South Korea police say 120,000 home cameras hacked for 'sexploitation' footage
cross-posted from: lazysoci.al/post/38470875
South Korea police say 120,000 home cameras hacked for 'sexploitation' footage
The cameras were located in private homes, karaoke rooms, a Pilates studio and a gynaecologist's clinic.Gavin Butler (BBC News)
like this
14th_cylon
in reply to sabreW4K3 • • •who in their right mind puts a camera in medical exam room and who in their right mind goes there to receive any kind of treatment, thinking "yeah, this camera does not bother me at all"?
sometimes people really do get what they deserve 🤷‍♂️
this must have been the worst swingers party ever
along_the_road
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •Nah. The patients of the clinic do not deserve this nor they did they put the cameras there.
14th_cylon
in reply to along_the_road • • •ulterno
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •elsewhere, you would have this guy's friends.
Your choice.
Belgian court lets convicted rapist go free so he can become a gynaecologist
Fatou Ferraro Mboup (SCREENSHOT Media)14th_cylon
in reply to ulterno • • •so you will let your gynecology treatment record on some security camera, because some other gynecologist might be rapist? you weren't able to find more absurd nonsense to defend your position?
1) what is the likelihood that random other gynecologist is a rapist?
2) what are you smoking? i want to try some of that.
anton
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •14th_cylon
in reply to anton • • •we are talking about cameras being hacked, not about cameras being purposely hidden by some creeping tom.
oh really? how many patients do you think come to gynecologist's office with such urgent condition they can't go elsewhere?
vocabdictionary.com/explained/…
What is the What If Fallacy? - Vocab Dictionary
QuickAnswer (Vocab Dictionary)flora_explora
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •14th_cylon
in reply to flora_explora • • •what the actual fuck, no, it is not. the victim status does not absolve you of a responsibility. if you get mugged going through a sketchy neighborhood, that does not make it ok for a robber, but it is a valid question whether it was really good idea for you to go there.
it obviously is, but no one seemed to mind, otherwise someone would go to complain about it.
there is one person who got stupid idea to put the camera there, and there is hundreds or maybe thousands of patients who could have stopped them by telling them they lost their mind and/or going to complain to authorities, and instead they shrugged their shoulders and did nothing.
we are responsible for the world around us. if we just shrug our shoulders when it is not going the way we like it, we can't be surprised when it is going the other way. sometimes it is not easy, sometimes it is relatively easy and this is the later.
flora_explora
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •This is classical victim blaming! Same like when people ask women what they were wearing when they experience sexualized violence. It shouldn't matter!
You don't know anything about the context or what patients have said and done in this clinic. You just assume everyone knew about it and was OK with it. And then you blame them for this assumed participation.
14th_cylon
in reply to flora_explora • • •it shouldn't matter, but it does. shouting about it on the internet does not change that. and it is not even about sex. if i go to some sketchy neighborhood with 20k$ camera around my neck, i am asking for a trouble, and it is smart thing to think about it beforehand and adapt. whether it should or shouldn't matter does not matter (pun intended).
it is like a pedestrian walking in front of a speeding car, getting hit by it and then complaining "they were in the right". how does it matter, when you are still the one being hit by a car?
... Show more...yeah, i am speculating little bit. but if there were some sensitive materials captured, that means the camera was running for some ti
it shouldn't matter, but it does. shouting about it on the internet does not change that. and it is not even about sex. if i go to some sketchy neighborhood with 20k$ camera around my neck, i am asking for a trouble, and it is smart thing to think about it beforehand and adapt. whether it should or shouldn't matter does not matter (pun intended).
it is like a pedestrian walking in front of a speeding car, getting hit by it and then complaining "they were in the right". how does it matter, when you are still the one being hit by a car?
yeah, i am speculating little bit. but if there were some sensitive materials captured, that means the camera was running for some time and no one did anything so impactful it would change. i am not expert of south korean law, but such camera would be major breach of privacy and straight up illegal anywhere in eu, and i assume in us as well, i see their hipaa cited often.
flora_explora
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •South Korea actually has a major problem with sexism and gender-based violence. Especially with men secretly filming women! It doesn't seem unlikely that the filming of the gynecologist clinic was done in secret as well. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it actually gets punished.
There is also the larger context in which women experience daily sexism and violence. This fundamentally changes how they react to further violence. Victims of sexualized violence often think of themselves as responsible for the violence they receive, because society constantly tells them they are at fault! Victim blaming is part of society's effort to tell women they are worthless and to keep control over them. If you solely focus on how the victims of this act of violence are at fault here, you are part of the problem.
'I was humiliated': The continuing trauma of South Korea's spy cam victims
By Laura Bicker (BBC News)14th_cylon
in reply to flora_explora • • •i am not solely focusing on victims. i am explaining that out of the two factors, there is only one of them which you have really under control, and it is not the potential attacker's behaviour, it is yours.
you, on the other way, are bent to explain that you are not responsible for your risky behaviour, which makes YOU part of the problem.
i hope you will never have to find out the hard way that real world can't be tackled by shouting on the internet.
Vodulas [they/them]
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •A lot of pretty reasonable ways it could happen.
1. It says nothing about it being in an exam room, could have been in the lobby
2. Could have been hidden as others have said
3. Could have simply gone unnoticed since people would not expect a camera in exam rooms
There are a lot of people to potentially blame here, none of which are the victims
14th_cylon
in reply to Vodulas [they/them] • • •i'll go out on a limb here and say that records from the lobby don't make very good "sexploitation" material
the article is about camera hacks, not cameras hidden by some peeping tom
"some" might not, but again, there is no indication these were purposely hidden cameras, so lot of them should.
being a victim does not absolve you of responsibility. it does not make any assault that may have happened to you allright, but if you contributed to a situation with a bad decision, the fact you were attacked suddenly does not change that decision into smart one.
lemmy.zip/post/54116147/230956…
Vodulas [they/them]
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •The article only states that a gynecologist's office camera was hacked, not that the footage was used. It sucks, but I can guarantee they put that in there for shock value.
Later it states 1193 videos were made from 133,000 cameras that were hacked, so while nobody but the people with the data can say for sure, it is quite possible it was just a lobby camera.
Yes, but your argument is that people should have gone elsewhere. People are just giving you pretty reasonable explanations as to why they might not have simply gone to another doctor. Nobody is saying "This is exactly what happened."
... Show more...There is no indication that it was a visible camera in the
The article only states that a gynecologist's office camera was hacked, not that the footage was used. It sucks, but I can guarantee they put that in there for shock value.
Later it states 1193 videos were made from 133,000 cameras that were hacked, so while nobody but the people with the data can say for sure, it is quite possible it was just a lobby camera.
Yes, but your argument is that people should have gone elsewhere. People are just giving you pretty reasonable explanations as to why they might not have simply gone to another doctor. Nobody is saying "This is exactly what happened."
There is no indication that it was a visible camera in the exam room either. You just made that assumption.
The article says nothing about the circumstances, so everything said is speculation. Assuming the camera was visible and in the exam room is just that, an assumption. Just as you made that assumption, others gave reasons why that may not be true.
You can justify victim blaming all you want, but the fact of the matter is the blame lies solely on the perpetrator. If they did not do the bad deed, then the victim would not be a victim.
You can, and should, have situational awareness, but that is something that comes with experience and practice. Not everyone can prepare for every situation.
14th_cylon
in reply to Vodulas [they/them] • • •ok, that's fair point. i will admit i have originally reacted just to copied lede without reading the details, i did not really expect that remark to turn into such discussion.
... Show more...and that argument stays. if the camera was in fact visible in the exam room (speculation indeed), then walking away would be the only reasonable reaction. i assume that some first line gynecologist don't perform some critical emergency procedures (and even if so, they would be just fraction of their services) that would really not allow you to wait and go elsewhere. sooner or later, someone should notice and raise an alarm.
ok, that's fair point. i will admit i have originally reacted just to copied lede without reading the details, i did not really expect that remark to turn into such discussion.
and that argument stays. if the camera was in fact visible in the exam room (speculation indeed), then walking away would be the only reasonable reaction. i assume that some first line gynecologist don't perform some critical emergency procedures (and even if so, they would be just fraction of their services) that would really not allow you to wait and go elsewhere. sooner or later, someone should notice and raise an alarm.
of course it is an assumption. i am reacting within some parameters outside of which this discussion does not make sense.
advocating common sense is not victim blaming. playing a victim card is not going to help you when something bad happens to you.
lemmy.zip/post/54116147/230960…
and one should assume that at least some of the women who were patients there had one. it only takes one person to raise an alarm in situation like that.
Vodulas [they/them]
in reply to 14th_cylon • • •You say that, but you also said this in your original statement, which is classic victim blaming:
They did not deserve this. You can say you are advocating for common sense, but the first thing you said was that they deserved to be harmed.
I've seen this comment, and I do not find it persuasive.
For the first part, how do you know it is a sketchy neighborhood? You could easily walk into a situation you have no way to know is a bad situation through no fault of your own. What if you are there to take pictures in the neighborhood? There are a ton of reasons someone could find themselves in that situation. If you get robbed, the blame still falls on the perpetrator. The person did not deserve to be robbed.
The car a
... Show more...You say that, but you also said this in your original statement, which is classic victim blaming:
They did not deserve this. You can say you are advocating for common sense, but the first thing you said was that they deserved to be harmed.
I've seen this comment, and I do not find it persuasive.
For the first part, how do you know it is a sketchy neighborhood? You could easily walk into a situation you have no way to know is a bad situation through no fault of your own. What if you are there to take pictures in the neighborhood? There are a ton of reasons someone could find themselves in that situation. If you get robbed, the blame still falls on the perpetrator. The person did not deserve to be robbed.
The car analogy does not have anything to do with this situation. You would be walking into a space where you knew you were likely to get hurt, vs this situation where you expect to NOT be hurt.
And if that were the case, I would assume that detail would at least be mentioned in the article since that could be it's own story. Honestly it would be a better way to frame this article. All of the little details point to this not being the case and they just mentioned the gynecologist for engagement bait.
14th_cylon
in reply to Vodulas [they/them] • • •most people do not deserve to be harmed.
it is a hyperbole - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbol…
and it is commonly used phrase in a situation where you face consequences of your own bad decision. so if you are discussing in good faith, stop deflecting.
it is generally known information. this is a sketchy neighborhood and everyone in the city, including me, knows that.
yes, i could have, but that is not what happened in the case i am describing, so lets not deflect and talk about the case i am presenting.
... Show more...the blame is on both of u
most people do not deserve to be harmed.
it is a hyperbole - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbol…
and it is commonly used phrase in a situation where you face consequences of your own bad decision. so if you are discussing in good faith, stop deflecting.
it is generally known information. this is a sketchy neighborhood and everyone in the city, including me, knows that.
yes, i could have, but that is not what happened in the case i am describing, so lets not deflect and talk about the case i am presenting.
the blame is on both of us. the robber should not rob me, but i KNOWINGLY committed risky act and faced the consequences.
the car analogy has everything to do with the situation. you commit risky act, because you so focus on your perceived "rights" that you forget to use your brain. sometime you have to act to protect your rights, and if you don't, naively believing that everyone will just respect them, that you will sometimes end up facing consequences.
all the little details point to exactly nothing. the gynecologist might very well be just engagement bait, in which case this discussion is indeed pointless.
exaggeration as rhetorical device
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)ShinkanTrain
in reply to sabreW4K3 • • •Lime Buzz (fae/she)
in reply to sabreW4K3 • • •