Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements


GoddersUK GoddersUK A is A.
  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    14 hours agoswheaties wrote

    Its an excellent analogy in that illustrates that there are many ways to approach solving certain problems. Some ways are better than others and some ways are clearly wrong.  It illustrates that Sony can achieve the desired objective without directly exposing themselves to a potential PR disaster.

    OK, we need to split this into two parts, because you seem to have switched between two different arguments to which the analogy applies differently. Let me jog your memory of your initial argument I was actually responding to:

    Sony made the right choice. It was their only choice really. They are a for profit company, remember. They cant endanger people's lives. They have to be more discreet.

    Is it a good analogy for your moral judgement that Sony would be responsible for the consequences? No. Sony would not be putting them or anyone else in front of a speeding train, it is more like someone (NK) deliberately ramming a car into a group of people. If someone blackmails me "give me £1,000 or I kill the bunnies" am I responsible when they kill the bunnies? Of course not. The analogy is always invalid when considering this dimension because Sony are neither in front of nor driving the train. Sony releasing the film would not have endangered anyone's lives (or at least only the lives of people that were aware of the risk and chose to watch the film anyway)

    Is it a good analogy for the corporate reasoning behind the decision making? I don't think so. Sony pulled the movie because cinemas weren't showing it, so it would flop. But assuming they had pulled it because of the threats? I still don't think so. You seem to make assumptions about the consequences of caving (limited only to the investment in this particular investment) when, in reality, it proves that the threat tactics work and more and more people will begin to use them. Sure, they jump from the path of the local train... but right into the path of the speeding express to oblivion. Indeed you assume there's no shareholder value in standing up to the bullies... I guess the value of Sony being able to carry out is business and make money without illegal interference doesn't count as shareholder value, eh? So yes, in this dimension, maybe the analogy is valid; I still disagree with your conclusions though.

    Now that call is for Sony's managers and shareholders to make (indeed it looks like they've moved from their original position on this)

    Showing the film in theatres is not the only avenue for justice. And it is certainly not the best one.

    I guess that depends how you define justice. I don't particularly think punishment of the culprits or some kind of compensation for Sony would equate (either morally or financially) to the wrong that is done by having their legitimate business activities curtailed by illegal blackmail.

    Can you even imagine the backlash if some nut walks in a theatre and shoots up a couple freckle faced teenagers? Headline on CNN: "Sony puts profits over public safety!!".

    Then CNN would be idiots, because that headline would be a poor reflection of reality. I guess "Sony does legal and reasonable stuff and nut does nutty stuff" (or, even more accurately, "nutt does nutty stuff in cinema") doesn't garner many clicks... (aside: your logic here reminds of this)

    (the wishes of the independent theatres were not solicited or considered I assure you).

    Please don't pull facts out your arse.

    Sony said:

    "In light of the decision by the majority of our exhibitors not to show The Interview, we have decided not to move forward with the planned December 25 theatrical release,"


  • MS Ads - much better

    , MasterPi wrote

    But, yes, I think in general the ads seem to more meaningful.

    I don't particularly want an advert to be "meaningful" - I find when companies try that to be incredibly cringeworthy and activate every cynic alarm in my brain.

  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    , swheaties wrote



    There are many inventive and effective ways to stop a speeding freight train.... standing in front of it is not one of them.

    That's a poor analogy. First, unlike a speeding freight train, there's no credible reason to believe these threats will produce anything (again, the theatres did not cancel the showings because of the threats, but because they could be sued if anything did happen). Second, your original post suggested that Sony would be responsible for the consequences - this isn't like standing on railway tracks, but like blaming the victim of a hit and run attack for standing in the way of the car.

  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    @figuerres: This was a response to specific threats, made by anonymous online individuals, against cinemas that something would happen if they showed the film. This was not a response to general threats made by North Korea (indeed, when such threats were made, they were laughed out).

    And even if NK did make such threats it would be hard to believe that they would be credible. They're forever threatening to obliterate SK/Japan/the US/the evil capitalist west but, somehow, never actually doing anything beyond petty terrorism.

  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    , blowdart wrote


    Wait, you don't think that's already going on?

    Personally I think we should stop the sanctions. Kim Jong Un still lives a life of luxury and absolute rule. The only people that suffer are the ordinary citizens who have to live through famine and lack of daily essentials.

    I'm not suggesting we should sell the North Koreans weapons but I think being able to trade for food, consumer goods and other innocuous items wouldn't hurt. It certainly isn't going to make life in North Korea any worse than it is now.

  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    , swheaties wrote

    Sony made the right choice. It was their only choice really. They are a for profit company, remember. They cant endanger people's lives. They have to be more discreet.

    EDIT: Craig_Matthews basically said the first paragraph about 7 hours before I posted this... the perils or not reading all the way to the end of the thread before replying!

    First, the threats weren't made to Sony, they were made to cinema chains; I guess Sony cancelled the release for commercial reasons related to the fact that most cinema chains weren't showing it. The cinema chains aren't not showing it because of the threat to life and limb (which is probably only credible in a self-fulfilling fashion), they're not showing it because they're worried that if something does happen (most likely some nut job takes thinks this would be a good excuse for going crazy) they could be legally liable; IANAL so this may be valid reasoning, there's something seriously wrong with the law in that case though.

    Second, this attitude scares me. If Sony are going about their perfectly legal and reasonable business of making satirical films we cannot hold them morally or legally responsible for the actions that people carry out in response to those films. If Mr. Animal Rights Terrorist tells Mr Medical Researcher that he'll bomb the university if Mr Medical Researcher keeps doing his research do we say that Mr Medical Research is somehow responsible for those bombings? Of course not. The attitude in the quoted post is an example of the worst kind of limp-limbed caving and kowtowing.

    When you make the innocent responsible for the terrorists actions, so the innocent cave to their demands, the terrorists have won and you have lost your freedom.

  • Made my first ISIS payment today!

    This is NSA bot. Your post has been logged. Please do not mind the heavily armed SWAT team now surrounding your premises. Click here to report false positives.

  • What gift do You want this season?

    @ScanIAm: Assuming American fruit cake is the same as English fruit cake then yes. That's another Christmas food I won't be having this year, though...

  • My top 10 worst tech for value

    Everything I've seen advertised as an LED (except OLED) television or monitor is simply an LCD tv/monitor where the backlight uses LEDs rather than a CCFL.

  • What gift do You want this season?

    A mince pie. I'm overseas and they don't have mince pies here. It's just not Christmas without mince pies :(

    Mmmmm... I can almost taste them :)