BombsAway Wrote:That's not a dilemma at all. Siblings aren't parents and the kid has no right to touch the other's stuff. If the parent is concerned with the kids lack of life-progess then the parent should be a parent and take away the kids internet. Hacking the kid serves no purpose except making the older sibling feel unnecessarily powerful and influential and will bring about unnecessary bitterness when it eventually comes out.
Do you have older siblings? You sound like someone whose definition of fairness comes from issues between older/younger siblings. Perhaps my take on the situation, in being different from yours, stems from the fact that I'm the oldest child, but I think the OP of that thread should hack her brother. You see metaphorical situations like these happen all over the place in the real world: female rape victims won't talk to a male detective but will open up to a female one, or a friend, etc. In this case the parents may be clueless as to how to go about preventing him from playing. After all, we're the children of the information age, and most of our parents can barely program the speed dial on their cell phones. On top of that, anyone smart can find a way to sustain their addiction if an improper block is put in place to try and cure the problem. How many of you went to another room to watch T.V. when your parents forbid you from watching, or played another console/computer when the first was taken away? Same things with other addicts. Dumping an alcoholics booze down the drain only enables them to go buy more.
My point with all of this is that I agree the OP, in this rare instance where she has an alternate solution to the problem, should strongly consider taking it. However, she shouldn't "UP N HACK DA MOFO" like one person responded to the thread. Instead, she should talk to someone aware of the consequences surrounding the situation and inform them of her "ace in the hole," then seek guidance from there. Her parents, if assessed as unreliable due to lack of computer/addiction knowledge, etc., should not be approached; instead, I think she should find a guidance counselor or a social worker and speak to them. A psychologist would be more apt at handling this situation with the least damaging repercussions than anyone else in her life.
Ssj5will Wrote:I completely agree.
He didn't give out his password, he's showing how much pomegranatety nexon's security is.
I can't stop laughing at you, Solar.
And back to the topic at hand. I think you guys are forgetting one thing: while he didn't give out his PIC, that doesn't mean he didn't set one. Remember that the first thing one had to do when logging into this latest patch was create a PIC for the account. This is the reason I inferred he could be the biggest fool in the world: if he was unaware that MS had gone through a patch (which, believe me, shouldn't be a surprise), he may have assumed hackers couldn't get through his pre-created PIN, but unfortunately chose the worst possible time to reveal his information in that PIN's have been replaced with PICs.
If that's the case he gave out every scrap of information needed to get into the account.
EDIT: Ahh, right, he didn't give out his password. Regardless, I've been told that good hackers only need the ID to get into an account, as they can break the password with ease. The fact that he gave out his PIN supports my above PIC theory, and the fact that it took 6 hours for hackers to strip him supports the passcrack theory (with room for the time it takes a hacker to find the thread on Basil).