Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

FBI honeyFollow

#1 Jan 23 2016 at 8:01 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/12116278/FBI-took-over-worlds-biggest-child-****-website.html

I am not a big fan of FBI ( Comey specifically ) and I do go out of my way to show how out of hand they have been getting lately, but here I do not even have to try that hard. Should be a fun conundrum for the average 'will you think of the children' bridgade.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#2 Jan 23 2016 at 8:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
More Big Government taking control of private enterprise Smiley: disappointed
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#3 Jan 23 2016 at 8:24 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Jophiel wrote:
More Big Government taking control of private enterprise Smiley: disappointed
I know, right? They should have called Salon and found an expert on the subject from the private sector to run it. Smiley: tongue
#4 Jan 23 2016 at 8:29 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
I think it points out a fundamental flaw in the governments argument that damages are done on, and by viewership, rather than on, and by committing sexual acts with a minor.

Edited, Jan 23rd 2016 9:29am by Timelordwho
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#5 Jan 23 2016 at 11:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
I know, right? They should have called Salon and found an expert on the subject from the private sector to run it. Smiley: tongue

I have no idea what that means. I assume it's some angry anti-SJW Twitterverse Tumblr thing.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#6 Jan 23 2016 at 11:41 AM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
So I read up to the part of "could be accessed and copied in the 13 days when it was effectively a government-run site" and thought isn't that copying part actually a huge problem and pretty big deal?

I don't know much about sting operations, so maybe someone with more knowledge can explain the situation to me. Aren't digital goods fundamentally different than physical items, in that a single original can be copied endlessly? If they say 100,000 people visited the site, and they only got addresses for 1,300 and only arrested 137, then haven't they just given around 99,000 people access to illegal materiel, some of whom will likely go on to copy and distribute it themselves? I know the marijuana or cocaine used in a drug bust can be real, but isn't it usually reclaimed at the end of a sting?
#7 Jan 23 2016 at 11:44 AM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
I know, right? They should have called Salon and found an expert on the subject from the private sector to run it. Smiley: tongue

I have no idea what that means. I assume it's some angry anti-SJW Twitterverse Tumblr thing.

Salon posted an op-ed written by a self-identified pedophile that argued we, as a society, should not stigmatize them because feelz. It was very "you're the real monsters!".

Edit: here's the link.

Edited, Jan 23rd 2016 11:46am by Demea
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#8 Jan 23 2016 at 11:47 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Demea wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
I know, right? They should have called Salon and found an expert on the subject from the private sector to run it. Smiley: tongue

I have no idea what that means. I assume it's some angry anti-SJW Twitterverse Tumblr thing.

Salon posted an op-ed written by a self-identified pedophile that argued we, as a society, should not stigmatize them because feelz. It was very "you're the real monsters!".
Actually, I want to say it was more than one, but I'm too lazy to go double check.

Someone was making fun of them when I went on Twitter, so I just happened to find a couple of others.

Edited, Jan 23rd 2016 11:03am by Poldaran
#9 Jan 24 2016 at 6:40 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
Salon is frequently used as the new liberal strawman. Because naturally, people who support equal rights for homosexuals must also want the same rights for pedos-- or, "How to make everyone at the party extremely uncomfortable as if talking about politics in the first place wasn't enough."
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#10 Jan 24 2016 at 6:51 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Kuwoobie wrote:
Because naturally, people who support equal rights for homosexuals must also want the same rights for pedos-- or, "How to make everyone at the party extremely uncomfortable as if talking about politics in the first place wasn't enough."
Did you read the articles? Because they're the ones who keep trying to mainstream that ****.
#11 Jan 24 2016 at 7:18 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Kuwoobie wrote:
Because naturally, people who support equal rights for homosexuals must also want the same rights for pedos-- or, "How to make everyone at the party extremely uncomfortable as if talking about politics in the first place wasn't enough."
Did you read the articles? Because they're the ones who keep trying to mainstream that ****.


Yes, but as far as I know they are the only ones.
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#12 Jan 24 2016 at 7:32 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
They aren't the only articles. There are three more on that list that pretty well fit.
#13 Jan 24 2016 at 12:48 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
4,593 posts
..I think I'm ok with this.

Site was already an existing site being used for kiddie ****. That means material is already out there and these are registered users on a hidden site so they're mostly going to be regulars. If you immediately shut down the site the people using it aren't going to stop, they're just going to find another site with the same material on it. Leaving the site up for a couple weeks while you track those people down to prevent them from consuming/producing more material has minimal additional negative impact and potentially prevents a few child abuse situations.

137 pedophiles off the streets is a win even if it's a small percentage of the user base. It's a grey area but I can't think of a better answer.
#14 Jan 24 2016 at 3:24 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
I figured this was all for research purposes.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#15 Jan 24 2016 at 7:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
137 pedophiles off the streets is a win even if it's a small percentage of the user base. It's a grey area but I can't think of a better answer.


I don't think it is.

If they were actively harming, or trying to harm children, then I think even single digit capture rate is probably worth holding the site. Especially if it's a cheaper method than more traditional stings, taxpayer dollars and all that. civil forfeiture for the public good.

But active is the operative word; media content shouldn't be equated to abuse of minors. Obviously the creators of the content should be held to task. But we don't jail people for watching videos of torture, murder, larceny, rape or really any other crime. Why is this one special such that the very image of it cannot be seen without severe punishment?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#16 Jan 24 2016 at 8:06 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
But we don't jail people for watching videos of torture, murder, larceny, rape or really any other crime. Why is this one special such that the very image of it cannot be seen without severe punishment?




But of course, you could have a video of a kid being shot or ran over by a car or something, and probably not get in trouble.

While there does seem to be an inconsistent standard being made, it is something that is very hard to be on the "wrong" side of. You would be allying yourself with some groups that you probably wouldn't want to be. And there's the whole "if there wasn't a market" argument.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#17 Jan 25 2016 at 7:14 AM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
TLW wrote:
But active is the operative word; media content shouldn't be equated to abuse of minors. Obviously the creators of the content should be held to task. But we don't jail people for watching videos of torture, murder, larceny, rape or really any other crime. Why is this one special such that the very image of it cannot be seen without severe punishment?


That's a double standard that people don't like to talk about.

Tirith wrote:
While there does seem to be an inconsistent standard being made, it is something that is very hard to be on the "wrong" side of. You would be allying yourself with some groups that you probably wouldn't want to be. And there's the whole "if there wasn't a market" argument.
Doesn't that logic sound familiar that was used against other sexual preferences?
#18 Jan 25 2016 at 9:00 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Is this why it was lagging all weekend? Smiley: motz
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 272 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (272)