how-to block ads
topics flat nest
|Comments on news posted 2008-10-15 14:01:43: Over the summer, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo got a lot of attention for waging war on ISPs and newsgroup child porn, even though his highly publicized crusade resulted in ISPs, by their own admission, doing absolutely nothing differently. .. |
Yarmouth Port, MA
|reply to POB |
Re: Andrew Cuomo needs to create the appearance of a problem...
Since my "panties" aren't "in a wad" about anything, I think you have misinterpreted something. SilverSurfer has not said anything that I disagree with.
said by POB:
That may be so, but I've noticed that you have a nasty little habit of speaking in glittering generalities no matter what your opinion is on this site for any given topic.
said by POB:
Someone corrected you so don't get your panties in a wad over it.
People correct me every day, and I have invited and embraced that and I thank them for it.
In this case, I don't see any glaring corrections. In fact, SilverSurfer took what may be seen as a generality of porn and clarified that it was distinct from child porn. I'm perfectly okay with that, since I meant that from the beginning.
Welcome to our violent agreement.--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
NormanSI gave her time to steal my mind awayPremium,MVMReviews:
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
|reply to doober |
Re: Protecting the children ...............hmmmmmmmm
said by doober:
This investigation is censorship on free speech.
The investigation, itself, is not "censorship", it is more of a "witch hunt".
The result of the political grandstanding stunt, which this witch hunt has turned into is not "censorship". The ISPs, base on discussions I've participated in, with the SBC wonks over in 'sbcglobal.help.tech.newsgroups' (you can't get there unless you have an "at&t Yahoo! HSI" login) considered Usenet service to be a net cost, and would like any excuse to get out of offering them. Andy Cuomo just happened to hand them their excuse.
Now, if your ISP keeps you from accessing 'news.motzarella.org', or the other NNTP servers offered by dedicated NNTP service providers, then you have grounds to cry, "Censorship". Otherwise, it is nothing more than political, and economic hanky panky.--
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
Fort Wayne, IN
|reply to Doctor Four |
said by Doctor Four: said by ftthz:
So someone was paid to find those images??? Sounds like a disturbing job.
I doubt a person was involved, except maybe to program an automated bot to know what to search for.
In one of the past articles there as a link to a press release (that's no longer posted) that stated "The Attorney Generals investigation reviewed millions of pictures over several months, uncovering 88 different Newsgroups that contained a total of 11,390 sexually lewd photos featuring prepubescent children". Yes they paid someone (or some people) money to surf the download and look at millions of pictures of porn. They likely used a bot or some other automation software for the actual downloading, they still apparently reviewed them in person.
your moderator at work|
Are you saying that I should give the state of Utah all my downloaded XXX movies I got from newsgroups/limewire,p2p progies etc. just to protect the kids. There are something wrong witht this picture.
But to get back to this story about the witch hunt of end users in USA only. I wonder who will sue who for this? Will it be a case of censorship or will it be a case about restrictions, freedom of speech, lack of service on the internet(s) service we as consumers are paying for.
No, it was an example of how censorship has already been implemented to an extreme. In Utah, you could not buy a XXX movie from a B&M store; you go over the border to Nevada in order to do that. All adult movie rental is limited to "cable" versions. Adult shops have been banned from even operating in certain areas, and there is no such thing as a topless bar here. We cannot buy liquor other than 3.2% beer in our grocery and convenience stores, where it is also illegal to have a Playboy in plain view on a magazine rack. Utah's moral majority would like nothing more than to filter all Internet access within the state, and has even tried several times with some pretty outlandish legislation that barely failed.
IMO, these "save the child" campaigns are really nothing more than a convenient foothold used to initiate what the "moral terrorists" really want; total censorship.
If they really wanted to address this problem they would not be banning the illicit newsgroups, they would quietly monitor and trace the IP's accessing these groups, and then knock on a few doors. All they have really done here is drive the offenders underground where it will be much harder to identify them. Its sort of like forcing a landlord to burn down the local crackhouse when no one is home and then expecting the drug problem to magically go away.