Actress Leslie Jones Hacked, Private Info Leaked

[Neo Bavaria]

Her passport and ID could also be seen by any person on the street. Come back to me when her SSN was leaked or her bank PIN

I see you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how identity theft works.

I'm not stupid, I understand that there are more forms of identity theft than stealing cash out of an ATM account, my point is that just releasing pictures of someone's so-and-so is not the same as actually stealing their identity. Now, there are obviously blatant ways to use an SSN or a bank PIN, but it's not like they released a blueprint for making a fake passport or a fake ID card. You can't just photoshop your face onto a passport and print off a new one, to commit identity theft through ID card or passport you have to actually physically possess those two items so that you can directly modify the information on them.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

You're right. Let's stop arresting rapists.

Strawmanning is fun, isn't it?

I never suggested it, I was trying to say that the lawlessness of other crimes has made it decline.

One school of thought holds that rape has declined for the same reasons that other violent offenses have: a reduction in the lawlessness associated with crack cocaine, a shrinking population of young people and an increased number of criminals in jail.

The argument seemed to be that cyber crime doesn't decrease when you arrest hackers, with the implication being that arresting them was a waste of time and resources. The comparison to arresting rapists was brought up, then it was noted that the number of rapes had gone down, and it was pointed out by you that numerous factors could have contributed to that, meaning that the arrest rate wasn't a significant factor. If we continue the parallel, then this would mean that there's little point to arresting rapists, as there will continue to be rapists even when some are arrested, and only social factors will influence their number, much as it's useless to arrest hackers.

[Neo Bavaria]

Let's tell a story, okay?

You're Paul and you live in New York. One day, you come home and the room next to yours is cordoned off by police tape. Turns out some guy was stabbed and his apartment raided. Guy's dead, gone, and now your block is under surveillance and you've been asked to testify. You're so stressed out, so you check in with your friend Peter to vent a little about what just happened, and your friend Peter says "Yeah, I know what you mean, I keep on having to file noise complaints against my next door neighbor because he plays his stereo too loud. The police never do anything even though he's disturbing the peace". The long and short of it is, that we are presently in a crisis scenario where any day the director of the DHS could wake up to a phone call asking him to make his way to the nearest fortified bunker because there is a terror threat or a dirty bomb just went off. Now, at the end of the day, do you think that he's going to be able to live with himself, let alone keep his job, when he wasted Department resources going after the guy who leaked nudes of an actress instead of aiding an investigation into domestic terrorism?

Again:

This was a federal crime that involved identity theft.

The federal agency tasked with investigating cyber crime, especially when it involves fraud or identity theft, is doing so.

I suspect that if there is an increase in terrorist chatter, this case will be bumped down the list of priorities.

Fact is, any competent police agency will be able to investigate both murders AND noise complaints.

As I stated in my other post, you cannot commit identity theft with a picture of an ID card or a picture of a passport. You must have physical possession of those two items in order to perform the needed actions.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I see you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how identity theft works.

I'm not stupid, I understand that there are more forms of identity theft than stealing cash out of an ATM account, my point is that just releasing pictures of someone's so-and-so is not the same as actually stealing their identity. Now, there are obviously blatant ways to use an SSN or a bank PIN, but it's not like they released a blueprint for making a fake passport or a fake ID card. You can't just photoshop your face onto a passport and print off a new one, to commit identity theft through ID card or passport you have to actually physically possess those two items so that you can directly modify the information on them.

No, but you can use the information on someone's ID card and/or passport to cause all sorts of issues for a person, and find out even more information about them.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Again:

This was a federal crime that involved identity theft.

The federal agency tasked with investigating cyber crime, especially when it involves fraud or identity theft, is doing so.

I suspect that if there is an increase in terrorist chatter, this case will be bumped down the list of priorities.

Fact is, any competent police agency will be able to investigate both murders AND noise complaints.

As I stated in my other post, you cannot commit identity theft with a picture of an ID card or a picture of a passport. You must have physical possession of those two items in order to perform the needed actions.

You can use the information to find out further information, which in turn can cause major issues.

[Shonburg]

Again:

This was a federal crime that involved identity theft.

The federal agency tasked with investigating cyber crime, especially when it involves fraud or identity theft, is doing so.

I suspect that if there is an increase in terrorist chatter, this case will be bumped down the list of priorities.

Fact is, any competent police agency will be able to investigate both murders AND noise complaints.

As I stated in my other post, you cannot commit identity theft with a picture of an ID card or a picture of a passport. You must have physical possession of those two items in order to perform the needed actions.

Not particularly, passports are harder to fake then ID's (Which are pretty easy to make fakes of at home with a card printer, even with just a picture of the ID), but not especially hard for a dedicated identity thief/black market seller.

[Minzerland]

Strawmanning is fun, isn't it?

I never suggested it, I was trying to say that the lawlessness of other crimes has made it decline.

One school of thought holds that rape has declined for the same reasons that other violent offenses have: a reduction in the lawlessness associated with crack cocaine, a shrinking population of young people and an increased number of criminals in jail.

The argument seemed to be that cyber crime doesn't decrease when you arrest hackers, with the implication being that arresting them was a waste of time and resources. The comparison to arresting rapists was brought up, then it was noted that the number of rapes had gone down, and it was pointed out by you that numerous factors could have contributed to that, meaning that the arrest rate wasn't a significant factor. If we continue the parallel, then this would mean that there's little point to arresting rapists, as there will continue to be rapists even when some are arrested, and only social factors will influence their number, much as it's useless to arrest hackers.

That is still a strawman nonetheless, precisely because I've never made that argument.

By the same token. What is the point in arresting rapists then? They'll still exist, social attitudes will still play a major factor in how many there are. Why is their any point in doing so besides morals?

[Neo Bavaria]

Not particularly, passports are harder to fake then ID's (Which are pretty easy to make fakes of at home with a card printer, even with just a picture of the ID), but not especially hard for a dedicated identity thief/black market seller.

While this is true, this is usually prosecuted separately from someone who just releases pictures. I mean, I know it's not the same caliber but you wouldn't arrest a kid for gross negligence because he gave out his parents' credit card information to a stranger thus allowing them to steal their credit. Unless you can actually prove that this guy (or girl) was working with a fraudster, the worse you can get him on is gross negligence for releasing the info

You can use the information to find out further information, which in turn can cause major issues.

Such as?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

The argument seemed to be that cyber crime doesn't decrease when you arrest hackers, with the implication being that arresting them was a waste of time and resources. The comparison to arresting rapists was brought up, then it was noted that the number of rapes had gone down, and it was pointed out by you that numerous factors could have contributed to that, meaning that the arrest rate wasn't a significant factor. If we continue the parallel, then this would mean that there's little point to arresting rapists, as there will continue to be rapists even when some are arrested, and only social factors will influence their number, much as it's useless to arrest hackers.

That is still a strawman because I've never made that argument.

What is the point in arresting rapists then? They'll still exist, social attitudes will still play a major factor in how many there are. Why is their any point in doing so besides morals?

Well, that did seem to be your implication, whether you realized it or not. If you want to accuse me of a fallacy, reducto ad absurdum comes closer to what I was engaging in.

[Shonburg]

Not particularly, passports are harder to fake then ID's (Which are pretty easy to make fakes of at home with a card printer, even with just a picture of the ID), but not especially hard for a dedicated identity thief/black market seller.

While this is true, this is usually prosecuted separately from someone who just releases pictures. I mean, I know it's not the same caliber but you wouldn't arrest a kid for gross negligence because he gave out his parents' credit card information to a stranger thus allowing them to steal their credit. Unless you can actually prove that this guy (or girl) was working with a fraudster, the worse you can get him on is gross negligence for releasing the info

You can use the information to find out further information, which in turn can cause major issues.

Such as?

In this case, releasing private photos of something like identification purposefully with intent to harm (which I would argue is absolutely clear in this instance), is serious offense.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Not particularly, passports are harder to fake then ID's (Which are pretty easy to make fakes of at home with a card printer, even with just a picture of the ID), but not especially hard for a dedicated identity thief/black market seller.

While this is true, this is usually prosecuted separately from someone who just releases pictures. I mean, I know it's not the same caliber but you wouldn't arrest a kid for gross negligence because he gave out his parents' credit card information to a stranger thus allowing them to steal their credit. Unless you can actually prove that this guy (or girl) was working with a fraudster, the worse you can get him on is gross negligence for releasing the info

You can use the information to find out further information, which in turn can cause major issues.

Such as?

Uh-uh. No. Not even in a telegram. That conversation either leads to me going through the details of how to commit criminal fraud, which I suspect that the moderators might have a wee issue with, or it leads to me clamming up so that I don't say anything more. I'll save time and choose the latter right now.

[Neo Bavaria]

While this is true, this is usually prosecuted separately from someone who just releases pictures. I mean, I know it's not the same caliber but you wouldn't arrest a kid for gross negligence because he gave out his parents' credit card information to a stranger thus allowing them to steal their credit. Unless you can actually prove that this guy (or girl) was working with a fraudster, the worse you can get him on is gross negligence for releasing the info

Such as?

Uh-uh. No. Not even in a telegram. That conversation either leads to me going through the details of how to commit criminal fraud, which I suspect that the moderators might have a wee issue with, or it leads to me clamming up so that I don't say anything more. I'll save time and choose the latter right now.

I'm not entirely sure but it sounds an awful lot like you're trying to disguise the fact that you basically pulled that out of your ass.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Uh-uh. No. Not even in a telegram. That conversation either leads to me going through the details of how to commit criminal fraud, which I suspect that the moderators might have a wee issue with, or it leads to me clamming up so that I don't say anything more. I'll save time and choose the latter right now.

I'm not entirely sure but it sounds an awful lot like you're trying to disguise the fact that you basically pulled that out of your ass.

I am absolutely comfortable with it if that's your conclusion.

[Neo Bavaria]

While this is true, this is usually prosecuted separately from someone who just releases pictures. I mean, I know it's not the same caliber but you wouldn't arrest a kid for gross negligence because he gave out his parents' credit card information to a stranger thus allowing them to steal their credit. Unless you can actually prove that this guy (or girl) was working with a fraudster, the worse you can get him on is gross negligence for releasing the info

Such as?

In this case, releasing private photos of something like identification purposefully with intent to harm (which I would argue is absolutely clear in this instance), is serious offense.

But you actually have to prove that there was intent to harm, which is exceptionally difficult. It's a Capone Case: everyone knows it's true but there's no evidence. Best they would get them on would be gross negligence for exposing that information as part of a leak that was predominantly something else.

[Minzerland]

That is still a strawman because I've never made that argument.

What is the point in arresting rapists then? They'll still exist, social attitudes will still play a major factor in how many there are. Why is their any point in doing so besides morals?

Well, that did seem to be your implication, whether you realized it or not. If you want to accuse me of a fallacy, reducto ad absurdum comes closer to what I was engaging in.

It wasn't, I assure you. Just because something continues to exist doesn't mean it shouldn't be minimalised, just because cancer exists doesn't mean it doesn't deserve to be cured.

Yes it probably would, but nonetheless it was a strawman.

[Neo Bavaria]

I'm not entirely sure but it sounds an awful lot like you're trying to disguise the fact that you basically pulled that out of your ass.

I am absolutely comfortable with it if that's your conclusion.

Good for you, m80

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Well, that did seem to be your implication, whether you realized it or not. If you want to accuse me of a fallacy, reducto ad absurdum comes closer to what I was engaging in.

It wasn't, I assure you. Just because something continues to exist doesn't mean it shouldn't be minimalised, just because cancer exists doesn't mean it doesn't deserve to be cured.

Yes it probably would, but nonetheless it was a strawman.

I wasn't trying to say that that was the actual argument that you were making, but rather that that's where it seemed to lead to when taken to a logical conclusion. However, I may have misinterpreted your initial point.

[Minzerland]

It wasn't, I assure you. Just because something continues to exist doesn't mean it shouldn't be minimalised, just because cancer exists doesn't mean it doesn't deserve to be cured.

Yes it probably would, but nonetheless it was a strawman.

I wasn't trying to say that that was the actual argument that you were making, but rather that that's where it seemed to lead to when taken to a logical conclusion. However, I may have misinterpreted your initial point.

That is understandable; my posts aren't the clearest and can be misconstrued accidentally. My original point was , from Shonburg's article, that rape isn't declining because of rape being a crime, rather because social attitudes and the decreasing lawlessness of crack cocaine. Rape being a crime may deter some but not the majority.

[Ethel mermania]

The investigation is now being done by. DHS.

Apparently they think the hack came from Japan

http://gothamist.com/2016/08/25/homelan ... _jones.php

[Katganistan]

My opening posts were just being edgy for shits and giggles. I got more serious over on as I put my two cents in.

Also

Dicks out for Harambe.

already did the harambe meme

Do not call me kiddo.

kiddo

*** Warned for flamebaiting ***

[Katganistan]

So if someone capitalizes on the doxx and injures or kills her you'd call that fair retribution as well?

If someone (Hacked Victim) commits a crime (Association in the making of the terrible movie) then that would possibly leave them open to "Vigilante justice" as I would call it, it's fair game now.

*** Warned for wishing death/harm ***

[Nariterrr]

I wonder if this was related to Milo...?

[Katganistan]

You really should look up the rules to this forum, as it is your actions can get you warned or banned from this website

You needn't worry about me, I know when to go and stop, I've been doing this for a while.

*** Warned for admission of trolling. *** Now that you've confirmed it, don't expect to be given the benefit of the doubt.

[Kola Republic]

I wonder if this was related to Milo...?

They all decided to join in on the racist rhetorical shitflinging at a black comedienne because she participated in a reboot of one of their favorite movies.
Whiny asswipes.

[Katganistan]

Shrug I already reported them. Since they seem to be unable to debate without trolling I see no reason to pay any more attention to them. They are not worth my time.

As to the OP, find a prosecute the offenders.

you say that like you are important

*** 1 day ban for flamebaiting repeatedly ***