearly not consensual.
Their publication isn't.
This is the second weakest counter-argument. Now you've built a strawman of "porn pics" and valiantly smited it and claimed victory. But you know we aren't talking about porn pics. We are talking about stolen private photos of these people's sexual lives. You know this.
Okay Johnnie Cochran.
This right here is the weakest of all arguments. You know somebody has no leg to stand on when they retreat to crying "Well you're not the boss so whatever!"
I shouldn't have to say this, because I know you absolutely know this. I am making an argument. My argument is not an authoritative statement that is right because I say it is right. My argument is a set of statements that work together to build a case. You know this. Stop acting as if it is anything different.
To me the difference is a person going up to a window is taking the risk of making someone feel incredibly threatened. You are also committing the crime of trespassing, which is partly why it is so threatening to do it. Because of you the person may feel uncomfortable in their home, might feel the need to move, etc.
The person who actually stole the pictures perhaps is analogous to the peeping Tom. They maybe have made these women feel similar to what a peeping Tom can make someone feel.
Looking up these pictures is participating in a violation of privacy, but I don't think it's "the same" as a peeping Tom. You are making what the "peeping Tom" (the leaker) did "worse" though arguably.
The irony here is palpable.Okay Johnnie Cochran.
The irony here is palpable.
Please explain.
jim-jam bongs
Member
Look, if you want to beat your meat while looking at pics of people who didn't really want you random internet cretins to be feeding the chickens while looking at those pics because they thought they were private then that's copacetic; but you are still a degenerate in my book, just like all those dickwads spanking the monkey to non consensual upskirts.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
If you cannot see the differences between a private nude picture and a private political statement, we are in two different universes and cannot ever communicate.
I disagree with Gremlin's point but the analogy is sound. Romney made those statements in a private setting and then was humiliated and had his actual career hurt by their public revelation. The leak was "good" for his political opponents and people who were unsure about his true feelings for lower class Americans, and it was "bad" for Romney, moderate Republicans who wanted him in office, and the people who actually agreed with the sentiment.
The photo leaks are obviously bad for the women (and one guy) targeted, Apple, and 'selfie culture' in general. It's arguably good for the millions of people who enjoy looking at nude pictures of famous women on the internet.
Obviously the blanket statement "all leaks of private information are morally wrong" doesn't cover the nuance between the two, so it's best not to argue with such broad strokes. I think it's more productive to say that leaks of information that contribute and improve public discourse are often quite valuable. Leaks of more frivolous information, like people's messed up romantic texts, nudes, or embarrassing home videos, serve no higher purpose than entertainment, and most people are raised to believe that entertainment at other people's expense is wrong. You shouldn't share stolen photos for the same reason you shouldn't pants the guy in front of you at Dunk N Donuts in the morning; your personal amusement is causing someone else humiliation. Now, I also believe that passively viewing said material is another area of distinction. You are not contributing to the dissemination, it's already there. To reuse the same analogy, your moral culpability for watching a guy get pants'd at D&D (and perhaps even having a hearty chuckle) is different from being the actual perpetrator.
None of that matters at all. Having to take less risks doesn't make it better at all. Peeping Toms are often not caught. These irrelevant counter-points that do nothing but point out the most pointless differences are not arguing anything.To me the difference is a person going up to a window is taking the risk of making someone feeling incredibly threatened. You are also committing the crime of trespassing, which is partly why it is so threatening to do it.
The person who actually stole the pictures perhaps is analogous to the peeping Tom.
Looking up these pictures is participating in a violation of privacy, but I don't think it's "the same" as a peeping Tom.
The constant unwillingness to understand why it is wrong to actively look for private nude pictures and the constant defense of the right to do so is enormously terrifying to me. That other people are doing this in this thread despite being made aware of the call to respect another person's intimate privacy. This behavior affects me way too negatively right now. I have to bow out - sorry
None of that matters at all. Having to take less risks doesn't make it better at all. Peeping Toms are often not caught. These irrelevant counter-points that do nothing but point out the most pointless differences are not arguing anything.
Let me break this down for you. Peeping tom is a crime, looking at leaked photos online is not.
You are comparing me to a lawyer known to try and use every loophole and trick to make somebody clearly guilty appear innocent. You are doing this when it is you trying to use every trick to divert the argument from it's actual point. You are the Johnny Cochran here.Please explain.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
Let me break this down for you. Peeping tom is a crime, looking at leaked photos online is not.
But can't you see? They're one in the same! /s
Do you have anything to offer to the thread?
My opinion. You shouldn't save private pictures to the cloud. Other than that, it sucks for them that they were essentially stolen.
They are nice pictures though.
I'm not arguing law at all. Arguments of morality are not limited to the scope of law. It may make you feel better that you cannot be legally prosecuted, but that is one crappy moral argument.Let me break this down for you. Peeping tom is a crime, looking at leaked photos online is not.
Winterfang
Banned
None of that matters at all. Having to take less risks doesn't make it better at all. Peeping Toms are often not caught. These irrelevant counter-points that do nothing but point out the most pointless differences are not arguing anything.
To be fair, when a peeping tom get's caught he usually ends up humiliated for the whole town to see, at least it happened to a couple of guys where I grew up.
Killing_Joke
Member
I feel bad for them. But good lord did they live up to the hype.
None of that matters at all. Having to take less risks doesn't make it better at all. Peeping Toms are often not caught. These irrelevant counter-points that do nothing but point out the most pointless differences are not arguing anything.
I said nothing of having to take less risks.
I said you are creating a situation where you are at risk of making someone feel threatened.
Please read the posts you are responding to, particularly if you are going to be so insulting.
I'm not arguing law at all. Arguments of morality are not limited to the scope of law. It may make you feel better that you cannot be legally prosecuted, but that is one crappy moral argument.
Morality is a bases of opinion, what one person thinks is moral, another may not. So this is fruitless effort, not everyone thinks the same thing. So stop jumping down people's throats that don't agree with you.
To what point, exactly, is that being fair?To be fair, when a peeping tom get's caught he usually ends up humiliated for the whole town to see, at least it happened to a couple of guys where I grew up.
Look, if you want to beat your meat while looking at pics of people who didn't really want you random internet cretins to be feeding the chickens while looking at those pics because they thought they were private then that's copacetic; but you are still a degenerate in my book, just like all those dickwads spanking the monkey to non consensual upskirts.
lol.
Death Metalist
Member
Let me break this down for you. Peeping tom is a crime, looking at leaked photos online is not.
That's because of the source being responsible and not the people that looked at the damn photos. I didn't even know about shit or see until one of my friends sent me pics while telling me all about this damn fiasco. At this moment everyone who didn't or did want to see, saw a picture at-least.
You've returned to the weakest counter argument of "BUT ITS ALL OPINION!"Morality is a bases of opinion, what one person thinks is moral, another may not. So this is fruitless effort, not everyone thinks the same thing. So stop jumping down people's throats that don't agree with you.
I already told you I am not arguing any fact, but making an argument. You know this.
PHOENIXZERO
Member
Amazing how things have changed in the 20 or so years since this really became a thing with the Pamela Anderson/Tommy Lee sex tape.
There was not a single insult in that post.I said nothing of having to take less risks.
I said you are creating a situation where you are at risk of making someone feel threatened.
Please read the posts you are responding to, particularly if you are going to be so insulting.
You've returned to the weakest counter argument of "BUT ITS ALL OPINION!"
I already told you I am not arguing any fact, but making an argument. You know this.
You're also being completely unreasonable about it. There's a reason you're getting quoted to death in this thread...
Abstruse Moose
Member
You've returned to the weakest counter argument of "BUT ITS ALL OPINION!"
I already told you I am not arguing any fact, but making an argument. You know this.
Passing judgment =/= making an argument.
SteveWinwood
Member
Amazing how things have changed in the 20 or so years since this really became a thing with the Pamela Anderson/Tommy Lee sex tape.
longer than that
playboy has bought photos of people before and used them
vanna white had pictures of herself published and those were taken by her boyfriend, for her boyfriend only
longer than that
playboy has bought photos of people before and used them
vanna white had pictures of herself published and those were taken by her boyfriend, for her boyfriend only
How did that turn out in the end?
jim-jam bongs
Member
Just a reminder that what is immoral isn't always illegal, and what is legal isn't always moral. I don't believe in a universal morality, but I certainly think that a moral code which is based on not hurting other people is the best moral code. Jerk your gerkin if you absolutely must, but accept that you are feeding off the pain of another human being while you do so.
Winterfang
Banned
To what point, exactly, is that being fair?
What's wrong with you? I don't understand your question, ''to be fair'' Is a common phrase, anyway. What I'm trying to say is that I understand your point but being a peeping tom does carries more risk than watching some random pictures someone else out online, even if like you say they are hardly caught.
Guys guys, can we stop arguing for one second and come together on the central agreement that 4Chan is creepy?
Yeah 4Chan is doing some weird stuff lately. First the Tumblr stuff, now this. The hell's going on? Lol
Winterfang
Banned
Yeah 4Chan is doing some weird stuff lately. First the Tumblr stuff, now this. The hell's going on? Lol
Is not anything new, they had actually being low key for years. I guess they had calmed down.
Saying "to be fair" is saying I haven't been fair in my assessment. You've added that peeping Toms carry more risk. I've said this as well. But that point doesn't really change the dynamic of the argument. My very argument is that people that search these pics are equivalent to lazy peeping Toms who are only not peeping Toms because they are afraid of the risks.What's wrong with you? I don't understand your question, ''to be fair'' Is a common phrase, anyway. What I'm trying to say is that I understand your point but being a peeping tom does carries more risk than watching some random pictures someone else out online, even if like you say they are hardly caught.
SteveWinwood
Member
How did that turn out in the end?
She sued them.
Then dropped the suite.
I don't know if it was because there wasn't a leg to stand on legally or just because she was tired of the press.
They were her ex's pictures and he sold them was Playboy's understanding and they were published. They didn't need her permission they thought.
hodayathink
Member
longer than that
playboy has bought photos of people before and used them
vanna white had pictures of herself published and those were taken by her boyfriend, for her boyfriend only
Hustler published pictures of Jackie O from like the 60s or 70s (though, to be fair, those were paparazzi level shots of her in public). The desire for these images isn't something that's cropped up in the past 20 years. Just the access to them.
There was not a single insult in that post.
I said you were being insulting, it's not the same as saying their is an insult in the post.
You most definitely are being insulting. Telling people their arguments aren't arguments is insulting. Completely ignoring my actual argument is also insulting.
Not at all. People just don't like it when people call a spade a spade and it reveals how gross their actions are. I have no interest in using kids gloves or beating around the bush when it comes to describing people that care more about jerking off than respecting people's most private and intimate moments.You're also being completely unreasonable about it. There's a reason you're getting quoted to death in this thread...
I said you were being insulting.
You most definitely are. Telling people their arguments aren't arguments is insulting.
This is the weakest of arguments. You know this!
Just a reminder that what is immoral isn't always illegal, and what is legal isn't always moral. I don't believe in a universal morality, but I certainly think that a moral code which is based on not hurting other people is the best moral code. Jerk your gerkin if you absolutely must, but accept that you are feeding off the pain of another human being while you do so.
I think you are angry at the wrong people. Be angry at the hacker or the people who are spreading the pics all over the internet. The people jerking off to the pics are innocent bystanders. Whatever guilt they might feel most probably fuels their fetish anyways.
No, it absolutely is not. I can say your argument is poor, or even terrible and it is not an insult from an argumentative stand point. I made no claims about you, only the flaws of your argument.I said you were being insulting.
You most definitely are. Telling people their arguments aren't arguments is insulting.
Saying "to be fair" is saying I haven't been fair in my assessment. You've added that peeping Toms carry more risk. I've said this as well. But that point doesn't really change the dynamic of the argument. My very argument is that people that search these pics are equivalent to lazy peeping Toms who are only not peeping Toms because they are afraid of the risks.
Complete bullshit. Human curiosity man. I might be curious about what's in my neighbors house. I could break in, or I could view what's inside via being notified that there are some pics leaked online. To you this is the same? Wtf?
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Complete bullshit. Human curiosity man. I might be curious about what's in my neighbors house. I could break in, or I could view what's inside via being notified that there are some pics leaked online. To you this is the same? Wtf?
Would you download a car?
Yes, I will continue to flatly call out every attempt you make to obfuscate the argument. You do know better than that.This is the weakest of arguments. You know this!
This is like the perfect storm of:
-America's puritanical values and general inability to deal healthily with nudity or sexuality
-the ridiculous glorification and worship of celebrity by most of society
-the internet's ability to distribute information to the entire world, be it for good or ill
Seriously, it´s fascinating in a way.
And I feel seriously dumb, all the time I saw "JLaw" I thought it was Jennifer Lopez's new nickname or something and I was kind of surprised she would be involved in this since she has a pretty long career and has managed to keep her private scandals, well, private. But no, its Lawrence.
It makes me understand this whole reaction on the internet a bit better.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.