Re: The Interview
Now that we know it was them they should release the film. Those idiots are incapable of anything.
Well, yes and no. Militarily? North Korea is a joke. The only reason the North hasn't been steamrolled is China. Although that relationship has deteriorated over the years, particularly as China modernized and North Korea did not.
All that aside, apparently North Korea was at least sufficiently well off to fund this kind of hacking effort.
The reality is that, if they really wanted to, they could pay some dude with a gun to go into a theater showing The Interview, and just shoot the place up. A terror attack doesn't need to involve dirty bombs or ricin or airplanes. It can just be a guy with a gun shooting people. Or hell, even stabbing people. The point is to engender fear for political ends, not military dominance. And the reality is also that, realistically, this can happen anywhere at any time. Our security is an illusion, largely. There are plenty of public and/or strategic targets that terrorists could attack at any time. Movie theaters, subways, bus stations, restaurants, water reservoirs, power plants, etc., etc., etc. These places are not constantly guarded, if they're guarded at all. If all North Korea wanted to do was to make a statement, they could just pay a few guys to shoot up some theaters. Easy peasy.
Now, is that
likely? Probably not. But it
is feasible, even with a comparatively much weaker military.
This should be treated as an act of war, if we went and got caught hacking their stuff they'd be raising hell. This is also a very very good example of why not everything needs to be on a computer hooked to the freaking internet. If companies and agencies would learn to keep secret crap off things that can be hacked this wouldn't happen. This movie was going to be a turd anyhow and I'm amused by the "stars" complaining about the showing cancellations.
Mmmmmm.....no. This kind of stuff -- cyber attacks -- happen all the time. Nobody is going to war over it. Also, Sony is a Japanese company, not an American one. These are the things countries do
in lieu of war. As for the rest, I agree with you. Companies can protect their stuff by not having it be somewhere that hackers can get to -- like offline.
This makes no sense., There must be something else going on here to make SONY willing to eat its multimillion $ investment in this film. So far these hackers have released damaging inside information, so perhaps what's gone public is the tip of the iceberg compared to the really nasty stuff, and SONY execs don't want the public to know. A little blackmail.
It's all despicable.
I think it's more the cumulative effect of several things.
1. Sony is taking heat for the loss of its information. Much of this probably has independent economic value, and provides intel to other studios looking to compete. That's not good.
2. The theaters that said they were going to run the film got spooked. Once enough of them pulled it, Sony had to address it. Once
too many of them pulled it, Sony had to delay the film and then decide whether it's really worth trying to show this at all. It doesn't make sense to have the film open in what is effectively "limited release." Better to wait it out and then hope this blows over and they can release it later in proper fashion. Maybe that'll happen, maybe not. If not, they take a loss.
3. Sony was also possibly spooked about the bad press that could follow if they pushed ahead anyway and something happened at even one theater. Even if it was just some loony who was inspired by the threat to make themselves a name, Sony doesn't want its name being said in the same sentence with "...and the roughly 79 people who were killed and 11 wounded at the Alamo Draft House shooting this Christmas." Again, maybe it isn't realistic to expect this to happen, but it's one of those "If there's even a
chance it could...then we're pulling it."
As has been said, this is over a Franco/Rogen comedy film. Someone, somewhere said "This **** isn't worth the risk." And, frankly, I agree. It's not worth the risk. The film isn't meant to be some big political statement, nor is it intended as propaganda the way something like The Great Dictator or even Act of Valor were. It's just a goofy stoner movie. And yeah, maybe it's art, but it's also business.
Eh...not really. The situation with China and DPRK is complex, but most believe that Beijing has little patience for Kim Jung Un. Moreover, it's highly unlikely that another state would be compelled to take any meaningful action based on a comedy film.
Bingo. Nobody's going to war over a film, nor are they going to war over a lone hacking incident that only has economic effects (unless it was, like, shutting down Wall Street for a week).
