@Gelugon_baat Such an understanding of rights is archaic at best, and is a good example of institutionalized irrationality (where applicable anyway), rights are meant to protect specific things, not dignity as a whole. Otherwise, you might find an explicit "right to dignity" anywhere. The basic rights endowed by law are the most basal rights, that is, whatever right to dignity we have, peoples' right to free speech trumps it. Fortunately for the real world (in the US anyway) defamation is a civil matter, libel being the only sort with reasonable odds of litigation (other forms such as slander are rather unlikely to land you in hot water). Oh, and in regard to the bit about moderation, I wasn't trying to inform you of the obvious, I was more so speaking about GS's TOS, and how complaining about suggested slander is meaningless when they (most anyway) are well within their rights and the TOS. You may draw a line there, but if these don't, then they'll keep doing what they want.
@Gelugon_baat Such is the burden of free speech. It may be somewhat more limited on GS than in the real world (depending on one's location), but the majority of posts here seem at least tame enough to avoid moderation.
@Giancarlo But if this information is to be sold, it ALL needs to go, and the longer they sit on it, less it's worth. Actually, it would be the same reason (among others) to doubt CC numbers were taken, as those need to be exploited quickly, and so far, none seem to have have been. While it's true that ID theft as a result of this breach may happen at any time, the likelihood drops sharply as time goes on.
Right... So [URL=http://www.gamespot.com/news/6312408/sony-offering-free-identity-theft-protection]free ID theft protection[/URL] isn't appropriate compensation? Besides, most of the information leaked is stuff people already have (and if it's worth anything, have sold). You were already as risk for identity theft, and having some basic info spread about isn't going to do much additional damage (not to mention ID theft is not a lifetime problem). Oh, and you know as well as any informed individual that there was no evidence credit card numbers were taken. So unless you just assume everyone lies to you, that isn't quite the issue you make of it. But it doesn't really matter I suppose, the editorial would have no... Bite, without that ambiguous line. You can go on about how you don't want to trust Sony with your broken heart again, I'll be off using my brain.
@Phantom_75 @ducusss This is just sad... You guys (gals maybe?) should actually watch the movie. Or maybe even read the article. Ving Rhames plays a PROTAGONIST. Jeez... Who would think Ving Rhames to be a bad guy?
@acasero44 - . While Sony IS in fact liable for any potential loss (and more implicitly, the situation as a whole), they are not technically to blame. It's a fine distinction, but I trust you understand what it means.
parrot_of_adun's comments