5 ms·

There is always going to be a portion of the population that are just users of technology, without any understanding of how it works. Consequently, there are go

by Zafira 8y ago

There is always going to be a portion of the population that are just users of technology, without any understanding of how it works. Consequently, there are going to be people who are going to feel violated, confused and angered by stunts like this. I don't think there was any malicious intent by the Hacker Giraffe, but I doubt they thought this through. One was bound to encounter a fair amount of systems owned by not-so-tech-literate persons who would react in the worst way possible to stunts like the ones they did. I think some of the real questions that events like this raise are: * How do reduce the technological illiteracy in the population? * How do we develop polices to ensure that these devices that are being sold to millions of people are properly protected?

watwut 8y ago
Technological illiteracy is red herring. The actual issues are lack of security on the devices and lack of boundaries on side of some tech and tech-adjacent subcultures. The third issue are disproportionate penalties, they are really too big now. People are angry about analogical non-tech "pranks" when those happen too. It is convenient to chulk anger of prank target to his own faults, but no, they are not as cool as you think you are and people in general don't like pranks. And I am blaming culture instead of teenagers, because you have adults like PewDiePie saying this "I love it. Please keep it up, just don’t do anything illegal, because that will look bad on me—that’s the only reason—that will look bad on PewDiePie". What exactly does teenager hears there and would the teenager in that culture hear the opposite clear "it is illegal" and "don't do it, boundaries of others" messages?
- who-knows95 8y ago
  i agree tech illiteracy is the red herring, the fact this vulnerability affected so many people, points to the issue being with the manufacturer, designing and coding this, without consideration to the security. i think the "attack" they did is pretty perfectly grey hat, expose a weakness to the user with a "how-to-fix" guide. (i should note, i'm talking about the chrome hack.)
  - isostatic 8y ago
    One prank would be egging cars. Clearly it's the car companies fault for building cars that have paint ruined if you don't wash it quickly. Another would be putting a potato in the exhaust -- why don't they build potato proof exhausts? You can let car tyres down without causing an ounce of damage, what a hoot. It's the car company's fault that so many cars are susceptible.
    - who-knows95 8y ago
      sorry, i guess companies shouldn't worry about writing code or making products that have vulnerability built in. i'm sure you don't want secure strong products.
      - watwut 8y ago
        Of course they should. And we all on this forum know small internet devices are full of vulnerabilities. We also all know smart homes and such are security disaster waiting for happen. That does not mean it is for me to take advantage of that for pranks, fun or profit. Just as we should not demonize acts like this as something more dangerous then it is, we should not add naive feel good interpretations that makes them misunderstood heroes.
        who-knows95 8y ago
        the chrome cast hack, along with the printer hack aren't pranks, for fun or profit? they did them to expose a weakness to the user so they could fix it. if white hat is employed by companies, and black hat is working for malicious gain. their actions fall squarely into grey hat. i'm not calling them saints, but it confuses me that anyone would have a issue with their actions? can you explain why they don't fit the model of grey hat? what they do wrong?
        watwut 8y ago
        They are pranks for fun. I don't buy "to expose vulnerability so that users fix it" explanation. I think that what they did crossed the boundaries of other people. It did not caused much harm, just like walking around directors office without permission and without taking away something. I don't care about hat color games. That just serves to obfuscate issues. Also, it was illegal and put themselves in danger for that reason. So PewDiePie along with all adults who talk from both sides of their mounth in front of audience they intentionally build from young inexperienced impulsive people can stuff themselves too. "This illegal thing is totally cool I love you, I mean don't do anything illegal, I love you for doing that ilegal thing" is mastery of double message and manipulation.
- dbuder 8y ago
  "because that will look bad on me—that’s the only reason—that will look bad on PewDiePie" He was being sarcastic when he said this bit, have you thought of working for Vox?

by Zafira 8y ago

watwut 8y ago

Technological illiteracy is red herring. The actual issues are lack of security on the devices and lack of boundaries on side of some tech and tech-adjacent subcultures. The third issue are disproportionate penalties, they are really too big now. People are angry about analogical non-tech "pranks" when those happen too. It is convenient to chulk anger of prank target to his own faults, but no, they are not as cool as you think you are and people in general don't like pranks. And I am blaming culture instead of teenagers, because you have adults like PewDiePie saying this "I love it. Please keep it up, just don’t do anything illegal, because that will look bad on me—that’s the only reason—that will look bad on PewDiePie". What exactly does teenager hears there and would the teenager in that culture hear the opposite clear "it is illegal" and "don't do it, boundaries of others" messages?

who-knows95 8y ago
i agree tech illiteracy is the red herring, the fact this vulnerability affected so many people, points to the issue being with the manufacturer, designing and coding this, without consideration to the security. i think the "attack" they did is pretty perfectly grey hat, expose a weakness to the user with a "how-to-fix" guide. (i should note, i'm talking about the chrome hack.)
- isostatic 8y ago
  One prank would be egging cars. Clearly it's the car companies fault for building cars that have paint ruined if you don't wash it quickly. Another would be putting a potato in the exhaust -- why don't they build potato proof exhausts? You can let car tyres down without causing an ounce of damage, what a hoot. It's the car company's fault that so many cars are susceptible.
  - who-knows95 8y ago
    sorry, i guess companies shouldn't worry about writing code or making products that have vulnerability built in. i'm sure you don't want secure strong products.
    - watwut 8y ago
      Of course they should. And we all on this forum know small internet devices are full of vulnerabilities. We also all know smart homes and such are security disaster waiting for happen. That does not mean it is for me to take advantage of that for pranks, fun or profit. Just as we should not demonize acts like this as something more dangerous then it is, we should not add naive feel good interpretations that makes them misunderstood heroes.
      - who-knows95 8y ago
        the chrome cast hack, along with the printer hack aren't pranks, for fun or profit? they did them to expose a weakness to the user so they could fix it. if white hat is employed by companies, and black hat is working for malicious gain. their actions fall squarely into grey hat. i'm not calling them saints, but it confuses me that anyone would have a issue with their actions? can you explain why they don't fit the model of grey hat? what they do wrong?
        watwut 8y ago
        They are pranks for fun. I don't buy "to expose vulnerability so that users fix it" explanation. I think that what they did crossed the boundaries of other people. It did not caused much harm, just like walking around directors office without permission and without taking away something. I don't care about hat color games. That just serves to obfuscate issues. Also, it was illegal and put themselves in danger for that reason. So PewDiePie along with all adults who talk from both sides of their mounth in front of audience they intentionally build from young inexperienced impulsive people can stuff themselves too. "This illegal thing is totally cool I love you, I mean don't do anything illegal, I love you for doing that ilegal thing" is mastery of double message and manipulation.
dbuder 8y ago
"because that will look bad on me—that’s the only reason—that will look bad on PewDiePie" He was being sarcastic when he said this bit, have you thought of working for Vox?