Hacker News Reader

Comment by pquerna | Hacker News Reader

This is very different than the Target hack -- we have become numb to credit card focused hacks -- we all know the drill, we just get a new card in the mail a few days later, and the banks are pretty good at detecting fraud: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/credit-card-fraud-and-id-theft...

To me both Sony and Ashley Madison are part of a very different type of hack, that we are just starting to understand.

They leak massive amounts of personal information, and this personal information can and does ruin lives. This article outlines much of the emotional turmoil that Sony employees went through, and in Ashley Madison, there were suicides as a result:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/08/technology/ashley-madison-su...

You can rotate your credit card number, but rotating your real life is not possible.

I don't see a way out. Going anonymous might be possible for living on the internet, but you cannot be anonymous to your employer.

View on HN

I'm very interesting in maintaining security and privacy while still being able to use the internet, so please don't interpret this comment as a dismissal of your concerns. I share your concerns 100%.

But I hate the phrase "ruin lives". How are lives ruined? Bad things happen to people all the time, and their lives continue. It's really a poor way to talk about these issues.

But I hate the phrase "ruin lives". How are lives ruined? Bad things happen to people all the time, and their lives continue. It's really a poor way to talk about these issues.

Leaking of your social security number can result in your credit rating being ruined for years. This will leave you unable to take our a mortgage, buy a car, etc. etc. In the Ashley Madison hack, details of people being unfaithful in their marriages was exposed, which has led to divorce and even suicide.

If that doesn't count as a "ruined life", what does?

Those are all major problems. I think that "ruined life" is crap Newspeak. It's like "boots on the ground", "inner-city", "financial crisis", "cloud", and a billion examples from the "business world". These phrases prevent thought and communication rather than facilitate it.

Aside from that, people will respond to those problems in a myriad of ways. Almost all of them keep living and return to their baseline emotional state again. Using the phrase "ruined life" ignores human resiliency which is very powerful. It makes us sound like teenagers experiencing our first heartbreak.

So you're saying that we shouldn't use "ruined life" in any circumstances? I'm not really sure what the appeal is to here - that we should only ever use clinical and unemotional words when describing things? Seems like a net loss to me. If I think my life has been ruined why can't I say that?

Of course you should use it when you think its appropriate. For example, if you left your boots on the ground, it would be appropriate to describe them as "boots on the ground". If you are talking about the historic center of a city, call it the "inner-city".

But for the examples you gave upthread, it would be more accurate and useful to say "ruined credit" (and in that case, it's really only for some years) or "ruined marriage".

If someone spent their life in prison and lost their mind due to a wrongful conviction, I'd call that a "ruined life". And if you feel your life is ruined, you should say it.

But I read the phrase "ruined life" and I really don't think it communicates anything except for "bad thing". So why not just express the value judgment and say "That's bad and here's why" rather than trying to describe a life as "ruined"? It's another phrase that has lost whatever meaning it once had.

I think a lot of the people who have had identify fraud happen to them would say their life has been ruined. This seems like a silly argument on whether or not their lives have been "really ruined" or not when we get the point. Yes, it is a phrase, maybe it is overused, but does it really matter?

"Ruined life" can and should refer to an event that negatively affects other major areas of one's life that are not directly connected to that event. Being able to buy a house has nothing to do with a random company getting hacked, unless that hack involved getting your personal information into the hands of criminals, who then use that to commit criminal activity which leads to false accusations against you regarding your creditworthiness, leading to lenders not trusting you with a house loan.

It's a little more fair to say the people pursuing affairs ruined their own lives, since they took the ruinous actions and simply hoped not to be exposed.

Sure. But if someone ruins their own life it's still correct to describe their life as having been ruined.

It is correct to say that their life is ruined. But is it true to say that the hack ruined their life or is it the cheating that ruined their life and the hack only revealed it. And if we say both, because both had to happen for the life to enter into a 'ruined' state, could we then say that other things that could've stopped the hack ruined their lives? For example, a tornado not destroying the Ashley Madison site ruined their life.

If you read the story, many identifies have been stolen. Some lost money in the bank, some got credit card charges. People were confused, paranoid, scared of not knowing what to do other than going to office and hoping something better would come out. I think the term "ruin lives" is not the sort of life and death kind, rather the social and psychological effects were and probably still are, dangerous to close to ruin one's life. Imagine someone comes into your house and destroy everything you cherish (photos, videos). Now instead imagining that this happens to your friend, then your other friend the following month, you will keep pondering and worrying whether you will be next. You are literally sitting duck.

Getting your credit back to good standard is a really really tough effort.

What you say is true, but it needs better wording perhaps.

Like 'closure' I see how it is a toxic saying that harms people.

Did telling people their life is ruined (and having that attitude) just because they had an affair publicised, contribute to the suicides, perhaps. Self fulfilling.

At the time I was working in the same building of the Sony offices in Brazil and overheard people commenting about the incident on the elevator. I still think it was an internal job.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/scardine/random-writings/m...

>but you cannot be anonymous to your employer.

Why not? Why does your employer need all of your personal information?

If your employer can't even secure your basic info, maybe the relationship with the employer should be rethought?

They need your SSN and other critical info for tax reasons. Probably other regulations in states where I have little experience. Only obvious escape while still being marketable is having your own company and doing business in the company name. "Jsprogrammer & Associates Inc." Then, you get to pay extra taxes and stuff. Assuming they even hire you under such a scenario. ;)

> If your employer can't even secure your basic info, maybe the relationship with the employer should be rethought?

Of course it should. Why on earth does my employer control my access to healthcare? Don't count on that system changing any time soon, though.

Can you elaborate how the Sony hack ruined people's lives? How much information can possibility be attached to a psn account?

I don't think they're talking about the PSN hack, but rather the release of tons of internal company emails. Just to cite one example of how this can ruin lives, Charlie Sheen's HIV-positive status was referred to in one email [1] (though it wasn't discovered until after he publicly announced it).

[1] http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/charlie-sheen-hiv-posi...

You're thinking of the wrong Sony hack, this article details Sony Pictures. The organization as whole has been in the spotlight for this a few times now.

It wasn't just PSN accounts, but tons of internal details that involved lots and lots of employees.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com