4 ms·

There's a term for this. "Victim Blaming". Its also the same kind of excuses heard when a woman was dressing well and gets raped. Then the refrain is "she was

There's a term for this. "Victim Blaming". Its also the same kind of excuses heard when a woman was dressing well and gets raped. Then the refrain is "she was asking for it", or "she deserved it with the way she dressed". Notice that if a front door is unlocked and someone goes inside, its still trespassing. Just because its easier to commit a crime doesnt make the thing not a crime. (Please note, that I'm making this argument in good faith. I'm sure many here have digitally trespassed on others' computer systems without permission. It's not "trolling"; its a straight-up violation of the CFAA.)

allknowingfrog 7y ago
It's still trespassing, but it isn't breaking and entering. Visiting a public URL isn't hacking.
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  That's definitely still to be argued. I would have a reasonable amount of privacy if I used a random GUID to provide a hidden link. In that implementation, the link is a username-less password. That's how Craigslist, Pastebin, and email resets for all sorts of services work. And that too goes to the heart of passwords are inherently obfuscation. But that's a discussion for another time.
new2628 7y ago
You make an interesting parallel, but the fact that you call out trespassing through an unlocked door as a crime on a website called hacker news is remarkable.
- jnbiche 7y ago
  Yeah, not that kind of hacker.
- belltaco 7y ago
  No. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_culture
aivisol 7y ago
Yes, but you still don't leave your door open when leaving your house even when everybody perfectly knows that trespassing is a crime.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
Slikey 7y ago
"Its also the same kind of excuses heard when a woman was dressing well and gets raped. " Are you high? This is in an entirely different ballpark. You are not seriously equating some trolling and digital damage with the violation of a human body, are you? Obviously if there are serious consequences there needs to be a deterrant, but this is some trolling on the internet, not rape. We are "victim blaming" people for severe neglect all the time. Look at Facebook and other services if user data is stolen. It's called neglect or do you say "oh the hacker shouldn't have stolen the data, not Facebook's fault".
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  > Are you high? Really now? That's uncalled for. > You are not seriously equating some trolling and digital damage with the violation of a human body, are you? I am not equating digital trespass with rape. However I am comparing that victim blaming has been used to deflect both, and in the rape, victim blaming is finally rejected as any sort of valid response. > Obviously if there are serious consequences there needs to be a deterrant, but this is some trolling on the internet, not rape. That makes trolling sound awfully close to "locker-room talk". > We are "victim blaming" people for severe neglect all the time. Look at Facebook and other services if user data is stolen. It's called neglect or do you say "oh the hacker shouldn't have stolen the data, not Facebook's fault". You use the word "neglect". Keep in mind that neglect of a dependent is a crime (indiana https://www.in.gov/meth/files/IC_35-46-1-4_Neglect_of_a_Dependent.pdf https://www.in.gov/meth/files/IC_35-46-1-4_Neglect_of_a_Depe... ). And that definition of neglect doesn't match up with yours in much of any ways. However it is neglect of a dependent if school admins allow sex crimes to happen against public school students in their stead.... And FB is its own problem. Please stop trying to move goalposts.
runawaybottle 7y ago
This is a classic case of false equivalence. The door trespassing thing seems like a clear straw man. Where is that logical fallacies infographic when you need it.
ryandrake 7y ago
Sometimes blame can be shared among more than just one. If I go run around on the highway and someone hits me, is it purely the fault of the driver that hit me? Is it victim blaming to say I should not have run around on the highway?

allknowingfrog 7y ago

It's still trespassing, but it isn't breaking and entering. Visiting a public URL isn't hacking.

crankylinuxuser 7y ago
That's definitely still to be argued. I would have a reasonable amount of privacy if I used a random GUID to provide a hidden link. In that implementation, the link is a username-less password. That's how Craigslist, Pastebin, and email resets for all sorts of services work. And that too goes to the heart of passwords are inherently obfuscation. But that's a discussion for another time.

new2628 7y ago

You make an interesting parallel, but the fact that you call out trespassing through an unlocked door as a crime on a website called hacker news is remarkable.

jnbiche 7y ago
Yeah, not that kind of hacker.
belltaco 7y ago
No. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_culture

aivisol 7y ago

Yes, but you still don't leave your door open when leaving your house even when everybody perfectly knows that trespassing is a crime.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

Slikey 7y ago

"Its also the same kind of excuses heard when a woman was dressing well and gets raped. " Are you high? This is in an entirely different ballpark. You are not seriously equating some trolling and digital damage with the violation of a human body, are you? Obviously if there are serious consequences there needs to be a deterrant, but this is some trolling on the internet, not rape. We are "victim blaming" people for severe neglect all the time. Look at Facebook and other services if user data is stolen. It's called neglect or do you say "oh the hacker shouldn't have stolen the data, not Facebook's fault".

crankylinuxuser 7y ago
> Are you high? Really now? That's uncalled for. > You are not seriously equating some trolling and digital damage with the violation of a human body, are you? I am not equating digital trespass with rape. However I am comparing that victim blaming has been used to deflect both, and in the rape, victim blaming is finally rejected as any sort of valid response. > Obviously if there are serious consequences there needs to be a deterrant, but this is some trolling on the internet, not rape. That makes trolling sound awfully close to "locker-room talk". > We are "victim blaming" people for severe neglect all the time. Look at Facebook and other services if user data is stolen. It's called neglect or do you say "oh the hacker shouldn't have stolen the data, not Facebook's fault". You use the word "neglect". Keep in mind that neglect of a dependent is a crime (indiana https://www.in.gov/meth/files/IC_35-46-1-4_Neglect_of_a_Dependent.pdf https://www.in.gov/meth/files/IC_35-46-1-4_Neglect_of_a_Depe... ). And that definition of neglect doesn't match up with yours in much of any ways. However it is neglect of a dependent if school admins allow sex crimes to happen against public school students in their stead.... And FB is its own problem. Please stop trying to move goalposts.

runawaybottle 7y ago

This is a classic case of false equivalence. The door trespassing thing seems like a clear straw man. Where is that logical fallacies infographic when you need it.

ryandrake 7y ago

Sometimes blame can be shared among more than just one. If I go run around on the highway and someone hits me, is it purely the fault of the driver that hit me? Is it victim blaming to say I should not have run around on the highway?