
To be honest, I think Sony deserve everything they got for that film. Think of it the other way around, if North Korea made a film about assassinating Obama, they would of been firing the nukes in minutes.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:28, Reply)

they would
I'm obviously over exhagurating by saying "firing the nukes" assuming people wouldn't be as stupid on here to take that literally, but they wouldn't allow it.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:39, Reply)

pumps out anti American propaganda all the time. No one "fires the nukes" or anything like it. They ignore it.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:42, Reply)

about assassinating their president?
Maybe I missed it.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:44, Reply)

that you haven't watched yet, right?
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:52, Reply)

i was about to post this, but then i realised that your point is making no difference to the crazy!
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:08, Reply)

massively popular I can see, clearly had some stars in that.
I'm guessing your definition of blockbuster differs from mine.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:20, Reply)

Great film, and it was a big deal at the time despite not being a "blockbuster".
I'm not sure that the Interview would've qualified as a blockbuster either, though...
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 13:22, Reply)

Also sony employees have had their personal details stolen and released making them potential victims of fraud.
I don't think they deserved that just because someone made fun of lil kim.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:35, Reply)

all you have to do is making a joking threat on twitter and you'll get legal action.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:38, Reply)

write one about David Cameron, in the name of science.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:41, Reply)

Ok, if Obama doesn't stop bombing brown people with his drone army of darkness then I hope he stubs his toe really badly.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:48, Reply)

Because that's straining the definition of joke.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:55, Reply)

Clearly as this film involves the killing of someone in quite a graphic way, see the post above. Although it may be lolworthy to us lot, it isn't for them and for a film like that to be released by Sony to the entire world, it might be seen as a tad provocative.
Now with that in mind, the threat would have to be something that would insinuate that you would want to take someone elses life who also happens to be of importance. Preferably not mentioning defecating monkeys or whatever as that would probably change the tone of the tweet, not that you would fit that in.
And "straining the definition of joke" is the entire remit of most people on this site, just FYI.
Also: You do know that the hackers offered to redact staff personal details?
www.theverge.com/2014/12/15/7394703/sony-hacker-email-promises-christmas-gift-of-leaked-data-offer-to-redact-data
I'm not sure how much was released by that point, but still.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:00, Reply)

with the definition of a word which you cannot spell.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:17, Reply)

Pretty please?
Gawd bless em and their hearts of gold.
I presume any of the thousands of Sony employees that fail to get in touch with the hackers is fair game then?
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:26, Reply)

but they still offered it.
Yeah they are fair game, it's a war fought out in digital space, and as with any war, there is collateral damage.
Sony only pulled the film because theaters pulled out apparently. They weren't concerned enough about the personal details of their staff to protect them adequately in the first place or stop the film prior to that.
Although it was a pretty ruthless hack, I'm sure they could of done more to protect the data.
mashable.com/2014/12/02/sony-hack-passwords/
Security hasn't been one of Sony's strong points as of late.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:34, Reply)

( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:38, Reply)

The personal details of those employees is now in the hands of hackers or the N Korean state.
Names and addresses
Employment records.
Medical records
Bank details
Any you think they deserve all that? Because "This is war"
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:49, Reply)

I don't have much more to add.
Hacking is fucked up, I work in IT security and I'm a programmer but I've never wanted to hack anyone as I don't agree with it.
they were warned
they ignored warnings
their lack of IT security didn't protect their staffs data adequately enough
they stubbornly continued to ignore further warnings
they finally caved in for the wrong reasons
The security of the staffs data should of been Sony's priority, but unfortunately it wasn't.
BTW, Sony Pictures was hacked, not the entirety of Sony.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:59, Reply)

Your words are unambiguous, yet it's my reading of them that's at fault?
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 12:56, Reply)

You can read, not sure you can understand much though to be honest.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 12:59, Reply)

( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 13:12, Reply)

So you're blaming the victims because Sony didn't have strong enough security to stand up to a nation states cyber warfare program?
Nice bit of blame relocation there.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 12:49, Reply)

But if you want to get technical, who do you think secures their data? That will be staff who work for Sony. It's also responsibility of the staff not to use retarded passwords which only makes hacking easier.
Nice bit of completely missing the point in anything I say there.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 12:57, Reply)

( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 13:07, Reply)

( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:38, Reply)

If David Cameron doesn't try and push through legislation to make the mooning of bus drivers mandatory on Thursdays, I'll send a team of highly trained poo-throwing gibbons to Chequers on Boxing Day to mock him and the smoothness of his chin.
I look forward to hearing from lawyers.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:49, Reply)

No-one kicked up fuss then, especially when Frank ended up on top of the Queen. Brilliant stuff.
Kim Jong Un acts like a child as he's not been allowed to grow up.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:42, Reply)

with America is a little different. And the Queen doesn't rule anymore btw ;)
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:45, Reply)

She's also head of the armed forces and justice courts act in her name.
Sounds like she's in charge to me.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:47, Reply)

that's hardly relevant, she isn't making daily decisions on the direction of the nation anymore.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:51, Reply)

She only choses not to exercise them because it would cause a constitutional crises.
When Charlie get's in he may well have other ideas.
Of have we become a republic without me noticing?
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:53, Reply)

she is de jure in charge, but de facto not actually in charge.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 13:15, Reply)

As far as I can gather she's technically in charge but choses not to exercise that power because it would cause massive problems.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 13:20, Reply)

But we can get a bit upperty regarding the royal family.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 12:13, Reply)

( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 10:53, Reply)

Why not just release the film, along with an open letter to the DPRK taking the absolute piss?
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:00, Reply)

the amount of data they allegedly have would cause serious damage to Sony.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:02, Reply)

and they can kill the remaining ad budget (multi millions) because they don't need it...
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:11, Reply)

you clearly haven't a clue how much this has cost sony to make the ad budget on the film irrelevant.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:19, Reply)

on modern motion pictures is often in excess of the production budget of the movie...
it's nice that the schools have broken up for christmas... but maybe you should do something more productive with your time...
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:22, Reply)

You remember that whole "You cannot show Mohammed in a cartoon" thing?
South Park did it ages ago and no-one gave a fuck. They even referenced this in a later episode.
In order to give a fuck it needs to be shoved in front of someone's face on a big red "Get Angry" plate
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:07, Reply)

www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2010/apr/22/south-park-censored-fatwa-muhammad
That you mean?
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:09, Reply)

nowhere near as graphic as the above video.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:07, Reply)

It's probably some clever South Koreans doing all the hacking who want the US to start fighting with NK to allow SK to storm north.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:03, Reply)

made the threat prior to the hacking, they got what they were promised essentially.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 11:11, Reply)

It could have been a script kiddy in Romania for all the security they had to defeat.
( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 14:20, Reply)


( , Thu 18 Dec 2014, 13:17, Reply)