News of the World

[Kwai Chang Caine]

Randy Winkman said:

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Cheers


See, to me, if there is no password, then it's not the heinous crime it's being made out to be. Ok, the consequences in this case weren't that nice but I find it hard to get particularly angry about.

What, like walking into someone's house and nicking their stuff cos they left the back door unlocked?

Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example.

Obviously wrong of course.

[Oakey]

They cleared the inbox deliberately so new messages could be left and listened to. Wonder if they did the Mccanns too?

[55allgold]

Some weird reasoning above - how is it less scummy to enter a default PIN instead of a non-default PIN? It's the hacking that's scummy, not the level of skill required to do it.

[Kwai Chang Caine]

Oakey said:

They cleared the inbox deliberately so new messages could be left and listened to. Wonder if they did the Mccanns too?

This is just a Guardian claim right now though isn't it?

[Kwai Chang Caine]

55allgold said:

Some weird reasoning above - how is it less scummy to enter a default PIN instead of a non-default PIN? It's the hacking that's scummy, not the level of skill required to do it.

I dunno.

One is far less opportunistic than the other.

[Flintstone]

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Randy Winkman said:

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Cheers


See, to me, if there is no password, then it's not the heinous crime it's being made out to be. Ok, the consequences in this case weren't that nice but I find it hard to get particularly angry about.

What, like walking into someone's house and nicking their stuff cos they left the back door unlocked?

Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example.

Obviously wrong of course.

So you agree that theft is wrong but somehow think it less of a crime than if the door had been locked/phone PIN protected? Sorry but I can't see the logic.

[Kwai Chang Caine]

Flintstone said:

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Randy Winkman said:

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Cheers


See, to me, if there is no password, then it's not the heinous crime it's being made out to be. Ok, the consequences in this case weren't that nice but I find it hard to get particularly angry about.

What, like walking into someone's house and nicking their stuff cos they left the back door unlocked?

Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example.

Obviously wrong of course.

So you agree that theft is wrong but somehow think it less of a crime than if the door had been locked/phone PIN protected? Sorry but I can't see the logic.

No, of course it is the same crime.

It's just the hysteria I can't agree with.

[55allgold]

Kwai Chang Caine said:

I dunno.

One is far less opportunistic than the other.

You keep saying that (in different ways), but how exactly does the taking of an easy opportunity make the motives ands actions of the jounralists less scummy?

Must be a bit like mugging old ladies instead of powerfully built PHers?

Or just possibly you're trolling...?

[Kwai Chang Caine]

55allgold said:

You keep saying that (in different ways), but how exactly does the taking of an easy opportunity make the motives ands actions of the jounralists less scummy?

Must be a bit like mugging old ladies instead of powerfully built PHers?

Or just possibly you're trolling...?

Well, I think you are jumping on a hysterical band-wagon.

I'd rather wait til we find out what is and isn't the case, not just a Guardian expose.

Look, I know a little girl was killed and her parents put through misery in court. That is truly terrible and I hope the perp' has a miserable time of it in prison.

However, it is not the crime of the century to listen to an unprotected mailbox. We don't know yet if the deletions were deliberate or the motives if they were.

I guess what I'm trying to say in a way that won't offend everyone (due to the nature of the crime involved) is that "don't protect your data...bad luck". Whoever you are. Whatever happens to you.

I apologise if this offends you (genuinely).

[Chrisw666]

I can't remotely access voicemail for my own phone.

How on earth this vile piece of work could do it to a 13(14?) year old girl I have no idea.

Would you not need to know the childs number etc?

[Flintstone]

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Flintstone said:

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Randy Winkman said:

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Cheers


See, to me, if there is no password, then it's not the heinous crime it's being made out to be. Ok, the consequences in this case weren't that nice but I find it hard to get particularly angry about.

What, like walking into someone's house and nicking their stuff cos they left the back door unlocked?

Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example.

Obviously wrong of course.

So you agree that theft is wrong but somehow think it less of a crime than if the door had been locked/phone PIN protected? Sorry but I can't see the logic.

No, of course it is the same crime.

It's just the hysteria I can't agree with.

Hysteria? But you quite clearly wrote "Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example." implying that the lack of a lock/PIN somehow made it less offensive. I can't read it any other way.

[Pesty]

Kwai Chang Caine said:

We don't know yet if the deletions were deliberate or the motives if they were.

They were delted deliberately in order to clear space for messages on hold. And they were done by that bloke in order to get a story. This gave some hope to the parents that she was alive.


I have posted before on the subject of phone hacking and how I really didn't give a st and didn't even see how it was news. We have a MPs' who are not even bright enough to password their mail boxes. Brilliant expose them use them I don't give a fk.

But for me this crosses a line MPs celebs fair game in my book. Missing young women.....

[Kwai Chang Caine]

Flintstone said:

Hysteria? But you quite clearly wrote "Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example." implying that the lack of a lock/PIN somehow made it less offensive. I can't read it any other way.

I'd have more sympathy if the mailbox was protected and entry had been made by nefarious means.

Happier?

[Kwai Chang Caine]

Pesty said:

They were delted deliberately in order to clear space for messages on hold. And they were done by that bloke in order to get a story. This gave some hope to the parents that she was alive.

This is still an allegation I think.

Again, not defending NOTW's actions here.

[Flintstone]

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Flintstone said:

Hysteria? But you quite clearly wrote "Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example." implying that the lack of a lock/PIN somehow made it less offensive. I can't read it any other way.

I'd have more sympathy if the mailbox was protected and entry had been made by nefarious means.

Happier?

No, because you are apportioning blame to a victim. Why does it make it less of an offense? The miscreant did wrong, you can't blame the victim. That's absurd.

[Kwai Chang Caine]

Flintstone said:

Kwai Chang Caine said:

Flintstone said:

Hysteria? But you quite clearly wrote "Well, it's hard to have much sympathy in your example." implying that the lack of a lock/PIN somehow made it less offensive. I can't read it any other way.

I'd have more sympathy if the mailbox was protected and entry had been made by nefarious means.

Happier?

No, because you are apportioning blame to a victim. Why does it make it less of an offense? The miscreant did wrong, you can't blame the victim. That's absurd.

A crime's a crime, you say. I don't think the nature of the case involved makes it any more of an offence. Let's put it that way.

[Kwai Chang Caine]

I'm done with this thread as given it involves a child, everyone goes Daily Mail on each other's asses.

[essayer]

Back in those days each network assigned accounts a default voicemail PIN, the same for every new account on that network. Most people weren't technically knowledgable and most left these PINs as the default, which is how NOTW et al easily 'hacked' those celebs, politicians and now we discover Milly Dowler.

It's not so much the fact it was a child's phone, it's the fact they were grubbing around trying to get info on a story about a murdered woman whose body at that point had not been found.

If you can feel good about trying to make a living with actions like that, morally, you're not far off the same level as Bellfield ...

[Flintstone]

Kwai Chang Caine said:

I'm done with this thread as given it involves a child, everyone goes Daily Mail on each other's asses.

Nothing to do with the dissection of your 'logic'?

I have no interest in the story per se which is way I didn't post. I just find the suggestion that a crime is somehow less serious because the victim took fewer security steps absurd.

Edited by Flintstone on Tuesday 5th July 00:44

[Morningside]

I wonder if this will hit their paper sales?