jvanbrecht
join:2007-01-08
Bowie, MD
| reply to tshirt
Re: The blocks are reasonable.
I'm inclined to agree. In my past jobs, I worked security and abuse for UUNET (prior to the whole MCI debacle) and then AOL/Time warner (aka roadrunner). I can tell you, in the course of my duties, I have seem some of the sickest shit possible, both illegal and just plain downright wrong. I am also against censorship in general, but there has to be a point where we draw the line. Most of the things I took down were involved with spamming, and while distasteful, not necessarily illegal (take down the revenue generator of the spam message and kill off the spammer, whack a mole game, but it was something that had to be done). The child related stuff was a no brainer, it goes down, all records get passed to law enforcement once a warrant was served (we would usually get notified about the material from law enforcement, but occasionally find things on our own, notify them, retain the logs and wait for a warrant).
On the flip side, the "for the children" argument gets thrown around an awful lot, when it comes to child porn, its a no brainer, but whats next, sex education sites, game sites with sexual content, all those laws aimed at child porn seem to include all sorts of broad contexts, rife for abuse, and I am sort of against that. |
|
Corydon
Cultivant son jardin
Premium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| said by jvanbrecht  :On the flip side, the "for the children" argument gets thrown around an awful lot, when it comes to child porn, its a no brainer, but whats next, sex education sites, game sites with sexual content, all those laws aimed at child porn seem to include all sorts of broad contexts, rife for abuse, and I am sort of against that. This is what scares me. To add to Sinclair Lewis' famous quote, fascism in the US will come about "for the children".
Considering how phenomenally rare actual sexual abuse of children by strangers is (on the order of 1 in a million), I often wonder just what agenda is really being pushed here (Cui bono? as L. Cassius used to say).
I suspect that the entire abuse issue is a red herring used to chip away at the First Amendment by the usual suspects pushing their idea of a culture war.
--
My opinions are my own. No-one else would want them! |
|
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
 ·T-Mobile US
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to jvanbrecht
Re: The blocks are reasonable!!! - THINK OF THE CHILDREN OMG!
said by jvanbrecht :On the flip side, the "for the children" argument gets thrown around an awful lot, when it comes to child porn, its a no brainer, but whats next, sex education sites, game sites with sexual content, all those laws aimed at child porn seem to include all sorts of broad contexts, rife for abuse, and I am sort of against that. Look at the french, and you'll see what's next: "racist" sites, "terrorism" sites. You know, for the children.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
wmcbrine
Touched by His Noodly Appendage
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD
1 edit | reply to Corydon
Re: The blocks are reasonable.
said by Corydon :Considering how phenomenally rare actual sexual abuse of children by strangers is (on the order of 1 in a million), I often wonder just what agenda is really being pushed here (Cui bono? as L. Cassius used to say). Yeah. I heard the most phenomenally absurd claims about this story on my local "News Channel 8" last night -- they said, with a straight face, that child porn was "a billion-dollar business" and "the fastest-growing business on the Internet". I don't think they even attributed these credulous statements.
Then I got an updated Terms of Service from Verizon last night with a clause about child porn. But I'm not sure it really does anything that they weren't already doing... I don't have access to it right now; I'll post it later.
I suspect that the entire abuse issue is a red herring used to chip away at the First Amendment by the usual suspects pushing their idea of a culture war. No kidding... it's been used for perhaps fourteen years now as the pretext for sweeping attacks on the Internet.
--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
1 edit | reply to tiger72
Re: The blocks are reasonable!!! - THINK OF THE CHILDREN OMG!
said by tiger72 :said by jvanbrecht :On the flip side, the "for the children" argument gets thrown around an awful lot, when it comes to child porn, its a no brainer, but whats next, sex education sites, game sites with sexual content, all those laws aimed at child porn seem to include all sorts of broad contexts, rife for abuse, and I am sort of against that. Look at the french, and you'll see what's next: "racist" sites, "terrorism" sites. You know, for the children. Slippery slope. If you don't do anything now, the time will come when nothing can be done to help you.
said by »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came :
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
|
|
DataShade
join:2008-06-11
Buffalo, NY | You win at Godwin's Law |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to jvanbrecht
Re: The blocks are reasonable.
said by jvanbrecht :I'm inclined to agree. In my past jobs, I worked security and abuse for UUNET (prior to the whole MCI debacle) and then AOL/Time warner (aka roadrunner). I can tell you, in the course of my duties, I have seem some of the sickest shit possible, both illegal and just plain downright wrong. Perhaps thats a job a certain internet population should pursue.
Speaking of the catching these rings, how do police get into child porn rings, when there are very high entrance requirements of lots of feature length child porn movies required? Do they secretly buy some stuff (possibly custom made, think of the horror) from real producers in untouchable foreign countries? Or they just phish/sniff/security exploit existing members for passwords? Or do they make it themselves? 
It worries me sometimes that these investigators like their job too much in the wrong way.  |
|
Corydon
Cultivant son jardin
Premium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO
clubs:
·Comcast
| Considering how much illegal activity on the Internet is done pretty much out in the open (copyright infringement is the obvious example), I'd suspect the purveyors of child porn are no different.
I suspect that it's largely a matter of hanging out in the right chat rooms or getting on the right mailing lists. Websites may be pretty effectively secured, but when you're chatting there's plenty of opportunities for social engineering.
As for some investigators getting way too involved in what they're doing, check out the Perverted Justice website...a lot of those people are almost as creepy as the people they're going after.
--
My opinions are my own. No-one else would want them! |
|
hacker90
join:2005-09-01
Winnebago, IL
·Mediacom
| reply to Corydon
You obviously never had a mother that worked for DCFS. This type of sexual abuse is quite common up here in northern illinois. But, it never makes the normal news broadcast.
Want to know something REALLY sick? My friend was told by an FBI agent at college, that the youngest sexual abuse victim he dealt with was only several hours old.
Hacker |
|
damicatz
@rr.com
| If they block a single website, then I am done with them. I pay Time Warner $250/month for digital cable on multiple televisions, digital phone, and Roadrunner. If they implement this system, all of those services will be canceled. I'll use all of the money I'll save towards a T-Carrier instead which I know won't be censored.
I don't like hypocrites. In the same paragraph, Time Warner says they do not block websites and then says they will happily block websites on the NCMEC list. Way to contradict yourself.
I do not pay them to filter my content. I do not like the idea of an independent body getting sole discretion over what constitutes child pornography or what sites contain them with no government oversight. I've seen cases where things were blocked for supposedly having child pornography when they infact had none. In this case, there is no appeals process; it is a dictatorship. The NCMEC has sole discretion over what sites should be blocked.
No thanks. |
|
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
·T-Mobile US
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to DataShade
Re: The blocks are reasonable!!! - THINK OF THE CHILDREN OMG!
You win at misapplying Godwin's Law.
I see no direct comparison between TWC and Hitler as is necessary to invoke Godwin's Law.
I do see a comparison between TWC's increasing censorship and the mindset of "I don't care because it doesn't effect me yet".
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
1 edit | reply to Corydon
Re: The blocks are reasonable.
said by Corydon :Considering how much illegal activity on the Internet is done pretty much out in the open (copyright infringement is the obvious example), I'd suspect the purveyors of child porn are no different. And considering how many completely meritless DMCA warnings are issued for alleged copyright infringement, I'd suspect that kiddie porn fans are few and far between. Let's get something straight here...child porn = bad. But that doesn't mean that we surrender wholesale control of the Net over to Big Bro for him to decide what is for us to see or not see. But considering the path we're already on, the U.S. will make China's Internet gatekeeping policies look generous and liberal in no time. |
|
wmcbrine
Touched by His Noodly Appendage
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD
1 edit | reply to wmcbrine
Here's the Terms of Service update from Verizon:
quote:
1. Reporting of Actual or Potential Violations of Child Pornography Laws. We have added language to our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) making clear that the Service cannot be used in any fashion for the transmission or dissemination of images containing child pornography. In addition, in Section 5, Privacy Policy; Legal Compliance, we have added language making clear that (a) we are required by law to report any facts or circumstances reported to us or which we discover from which it appears there may be a violation of the child pornography laws; and (b) that we reserve the right to report any such information, including the identity of users, account information, images and other facts to law enforcement personnel.
(The "1" is because this was just point one of five in the message, the others relating to billing, etc.) Nothing about blocking here, nor anything else proactive.
--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 |
|
DataShade
join:2008-06-11
Buffalo, NY
1 edit | reply to tiger72
Re: The blocks are reasonable!!! - THINK OF THE CHILDREN OMG!
said by tiger72 :You win at misapplying Godwin's Law. I see no direct comparison between TWC and Hitler as is necessary to invoke Godwin's Law. I do see a comparison between TWC's increasing censorship and the mindset of "I don't care because it doesn't effect me yet". Well, the Wikipedia article I linked to says "usenet" conversations, so if you want to be technical it doesn't apply to a web forum conversation ... but assuming it does, the link defines Godwin's law with the phrase "the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." And the original post I responded to quoted: "When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent" which I'm pretty sure qualifies as "a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler."
EDIT: quoted response for clarity |
|
wmcbrine
Touched by His Noodly Appendage
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD
1 edit | reply to wmcbrine
Re: The blocks are reasonable.
Well, I take it back -- I've just read on 0.verizon.announce that Verizon is planning to drop the alt.* hierarchy, just like Sprint. This is shocking overkill... although it will certainly spare them a lot of resources.
--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 |
|
cao1964
join:2000-08-09
Danville, PA
| reply to jvanbrecht
What is reasonable for one person does not make reasonable for all, next we need to silence the scientist teaching us all those dirty latin words telling us that sudo science is not science, how dare them.
I for one hate spam and child porn but blocking anything online is wrong, that should be done by people not companies, if the intenet is not open then lets just do what the chinese do, or maybe let religion rule our lives again and forget science or anything that contradicts faith.
At first blocking makes sense, but over time a lot more stuff gets added for the children and for the people who can't handle truth, that is a dangerous way for a develop country to go. |
|
