My biggest beef with the assumptions here is that some earlier reports mentioned that the breach has been in effect for a long time. Sony hasn't disclosed exactly how long - but if they have been breached and information has been siphoned out of their company for a long time, then I highly doubt it has any correlation to 'The Interview' whatsoever, which kind of kills the whole "it was North Korea!" finger pointing based on the fact this movie was coming out at about the same time the group responsible for the hacks begins leaking information.

I feel for you man, good luck with the transfer. Their reach is far and wide, though, so you'd better hope the transfer lands you in another area of the world :D

I'm not pro-either side's corporate bullshit. But this is a specific case in point about the Koch brothers and *their* evil deeds. They are trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public. I'm not making any statement here about the left being better, or worse, or the same - I'm commenting on this specific issue, on Net Neutrality and the fact that by deceiving the public, the Koch Brothers and other corporations end up victorious - and appearing to be on the 'right' side of the public, no pun intended. In fact, when PEOPLE -- not corporate shills -- are educated on the subject and asked what they think, I don't think any legitimate poll/collection of opinions has any reasonable weight behind allowing the corporate megagiants to continue to try to fuck other people hard for their own personal gain, but rather to allow the government to step in in this specific case and prevent the monopolies from getting away with what they're attempting here: controlling and taxing the shit out of the internet to the detriment of other services and individual's experiences when accessing information.

Um.... I have 100mbit fiber to my apartment. It costs me about $25usd per month - fully unlimited traffic, no DMCA notices - ever, and includes IPTV with too many channels/movies (mostly Chinese, however).

I pay very little in taxes/fees, to boot. Thanks, corporate shill #108277.

If there is some statistic that the majority of the population can look at without understanding how it got that way - and it indicates support for the decision, then the decision seems more legitimate than if it receives no statistical support but was made anyways.. ie. easier to defend from a political/court of public opinion perspective.

If there's ever a time - it's times like this. Koch brothers' evil and the bullshit associations they support, typically lobbying for the opposite of what their names indicate (ie. "America" or "US" or "Family" combined with "Freedom" or "Prosperity" or "Commitment" or some other similar term) and the public would be greatly served by having these organisations dismantled, only, the people need some help -- the lack of transparency and lack of media coverage of these types of incidents means the majority, whose votes 'could' count, are too often taken for a ride.

I think that it's more about whether her release allowed the portions she appeared in to be dubbed over or not, and whether dubbing with different lines is allowed or not. I don't know the details, but it seems her claim is that "but ended up in a five-second scene in which her voice was dubbed over so her character asked if Muhammad was a child molester." If she read the script, and that's what it said, that's one thing.....if she read it out and thought it meant something else...but if she played some role, then these words were inserted over as if she had spoken them, I'd imagine that's another.

It would be super deceptive in my opinion to get actors in roles, then have them "saying" all sorts of craziness, and expect to be able to get away with it. If she did say those words or her release allowed the film to use her in this sort of way, then I would assume she has no real grounds.

What? Your argument started off by saying, essentially, no it's not just 1 it's 149 locations this morning... I would like to see links to that, not links from 2006 about 'jihadi support' or whatever nonsense you're trying to inject into the thread.

Here's some additional information, ie. busting your obvious bullshit and towing of the line, with facts:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/mart...

One guy with a gun in a cafe equates to "followers" of "Islam"?

Since when did a guy or a couple guys creating havoc turn into terrorism? You're the result of the current state of media. Any lone person who self-associates with any muslim state or islamic religion and acts aggressively suddenly becomes a terrorist, rather than a run of the mill criminal.

That we don't know a whole lot about weather, and meteorology has a long way to go - the complexity and variables that influence any sort of valid prediction make it hard for scientists to say "look at my track record for prediction" and appear any more accurate than a monkey pushing random buttons.

You really think anyone that doesn't work for the movie/music industry is going to be voting in favour of this kind of political fluff talk?

Really?

Are you implying that phone companies don't have the capability to record or analyze phone calls?

I initiate a hack via social engineering over the telephone. I get ahold of some passwords and information which allows me to access super secret data, and leak it. I suppose the phone company is at fault, also?

What kind of nonsense. Politicians should not directly talk about IT related issues - but rather, allow some representative who isn't ridiculously uninformed to do so on their behalf, save them lots of face.

"Most bizarre logic fart I've ever seen on an online forum in ages"

Clearly someone who doesn't understand game theory in any way whatsoever.

*sigh* Yes, because that's the same thing.

It's rather easy to identify fake anything, for the most part, in China.. unless you're some street-dumb newb who just walks off a plane and is SHOCKED that they copy software for sale on street corners.