7 ms·

It continues to baffle me that so many people are assigning substantial blame to Sony. Yes, their executives were uncouth in their private e-mails. However, th

by skuhn 12y ago

It continues to baffle me that so many people are assigning substantial blame to Sony. Yes, their executives were uncouth in their private e-mails. However, these e-mails were literally stolen from them and made available publicly in a campaign designed to embarrass them after they refused to cave to initial blackmail demands. There is no Pentagon Papers conspiracy here that the press needed to expose for the public good -- they're just airing dirty laundry and furthering the ends of criminals. Yes, Sony had lax computer security and they made it a lot easier than it should have been to abscond with internal data. However, it is so much harder to protect against a targeted attack and (I don't believe) the method of the attack has been disclosed, if it is even completely understood yet. They should be ashamed and apologetic about their security practices, but that doesn't mean they as much as published this information themselves. Yes, The Interview doesn't look particularly great, and I didn't plan to see it. Yet it should absolutely be allowed to exist and to be publicly released. It is a comedy. It is not "an act of war" as Sony's attackers claim. The existence of this film did not harm real people, that is entirely a result of the extreme overreaction by the people behind these attacks. I absolutely think that Sony is being blamed for their victimization, and I don't agree with it. It would be terrible to be in their position, and I don't think any company who operates within the laws of their country should be subject to any of: 1. A loss of over $40 million 2. A smear campaign using their own stolen, private correspondence 3. Release or misuse of all manner of employee personal information, SSNs, etc. 4. And all of the other things they're dealing with right now If you place value in free speech, privacy rights and the arts I don't see how you can side against Sony here. I don't care if it's "terrorism" or not, the people involved in these attacks are certainly criminals.

joeyh 12y ago
"operates within the laws of their country" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit Doesn't excuse others illegal activities, but it certianly makes it easier to feel a certian level of schadenfreude in this case.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  That was a decade ago, they paid out several million to settle the matter, and the actual impact of it was virtually nil. The endless harping on this transgression has reached the point of being posturing rather than substantive criticism.
  - revscat 12y ago
    Possibly. The leaked emails have definitively shown that Sony is philosophically still very much the same company today that they were they released the rootkit. Ergo, the rootkit still holds up as an accurate symbol of Sony's culture, specifically their arrogant belief that the end justifies the means.
- skuhn 12y ago
  I thought about mentioning the root kit as well, since a lot of people get schadenfreude-y over it. I greatly disliked the root kit and that whole approach to treating your customers like criminals (d/b/a DRM), but I don't see this attack as giving Sony their just desserts. The root kit was attached to Sony BMG's products (CDs), and this current attack was against Sony Pictures. Sony is a giant conglomerate with 140,000 employees and who knows how many child companies. To top it off, Sony BMG was a 50/50 joint venture with Bertlesmann. The root kits first appeared on BMG CDs, suggesting that it originated at Bertlesmann and not Sony (although I don't know that and it doesn't excuse Sony anyway). While it's hard to measure the impact that the root kit had on Sony BMG's customers, it's safe to assume that most of them did not have their personal data disseminated all over the Internet and in newspapers. Whereas that's the reality Sony Pictures and their employees are currently dealing with. It also happened eight years ago. While not everyone may forget or forgive, I think it's more productive to respond to the way Sony treats me as a customer today versus a decade ago. That's how you encourage better behavior from a company, by rewarding them for doing a better job.
paulhauggis 12y ago
Nobody cares about privacy anymore. The mainstream media spreads around private conversations and emails..and people are getting fired over it. I can bet if I got the private emails from some key CNN reporters and spread it around on social media, their tune would change. I would actually like to see this. I laugh when people in the mainstream media talk about how bad it is that the government is spying on us. Why does it even matter anymore? 1984 is here. It has nothing to do with the government and everything to do with social media. It's so easy to spread lies around as fact on social media...and people believe it. Just look at all of the false information spread around during the Ferguson protests..which people still believe to this day. Even Obama admit to swaying public opinion using social media and data mining.
- bdamm 12y ago
  Any president that did not sway public opinion using media would not be doing their job. Manipulation of the media is a basic tool for anyone in politics, including the good guys. Media is a tool.
  - paulhauggis 12y ago
    "Any president that did not sway public opinion using media would not be doing their job" Right. Lying to get your point across "Media is a tool." The only tools are the people that believe the lies of our politicians...which seems to be a vast majority of the US population. "including the good guys" The problem is that people don't respond to good things. To win, you need to smear your opponent and destroy all credibility. Anybody who does this isn't a "good guy", which leads only to one conclusion..
- skuhn 12y ago
  Gawker in particular has really turned my stomach with their extreme dedication to exploring every possible facet of the leaked e-mails. Yes, they're a tabloid, but rumors and tips are one thing and stolen, personal communication is another. I don't know how they would react if every e-mail sent or received by their mail server was made public and dissected. Maybe they would just laugh it off, but I'm sure there are a few they might prefer to hold on to.
waps 12y ago
This sounds the lawyers argument. Something is illegal so it shouldn't be done, and you get to get to act as if it didn't happen at all. Anyone who thinks different, gets to pay restitution. The thing to remember here is that law is a fiction, enforced by the state. I don't think anyone is "siding against Sony", they just 1) Realize that if this is indeed a nation-state attacking, the perpetrators are beyond the reach of justice. So law really is a fiction in this case. 2) Are calling out Sony, not for being in the wrong, but for being stupid.
- skuhn 12y ago
  I agree, law is a social construct and a fiction as you say. US laws certainly do not always agree with my own moral code. If you prefer, I find these attackers and their actions to be immoral, which is solely my own judgment. Saying that Sony behaved stupidly isn't a problem in itself. I just feel like this is the dominant narrative and that it's been taken to the point where people are blaming Sony and not the attackers. It's analogous to the furor over companies like Yahoo being outed as supposed PRISM participants. Yes, that sucks but the US government is the culprit there. That's where the blame rightly belongs. I think it's easy for some people to look at this and say it just prevented the release of a not particularly exciting movie, no big deal. How would we all feel if it hit a little closer to home though? What if Putin decides that it offends him that many of the world's computers use an OS with a kernel created by a Finnish programmer and takes similar steps?
AnthonyMouse 12y ago
> It continues to baffle me that so many people are assigning substantial blame to Sony. The people stealing private emails are not Robin Hood but Sony is still the Sheriff of Nottingham. Being right is not proved by being on the opposite side of a dispute with someone who is doing wrong. They can both be wrong.

by skuhn 12y ago

joeyh 12y ago

"operates within the laws of their country" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit Doesn't excuse others illegal activities, but it certianly makes it easier to feel a certian level of schadenfreude in this case.

anigbrowl 12y ago
That was a decade ago, they paid out several million to settle the matter, and the actual impact of it was virtually nil. The endless harping on this transgression has reached the point of being posturing rather than substantive criticism.
- revscat 12y ago
  Possibly. The leaked emails have definitively shown that Sony is philosophically still very much the same company today that they were they released the rootkit. Ergo, the rootkit still holds up as an accurate symbol of Sony's culture, specifically their arrogant belief that the end justifies the means.
skuhn 12y ago
I thought about mentioning the root kit as well, since a lot of people get schadenfreude-y over it. I greatly disliked the root kit and that whole approach to treating your customers like criminals (d/b/a DRM), but I don't see this attack as giving Sony their just desserts. The root kit was attached to Sony BMG's products (CDs), and this current attack was against Sony Pictures. Sony is a giant conglomerate with 140,000 employees and who knows how many child companies. To top it off, Sony BMG was a 50/50 joint venture with Bertlesmann. The root kits first appeared on BMG CDs, suggesting that it originated at Bertlesmann and not Sony (although I don't know that and it doesn't excuse Sony anyway). While it's hard to measure the impact that the root kit had on Sony BMG's customers, it's safe to assume that most of them did not have their personal data disseminated all over the Internet and in newspapers. Whereas that's the reality Sony Pictures and their employees are currently dealing with. It also happened eight years ago. While not everyone may forget or forgive, I think it's more productive to respond to the way Sony treats me as a customer today versus a decade ago. That's how you encourage better behavior from a company, by rewarding them for doing a better job.

paulhauggis 12y ago

Nobody cares about privacy anymore. The mainstream media spreads around private conversations and emails..and people are getting fired over it. I can bet if I got the private emails from some key CNN reporters and spread it around on social media, their tune would change. I would actually like to see this. I laugh when people in the mainstream media talk about how bad it is that the government is spying on us. Why does it even matter anymore? 1984 is here. It has nothing to do with the government and everything to do with social media. It's so easy to spread lies around as fact on social media...and people believe it. Just look at all of the false information spread around during the Ferguson protests..which people still believe to this day. Even Obama admit to swaying public opinion using social media and data mining.

bdamm 12y ago
Any president that did not sway public opinion using media would not be doing their job. Manipulation of the media is a basic tool for anyone in politics, including the good guys. Media is a tool.
- paulhauggis 12y ago
  "Any president that did not sway public opinion using media would not be doing their job" Right. Lying to get your point across "Media is a tool." The only tools are the people that believe the lies of our politicians...which seems to be a vast majority of the US population. "including the good guys" The problem is that people don't respond to good things. To win, you need to smear your opponent and destroy all credibility. Anybody who does this isn't a "good guy", which leads only to one conclusion..
skuhn 12y ago
Gawker in particular has really turned my stomach with their extreme dedication to exploring every possible facet of the leaked e-mails. Yes, they're a tabloid, but rumors and tips are one thing and stolen, personal communication is another. I don't know how they would react if every e-mail sent or received by their mail server was made public and dissected. Maybe they would just laugh it off, but I'm sure there are a few they might prefer to hold on to.

waps 12y ago

This sounds the lawyers argument. Something is illegal so it shouldn't be done, and you get to get to act as if it didn't happen at all. Anyone who thinks different, gets to pay restitution. The thing to remember here is that law is a fiction, enforced by the state. I don't think anyone is "siding against Sony", they just 1) Realize that if this is indeed a nation-state attacking, the perpetrators are beyond the reach of justice. So law really is a fiction in this case. 2) Are calling out Sony, not for being in the wrong, but for being stupid.

skuhn 12y ago
I agree, law is a social construct and a fiction as you say. US laws certainly do not always agree with my own moral code. If you prefer, I find these attackers and their actions to be immoral, which is solely my own judgment. Saying that Sony behaved stupidly isn't a problem in itself. I just feel like this is the dominant narrative and that it's been taken to the point where people are blaming Sony and not the attackers. It's analogous to the furor over companies like Yahoo being outed as supposed PRISM participants. Yes, that sucks but the US government is the culprit there. That's where the blame rightly belongs. I think it's easy for some people to look at this and say it just prevented the release of a not particularly exciting movie, no big deal. How would we all feel if it hit a little closer to home though? What if Putin decides that it offends him that many of the world's computers use an OS with a kernel created by a Finnish programmer and takes similar steps?

AnthonyMouse 12y ago

> It continues to baffle me that so many people are assigning substantial blame to Sony. The people stealing private emails are not Robin Hood but Sony is still the Sheriff of Nottingham. Being right is not proved by being on the opposite side of a dispute with someone who is doing wrong. They can both be wrong.