Brianna Wu / John Walker Flynt - "Biggest Victim of Gamergate," Failed Game Developer, Failed Congressional Candidate

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Kosher Dill said:
I think the real key to understanding it is, as so often with John, "Socially Unconscious". If you read Election Eve, Holiday gets away with all sort of ludicrous mayhem just because she's so cool, quirky, and badass. That's pretty much the template for John's new character "Brianna" - if you're cool enough you can do anything and be anything, just because the laws of narrative will knuckle under and comply to your deranged fantasies.
John definitely thinks "Brianna" is cool enough. So why not? Make her a mechanic, a congresswoman, a space secret agent. Anything goes! Whappity-pow!
Click to expand...
A woman who can do every job in the blink of an eye? Isn't that Barbie, the radical feminist's nightmare?
 
Mola Ram said:
I think that's very likely. You don't have to read very far between the lines to see he's not terribly happy with how badly the surgery's holding up as he ages. I've also wondered if the surgery is the reason for his falling out with his family; that is, they refused to pay for it either on religious grounds or because they wanted him to be examined by a psychiatrist first. I don't know if the timeline matches up for that, however.
Click to expand...

We're not really sure what kind of wound he has going on downstairs, but what we can see is that whatever was done to his face is a hatchet job. We know he used to be semi-normal looking at least facially and that now his face looks like a cube steak dragged behind a truck over three miles of dirt road. I half suspect, though, that John insisted on exactly what he got, possibly trying to turn into one of his creepy fetish characters that he constantly reuses in everything.

While I sometimes find it hard to believe he doesn't know how freakishly garish he looks, he's as autistic as Chris and may think he looks just fine.
 
But John there are bad guys on the moon!!

infosec.jpg
 
AnOminous said:
While I sometimes find it hard to believe he doesn't know how freakishly garish he looks, he's as autistic as Chris and may think he looks just fine.
Click to expand...
Considering John tries to show himself as little as possible to the point of refusing to appear in his own campaign ad and using old shitty MySpace photos to this day, I'm guessing there's at least something close to awareness going on somewhere in his brain.
 
vertexwindi said:
Considering John tries to show himself as little as possible to the point of refusing to appear in his own campaign ad and using old shitty MySpace photos to this day, I'm guessing there's at least something close to awareness going on somewhere in his brain.
Click to expand...
If he didn't always know he looks "off", he surely must have gotten a clue while sitting in the makeup chair for his "Internet Ruined My Life" appearance. Somewhere around the 6th or 7th hour.
 
Anti Fanta said:
This may be dangerously close to the realms of armchair psychoanalysis, but I have a feeling that Wu's egotism and eagerness to proclaim herself an expert in everything despite not having the prerequisites to back up such claims is because she views the world through the logic of the one thing she has actually put vast amounts of time into: video games.

You put in Call of Duty and you're immediately a highly-trained soldier with a vast knowledge of weaponry, play Bayonetta and you're a witch with cool powers, in Sim City you're a mayor, architect and town planner; you 'become' these things without any effort on your behalf. Most people understand this is just escapism, and that it's fun to play roles you wouldn't ever be able to in real life and that if you were to, would either require a lifetime of effort or be straight up impossible.

Brianna, of course, is different: she applies this video game logic to the real world. She wants to be a software engineer? She is one in her mind. She wants to be a expert mechanic/street racer? She is one. Congresswoman? Yeah that too.

To Brianna real life is the same as switching the disc that's in the Playstation.
Click to expand...

I would like to agree with you but you are wrong, you see, John only see things like hobbies as a medium for being famous, is the only thing that he craves, SOCOM was a stupid tryhard intent of being famous by being a cartoonist, then he tried other "easy" things, like being a journalist, being a (very low rank) politician and recently being a game developer, John has showed us that he doesn't care and doesn't give a shit about anything unless he can get asspats and recognition for it, i can assure you, John doesn't give a shit about video games by seeing his online gaming profiles, he destroyed any resemblance of caring about video games after R60 was a monumental failure, he just keep insisting that he likes them because the idiots that still follow him are from his Giant spacekat era, now he doesn't even mention GSK, all his effort are (wasted) in being a congressman, because being a game developer failed spectacularly to him

tl;dr john doesn't care about anything that doesn't involve kowtowing to him
 
Kosher Dill said:
View attachment 216093

John will 911 #TYCED
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the latter end of the generation of Porsches that got the nickname "widowmaker".

Come to think of it that's actually perfect. Carry on!

Actually I do really like the way that generation of 911s look and the engines are mostly known for being reliable, if properly maintained. But uh...I don't think Bribri fully understands what "in need of TLC" on a car nearly as old as they are can entail.

Also the nickname derives mostly from the car being a combination of being light, rear drive, wrong place for the engine, and (relatively) powerful, which resulted in a car with absolutely unforgiving vehicle dynamics if you drove like an idiot, which realistically, most people did (and still do).

AnOminous said:
I half suspect, though, that John insisted on exactly what he got, possibly trying to turn into one of his creepy fetish characters that he constantly reuses in everything.
Click to expand...
I think you hit the nail on the head here. There's some weird human doll people out there that pay top dollar for the work and they still look like a walking uncanny valley precisely because they want something that looks strange no matter how the doctor cuts it.
 
What does that even mean?

I'm really struggling to parse the idea of funding "infosec research" and making it "open source" together. Does she mean funding pure mathematics, finding new cryptoschemes and publishing them? Because they're already open in the sense that the papers describe the algorithms, though thanks to the crazy US patent system they may not be open in the sense of being available for all to use unencumbered.

Does she mean finding vulnerabilities in already existing products? What does "open source" mean in that context? Vulnerabilities are all eventually disclosed, usually through the CERT process when a fix is available. The actual code of the fix isn't made open source unless the product is already open source in the first place.

This is just stringing together buzz words and hoping people mistake it for coherent policy. "Engineer" Wu really hasn't got the slightest clue what she's talking about when it comes to software.
 
I really want to know why Wu thinks open source encryption would be a good thing. Open Source means anyone has access to the code...Which means anyone has easy access to make ways to break the encryption or reupload the code with backdoors so more people get their identities stolen and PC's hacked.
 
Anonymus Fluhre said:
I really want to know why Wu thinks open source encryption would be a good thing. Open Source means anyone has access to the code...Which means anyone has easy access to make ways to break the encryption or reupload the code with backdoors so more people get their identities stolen and PC's hacked.
Click to expand...

The idea of open source is that all that access means any vulnerabilities will be found and exposed more quickly; backdoors are much easier to insert into black box type code because the people inserting it might be the only ones who can look for it. Good encryption works without needing to be secretive about the 'how' because even the designers can't break it.

But how much of this is figuring into Wu's thinking and how much of those tweets is just jargony technobabble I don't know. Even if you want open source for good reasons there are sometimes other reasons (business concerns, proprietary needs, etc) that might come into play.
 
Blue Jerkop said:
The idea of open source is that all that access means any vulnerabilities will be found and exposed more quickly; backdoors are much easier to insert into black box type code because the people inserting it might be the only ones who can look for it. Good encryption works without needing to be secretive about the 'how' because even the designers can't break it.

But how much of this is figuring into Wu's thinking and how much of those tweets is just jargony technobabble I don't know. Even if you want open source for good reasons there are sometimes other reasons (business concerns, proprietary needs, etc) that might come into play.
Click to expand...

If that was true places like GitHub wouldn't be filled with broken code.
 
Blue Jerkop said:
The idea of open source is that all that access means any vulnerabilities will be found and exposed more quickly; backdoors are much easier to insert into black box type code because the people inserting it might be the only ones who can look for it. Good encryption works without needing to be secretive about the 'how' because even the designers can't break it.
Click to expand...

There was a talk some years ago about how someone like the NSA might tamper with open source encryption projects. Projects like that are constantly audited to check for flaws, bugs, exploits or possibly malicious edits, Programmers can audit some of that, experienced programmers can audit more complex bits like the crypto-implementation and things in that area.
The thing they can't fully audit, because it's so complex, is the actual math. The dude talking about this, can't remember his name, argued that there aren't many people in the world who understands that shit and is truly qualified to do something like that. and some of them already work at the NSA.
It was all speculation, of course, but it was interesting.

And here's a picture on what Brianna might want to look like to mirror those creepy sex-doll characters in Rev60.
VYe3w9H.jpg
 
Norvic said:
What does that even mean?

I'm really struggling to parse the idea of funding "infosec research" and making it "open source" together. Does she mean funding pure mathematics, finding new cryptoschemes and publishing them?
Click to expand...

NOTHING JOHN SAYS MEANS ANYTHING. I mean other than LOOK AT MEEEEEE LOOK AT MEEEEEE.

Just saying.
 
Absolutely agree John, let's start with some pest control and clean out the filthy roaches who are claiming to be software engineers but have zero credentials or portfolio to show for it.

ethics.jpg
 
Do you understand what it's like to be a woman, John?

man.jpg


Yes, sir!!! We, your obedient constituency, will definitely take time out of our lives to find more toys for you to buy!

switch.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom