I think you may undervalue how the practical ramifications of breaking-and-entering may enter into morality and primary intent. There were teen burglars in a neighborhood a few years back. They didn't break windows. They only entered garages that were unlocked. So the police recommended we check that we've locked our…

Are you here to talk about victimshaming, or here to pick a fight? You seem in the mood for no substance, all flash. If you aren't going to engage, I'm not sure what I'm doing.

"you are just … changing victim-blaming to 'the victim acted unwisely.' " Yes, that's exactly the way I'm framing it; and you keep saying it's bullshit. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. And maybe it is. But I require reasons to follow the cry of BS, not your haughty claims that it's self-obvious. It's not self-obvious to …

*shrug* well THAT settles things. You DO find it unwise. Because if you didn't find it unwise, you'd have said why. But you find it unwise and don't like the implication. To which I'm open to the idea that it's both unwise and perfectly unblameworthy, but for reasons someone — you, theoretically, but perhaps someone…

… so, to answer the question, you DO find it unwise? You could admit that (1) you find it unwise, but (2) find a reason that doing something unwise is separate from blame. Unless (3) you somehow find it wise? But then do so — try SOMEthing — because this is the crux of my hangup, my argument; which you say is…

A third of all computers have viruses. People get doxxed daily. 0-day exploits pop up hourly. Content managers shift through everyone's private cloud stuff every minute of every day. Is the cloud being moderately insecure really all that surprising?

We're getting disjointed here; read my response in our other subthread before we continue here. You're continuing to press ideas I've already conceded.

You didn't look at my other reply to you, did you.

… the [cloud's back]door WAS unlocked, people just didn't notice. Or care enough.

Grr. Do you understand the way argument works? I justify an argument, so that I might see an argument that deconstructs it. I try an analogy, you convince me how the analogy doesn't pan out, I try a new one, back, forth, back, forth, until we find illuminating common ground — ta-da, I'm convinced, or neutrally…

I'm having multiple conversations in this thread, and my opinion is changing bit-by-bit. So my hangup for your comment is still that the cloud is insanely — INSANELY — far from "perfectly secure"; but I see now that if I want to hold anyone responsible for that, I really only can the cloud providers for deceiving the…

I see what you're saying, and I find it very compelling. But it bugs me just a little and I want to actually believe as opposed to pretend to believe, so I will in fact say yes, "the people who did this to Jones would be more morally culpable if … they [had to] work harder to accomplish them." I'd say yes because,…

I … basically agree! My hangup is not a question of divvying out blame victim-side, as in oh, but you picked Robber's Alley, no sympathy for you. I'm not mitigating the crime itself by saying someone thought it was easier than others, so therefore there's less pain. But everyone is so caught up on the word DESERVE…

That's precisely my problem. I'm trying to work my way out of the hole that is the knee-jerk. And what you've here said is what I already know. So I re-wind, once again, to the cold philosophy of if-then: it is a given that there's a certain inevitable possibility of people stealing my car no matter what I do. But if…

I don't mean to be dishonest. I'm seeing a way that differs with yours, one I'm trying to understand because I believe it important I try. Tell me how my analogy is fraudulent. — although, I guess, you already have: you're saying that when someone steals, it simply doesn't matter how they stole it, it doesn't matter…

stop phrasing it like […] objects were stolen

I … guess. I mean, I *get* what Wafflicious is saying. But the "no if ands or buts" absolutism is where I get hazy. I genuinely non-ironically hope that your doubt of my unchangeability proves wrong. I *want* to believe. But I guess I still feel logically unmoved? But it's such an important issue, so I will press on…

That's a terrible metaphor! Allow me to fix it for you: I own a vault made of thick plastic, and I stick my secrets inside that plastic vault. And someone breaks it open and steals them. And someone says "I'm so sorry, I really am. But why did you put your secrets in a plastic vault?"

That didn't help me at all with what I was asking. If I were tweeting or messaging or going after or otherwise directing after-the-fact suggestions to Jones, I'd agree, that would be most dickish. But I'm not. I'm asking about social theory. This scenario among the unfortunate many brings up a question I have, and I'd…

If I own a car and don't lock the doors and park it in 'Robber's Alley,' that's not an invitation for anyone to steal it. But wouldn't it be better if I locked my doors and didn't park it in Robber's Alley? It would, of course, be best if robbers didn't rob at all, but … well, it IS Robber's Alley, you know?