4 ms·

> They gave credence to every threat. Earlier in the day I was somewhat neutral on this, but now that I've had a chance to consider it I think that Sony is actu

by VieElm 12y ago

> They gave credence to every threat. Earlier in the day I was somewhat neutral on this, but now that I've had a chance to consider it I think that Sony is actually endangering our national security with this move. This is the first time in recent memory that America has been seen as caving to terrorist demands, and it can only create more disasters. Of course given an article about a stupid, overblown reaction a stupid and overblown reaction would be the top comment. This craving of egos heavily immersed in the social news context for every popular news item be the Most Important Thing That Has Ever Happened And Nothing Will Ever Be The Same Again, paired with a never-ending need for everyone to be outraged about everything is just so tiring. Just get a hold of yourself and and chill out, ok, the world isn't over. Sony didn't just endanger your life. You're probably going to die of cancer in some hospital bed at 4pm in the afternoon a few decades from now after a pretty boring, normal life. You want excitement and danger go help a NGO in a war torn region. You're not going to find it on the pages of reddit and hacker news. This guy rolling his eyes in the vice article would probably roll his eyes at your response as well.

Houshalter 12y ago
I think you are reading far more from parent comment than he actually saying. Nowhere in his comment did he say anything to the effect of "It's significantly more likely my life will be taken in a terrorist attack." Which is what you seem to be interpreting it as. At best he just said that this could encourage more situations like this and possibly terrorist attacks. And all he literally said was "it can only create more disasters" which isn't very specific as to how many/severe said disasters are to be. How "overblown" of him. He's not saying that the sky is falling. He's saying that it's bad policy to cave to threats like this, even once. Which it definitely is. As an analogy, one police force giving into a hostage taker's demands probably wouldn't lead to more criminals taking hostages. But if it happened every time, hostage taking would become much more rampant. And so giving into criminals is almost universally against policy. Even if on a case by case basis it would seem overblown and ridiculous; to not just give them what they want to save lives. And there are possibly serious consequences of just this incident. I bet there will be many fewer movies made about North Korea now. Movie studios will censor self-censor themselves more on things that might upset powerful groups. Of course that may have happened anyway but now they've given up millions of dollars - whereas otherwise they might have actually profited from the attention of the controversy. Two movies have already been cancelled over this nonsense.
downandout 12y ago
You completely misinterpreted my comment, and your response is far more over the top than you incorrectly claim mine to be. My point was that private businesses caving to threats that have no possibility of being carried out will embolden countless others to make similar threats. Thus, what Sony did will likely cause similar issues for other businesses, large and small, the thinking being that US companies are so risk averse that they will just give in.

by VieElm 12y ago

Houshalter 12y ago

I think you are reading far more from parent comment than he actually saying. Nowhere in his comment did he say anything to the effect of "It's significantly more likely my life will be taken in a terrorist attack." Which is what you seem to be interpreting it as. At best he just said that this could encourage more situations like this and possibly terrorist attacks. And all he literally said was "it can only create more disasters" which isn't very specific as to how many/severe said disasters are to be. How "overblown" of him. He's not saying that the sky is falling. He's saying that it's bad policy to cave to threats like this, even once. Which it definitely is. As an analogy, one police force giving into a hostage taker's demands probably wouldn't lead to more criminals taking hostages. But if it happened every time, hostage taking would become much more rampant. And so giving into criminals is almost universally against policy. Even if on a case by case basis it would seem overblown and ridiculous; to not just give them what they want to save lives. And there are possibly serious consequences of just this incident. I bet there will be many fewer movies made about North Korea now. Movie studios will censor self-censor themselves more on things that might upset powerful groups. Of course that may have happened anyway but now they've given up millions of dollars - whereas otherwise they might have actually profited from the attention of the controversy. Two movies have already been cancelled over this nonsense.

downandout 12y ago

You completely misinterpreted my comment, and your response is far more over the top than you incorrectly claim mine to be. My point was that private businesses caving to threats that have no possibility of being carried out will embolden countless others to make similar threats. Thus, what Sony did will likely cause similar issues for other businesses, large and small, the thinking being that US companies are so risk averse that they will just give in.