Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Reply To Thread

Anthony Weiner not sure if that's his weiner.Follow

#1 Jun 01 2011 at 8:39 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
FUCKING HILARIOUS.

Weinergate. Teehee.

Edited, Jun 1st 2011 10:48pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2 Jun 01 2011 at 8:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I have no idea (nor really care) if it was legitimate or hax but his answers have been jack-retarded.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#3 Jun 01 2011 at 9:08 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Anthony WEINER wrote:
You know, I can't say with certitude. My system was hacked. Pictures can be manipulated. Pictures can be dropped in and inserted,
Jack retarded doesn't really begin to describe the ineptitude in answering. But it does make it funnier.

Be a politician and just say it isn't. If its a lie, its a believable one. He's a Jew from Brooklyn. Come on.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#4 Jun 01 2011 at 10:20 PM Rating: Good
The photo manipulation in question was a supposed "screenshot" of a Yfrog feed with his twitter info superimposed on it, or something like that. Some chick did some digital forensics analysis and concluded it was clearly a shopjob and fake, and that his username and stuff had been copypasta'd in.

So yeah, he's not handling this well, but c'mon, with a last name like that, neither would you.
#5 Jun 01 2011 at 10:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I haven't followed the nitty-gritty details but Weiner is supposedly one of the more tech savvy and Twitter-happy people in Congress so I found it eyebrow raising that he'd supposedly send such a picture in a medium where he knows it's public and being followed. It's not like sending e-mails or something where you can at least hope they remain anonymous.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#6 Jun 02 2011 at 6:15 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,049 posts
Jon Stewart's segment on this was hilarious. He basically laughed and said "I was good friends with him back in college, and let me just say... no way. Granted, we swam in the cold Atlantic Ocean a lot, but... no. Impossible."
#7 Jun 02 2011 at 7:53 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,471 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
Jon Stewart's segment on this was hilarious. He basically laughed and said "I was good friends with him back in college, and let me just say... no way. Granted, we swam in the cold Atlantic Ocean a lot, but... no. Impossible."


"His ***** is like his politics...far left leaning."
#8REDACTED, Posted: Jun 02 2011 at 7:55 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#9 Jun 02 2011 at 2:58 PM Rating: Good
I think the confusion over whether it's a photo of him specifically or not also has to do with the ubiquity of that particular pair of boxer briefs. Even my husband has a pair of them.
#10 Jun 02 2011 at 3:08 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
catwho wrote:
I think the confusion over whether it's a photo of him specifically or not also has to do with the ubiquity of that particular pair of boxer briefs. Even my husband has a pair of them.


Honestly, the question of who exactly is in the photo or whether said photo was shopped isn't that important. The question is whether or not he sent the photo.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#11 Jun 02 2011 at 3:30 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
LockeColeMA wrote:
Jon Stewart's segment on this was hilarious. He basically laughed and said "I was good friends with him back in college, and let me just say... no way. Granted, we swam in the cold Atlantic Ocean a lot, but... no. Impossible."
"His ***** is like his politics...far left leaning."
Hahaha, yeah, that cracked me up.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#12 Jun 02 2011 at 3:40 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
gbaji wrote:
catwho wrote:
I think the confusion over whether it's a photo of him specifically or not also has to do with the ubiquity of that particular pair of boxer briefs. Even my husband has a pair of them.


Honestly, the question of who exactly is in the photo or whether said photo was shopped isn't that important. The question is whether or not he sent the photo.


I disagree. I think the question is "Is there a similar picture of your junk?". Whether or not that is the same picture is an entire different question. If you don't have any "junk pictures", then it obviously can't be you.
#13 Jun 02 2011 at 3:48 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
Almalieque wrote:
gbaji wrote:
catwho wrote:
I think the confusion over whether it's a photo of him specifically or not also has to do with the ubiquity of that particular pair of boxer briefs. Even my husband has a pair of them.


Honestly, the question of who exactly is in the photo or whether said photo was shopped isn't that important. The question is whether or not he sent the photo.


I disagree. I think the question is "Is there a similar picture of your junk?". Whether or not that is the same picture is an entire different question. If you don't have any "junk pictures", then it obviously can't be you.


[:woosh:]

As usual.
#14 Jun 02 2011 at 4:11 PM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
catwho wrote:
I think the confusion over whether it's a photo of him specifically or not also has to do with the ubiquity of that particular pair of boxer briefs. Even my husband has a pair of them.


Honestly, the question of who exactly is in the photo or whether said photo was shopped isn't that important. The question is whether or not he sent the photo.


Which he didn't. Yfrog has disabled the email-pic service that was exploited, presumably to dig through the logs and find the actual email address of the person who sent the photo for the lawyers - and the IP address.
#15 Jun 02 2011 at 4:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
catwho wrote:
Which he didn't. Yfrog has disabled the email-pic service that was exploited, presumably to dig through the logs and find the actual email address of the person who sent the photo for the lawyers - and the IP address.

Interesting. Like I said, I haven't been following the details but since you brought it up, I searched for news on it involving yfrog.
Ars Technica wrote:
The truth, though, is that it is possible that the Weiner-wiener incident was pulled off by pranksters who knew how to manipulate yFrog into posting a photo to Weiner's account. yFrog, like many other image services, allows users to send a photo to a specialized e-mail address made for that person's account; when the service receives the message, it gets posted automatically and then tweeted out to the world.

The yFrog e-mail addresses given to users aren't public, but they also aren't hard to crack with some patience and some brute force. As noted by the Daily Dot, the format includes the user's twitter name, a period, and a random word between five and six characters @yfrog.com (for example, mine might be something like ejacqui.bears@yfrog.com). And because yFrog apparently accepts submissions to those secret e-mail addresses from any account, any prankster who has guessed the random dictionary word could send a photo to Weiner's account as if it were from Weiner himself.
[...]
The folks over at Cannonfire tested this several times with yFrog and confirmed that this is possible when the trickster figures out the target's yFrog e-mail address. yFrog has since disabled this feature, but the damage has already been done to Weiner's reputation—assuming that it was indeed a prank from a third party
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#16gbaji, Posted: Jun 02 2011 at 4:48 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) We don't know if he did or didn't. Hence, my statement. All we know is that it's possible to exploit Yfrog to do this, not that it actually happened in this case. And while I fully admit to not having more than a cursory knowledge of the specifics, my understanding is that this didn't get sent out to "the world", but to a specific person, but done publicly so that everyone following him could see the tweet.
#17 Jun 02 2011 at 4:56 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
gbaji wrote:
It sounds more like wishful thinking whilst trying to come up with some rational explanation instead of the more likely obvious one that he accidentally sent a message publicly that he intended to be private.
Because he's a Democrat, right?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#18 Jun 02 2011 at 4:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I'm frankly not sure how it could even be possible.

Not too long ago, you have no idea how Twitter even worked. You'll have to excuse me for not really hanging on your expert opinion in this instance.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#19 Jun 02 2011 at 5:03 PM Rating: Excellent
gbaji wrote:
catwho wrote:
gbaji wrote:
catwho wrote:
I think the confusion over whether it's a photo of him specifically or not also has to do with the ubiquity of that particular pair of boxer briefs. Even my husband has a pair of them.


Honestly, the question of who exactly is in the photo or whether said photo was shopped isn't that important. The question is whether or not he sent the photo.


Which he didn't. Yfrog has disabled the email-pic service that was exploited, presumably to dig through the logs and find the actual email address of the person who sent the photo for the lawyers - and the IP address.


We don't know if he did or didn't. Hence, my statement. All we know is that it's possible to exploit Yfrog to do this, not that it actually happened in this case. And while I fully admit to not having more than a cursory knowledge of the specifics, my understanding is that this didn't get sent out to "the world", but to a specific person, but done publicly so that everyone following him could see the tweet.

I'm not aware that the Yfrog exploit would result in a specific targeted tweet like that. I'm frankly not sure how it could even be possible. Automatic upload of a pic? Sure. Forwarding that to a single specific twitter account from the account it's uploaded to? I don't think so. It sounds more like wishful thinking whilst trying to come up with some rational explanation instead of the more likely obvious one that he accidentally sent a message publicly that he intended to be private.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but I think we should wait until more facts come in before leaping to the conclusion that it was all a prank played on him.


Actually, it's quite easy to direct it to a specific person on Twitter via Yfrog. You just include the @UserName in the message portion of the email, and bam, the tweet is sent and directed to that person. Easy peasy. Too easy, unfortunately.
#20 Jun 02 2011 at 5:10 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm frankly not sure how it could even be possible.

Not too long ago, you have no idea how Twitter even worked. You'll have to excuse me for not really hanging on your expert opinion in this instance.

Especially since you posted a plausible explanation for how it is possible one post before his response (timestamps are ~15min apart).
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#21 Jun 02 2011 at 5:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The dudes at Ars Technica are mere mewling babes in comparison to Gbaji's awesome Twitter knowledge. He's a tech support guy!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#22 Jun 02 2011 at 5:23 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
You know what this thread needs more of?

Weiner.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#23 Jun 02 2011 at 5:33 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
catwho wrote:
Actually, it's quite easy to direct it to a specific person on Twitter via Yfrog. You just include the @UserName in the message portion of the email, and bam, the tweet is sent and directed to that person. Easy peasy. Too easy, unfortunately.


I've been reading a few sites discussing the Yfrog hack, but still haven't found one detailing how the tweet would appear to originate from one person and be to another by using the Yfrog hack. All of them verify that a third party can send an image to Yfrog with the correct email address string and it'll show up on that persons Yfrog *and* on that persons twitter (which is frankly silly for twitter to allow an image hosting service to do btw), but my understanding is that the tweet appeared to be a public message from Wiener to a specific female which was visible to many other people as well.


Is there some source detailing how to cause that to happen? Again, I'm not saying that it didn't, just that I haven't seen more than parts of an explanation about how it could have.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#24 Jun 02 2011 at 6:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I've been reading a few sites discussing the Yfrog hack, but still haven't found one detailing how the tweet would appear to originate from one person and be to another by using the Yfrog hack. All of them verify that a third party can send an image to Yfrog with the correct email address string and it'll show up on that persons Yfrog *and* on that persons twitter (which is frankly silly for twitter to allow an image hosting service to do btw), but my understanding is that the tweet appeared to be a public message from Wiener to a specific female which was visible to many other people as well.

Reading Cannonfire, since they broke the yFrog 'hack' story, it seems that the "Sent to her" angle was exaggerated.

In fact, their whole spread on the scandal is rather interesting.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#25 Jun 02 2011 at 6:16 PM Rating: Good
ITT: Gbaji has no idea how Twitter actually works.
#26 Jun 02 2011 at 6:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
catwho wrote:
ITT: Gbaji has no idea how Twitter actually works.
That garners a smidgen of respect from me.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 207 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (207)