T/S: Defamer v. Gawker

i received an email from gawker asking if i had heard from max and whether he was ok

i feel like people wondering when/why they created gawker accounts could be the plot of The Killer Inside Me 2

I'm not super familiar with Gawker. Just curious why a lot of people hack it.

― kshighway (ksh)

hahahahahaha

BUZZA FOR MOD

One snarky comment and you're screwed for life.

So I originally registered for Idolator in 2006, and I'm pretty sure I don't currently use that password anywhere (whatever it might have been). Now a search of my Gmail indicates that I reset that password in 2009, probably to something I do currently use elsewhere, but since Idolator was no longer part of Gawker at that time, I should be OK, right?

this was posted upthread http://undertow.jedsmith.org/gawker

ah mine must have been idolator too

max emailed me at 9pm - customer service!

Well my username/e-mail have definitely been compromised. But that doesn't mean anything if the password was unique, no?

\(o_O)/

Hmm, mine is on that list as well, though the e-mail address I used was a secondary anonymous-y one, so I don't know that it can be traced to anything other than that e-mail account.

if the password you gave gawker was unique, you're fine

cool i've used 'unique' for all my passwords

you weren't kidding

hey caek it looks like your gawker password was unique too...also your ilx one

lol

http://www.observer.com/2010/media/turning-gawker-itself

But there was also the very real chance that editors and writers across the city could now be outed publicly for dissing their bosses in private. One Gawker and Jezebel commenter with a Condé Nast email address, for instance, had written in about making up quotes at a women's magazine; the condition of Anna Wintour's 60-year-old skin; and her experiences with both circumcised and uncircumcised penises. Twenty-six readers registered with Times email addresses, 21 from Condé Nast, 12 from Time Inc., 18 from Hearst, nine from The Journal, six from the Post and three from the Daily News. An untold number more used harder-to-detect private accounts. But searching for media coworkers—and rivals—became as simple as plugging their personal email addresses into an easily downloadable 72-megabyte text file, a 1.3 million-entry fantasia of byline hunting. Did Jeffrey Toobin really register with the name "ValentinoAgamemnon"?

http://www.unconditionalconfidence.com/mt/mt-static/FCKeditor/UserFiles/Image/nervous.gif

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/12/13/the-top-50-gawker-media-passwords/

trustno1

'trustno1' is pretty good, as in, people with that password probably expected gawker or some other site to get hacked, probably use diff passwords for important stuff, and are probably safe. or maybe they're just stupid

At least two popular passwords are science-fiction references: “trustno1″ was Special Agent Mulder’s password on “The X-Files,”

afaict the passwords confirm what we already know, gawker's demographics skews towards huge fucking internet nerd

lol @ pokemon

wonder which one j0rdan's was

whoa I had no idea the situation was that serious before reading that article

I had an ex-girlfriend who had trustno1 as her gmail/facebook password

no kidding

including u, eh?

no joshua?

I was relatively trustworthy, only saw it by accident when she typed her password in the username spot once. Well, that part was innocent, at least.

here we go again? http://gawker.com/5714043/

Eh, it's a little much, for sure.

Is there anyone out there who hasn't figured out exactly what he seems to be like in social interactions? He really sounds like every somewhat arrogant, academically intelligent computer nerd. Reminds me of lots of people I've met.

lol ilx

wow at those emails. whoa

password reset lady at my school just gave me some parting advice: "just stay off of the gawker"

ADVICE TAKEN

my password was "jordan"

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/12/13/the-top-50-gawker-media-passwords/

― dayo, Wednesday, December 15, 2010 12:37 AM (5 days ago)

lol @ pokemon

― k3vin k., Wednesday, December 15, 2010 1:08 AM (5 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

wonder which one j0rdan's was

― k3vin k., Wednesday, December 15, 2010 1:08 AM (5 days ago)

^____^

comments section:

Reminds me of the time my sister bought my nephew a gift, that she told him was from me, because I upset him and accidentally took his apple or something. I'm allergic to apples to this likely didn't happen and was imagined by my nephew because kids are moody and nonsensical beings. But I did the normal thing and brought him a big bag of apples next time I saw him. My sister kept insisting the toy to appease was from me, but I insisted otherwise.

???

actually all the comments here are winners:

http://gawker.com/5715629/ungrateful-little-jerk-embodies-americas-attitude-towards-reading

Either
1. Long diatribes about how bad the parents are
2. Weird bragging about how they used to read as kids

Weird bragging is usually the domain of the jezebel commenters.

MrKotter 10:57 AM

So your plan is to restore that respect for reading, one Katy Perry post at a time?

boom

funniest thing about the WSJ blog entry -- that people actually do "online banking." What a buncha darned fools.

?

does that boggle ur stone-age mind or

other things "darned fools" do "online": shopping, taxes, reading, chatting!?!?!

would you say you pity these fools?

never been ripped off during online chatting and reading funnily enough