Ban on porn. My life is over!

[shoemoodoshaloo]

OH MY GOD!

Strict federal regulations that are scheduled to take effect later this week could cripple many Internet porn sites and burden other sites with adult photos in personal ads or retail offerings.

Under the new rules, which expand the enforcement of an existing law known as 18 U.S.C. 2257, every Web site with explicit adult content -- including sites that allow for member-generated content -- must keep records proving the people portrayed in photos or videos are over the age of 18. webmasters who don't comply face federal prison terms.

The adult entertainment industry and advocates for online speech and privacy are fighting the regulations and hoping to put them on hold by Thursday, when they're scheduled to take effect. But explicit sites, including many within the LGBT community, are already preparing for the worst. Some are busy updating their paperwork, while others plan to simply go out of business, at least temporarily, or move their operations offshore.

The HORROR (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/po/20050622/co_po/newpolicythreatensadultwebcontent)

This is bad new for porn sites. Since, many porn sites borrow and link themselves to other porn pages, there is no way for sites to background check the pictures they display. This is now illegal. Many sites will be shut down. I discovered this when going to a site and the site was CLOSED! Holy shit. It's almost impossible for any websites to cross check their pictures. Imagine trying to hunt down the identity of an original photo over the internet. Photos are posted, then borrowed, borrowed, borrowed, borrowed! The original host sites for many pictures don't even exist anymore.

I guess this is a victory for many of you "(edited as of 6:00 am because it might offend mothers)" people.

But for us "Un-sophsiticated to the point that we stay up til 5:30 in the morning, scavenging for porn and posting on political forums" people, this is an outrage.

Call me a pervert or w/e, but there has to be at least some of you that feel cheated from all this. The internet is already our only crappy source of free porn, and it's being taken away.

Finally...a political issue that I feel strongly about. All it took was someone to attack my most sacred part (the penis).

[Trau]

8)

[Apollo5600]

Let it burn, burn, burn! That ring of firreee, that ring of fire.

[TheRealLobo]

If I teach you about FREE USENET, will you go away?

[DoctorDoom]

Under the new rules, which expand the enforcement of an existing law known as 18 U.S.C. 2257, every Web site with explicit adult content -- including sites that allow for member-generated content -- must keep records proving the people portrayed in photos or videos are over the age of 18.If the vermin are using material involving kids under 18, then let them feel the sword. I have no pity for porn peddlers, but it takes a particularly despicable grade of scumbag to exploit kids.

IMO, if they're caught, rip their balls off and force them to run naked down the street carrying them in their mouths until they die of blood loss.

Many sites will be shut down.TS! If anyone is so desperate that he has to get off looking at Net smut, he has all the sympathy from me that he is worth.

BTW...

OH MY GOD!Not very likely.

[Trau]

It's not about how objectionable you find porn and those who use it, it's about one's right to use it.

This measure is overkill.

[TheRealLobo]

OH MY GOD!

Strict federal regulations that are scheduled to take effect later this week could cripple many Internet porn sites and burden other sites with adult photos in personal ads or retail offerings.

Under the new rules, which expand the enforcement of an existing law known as 18 U.S.C. 2257, every Web site with explicit adult content -- including sites that allow for member-generated content -- must keep records proving the people portrayed in photos or videos are over the age of 18. webmasters who don't comply face federal prison terms.

The adult entertainment industry and advocates for online speech and privacy are fighting the regulations and hoping to put them on hold by Thursday, when they're scheduled to take effect. But explicit sites, including many within the LGBT community, are already preparing for the worst. Some are busy updating their paperwork, while others plan to simply go out of business, at least temporarily, or move their operations offshore.

The HORROR (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/po/20050622/co_po/newpolicythreatensadultwebcontent)

This is bad new for porn sites. Since, many porn sites borrow and link themselves to other porn pages, there is no way for sites to background check the pictures they display. This is now illegal. Many sites will be shut down. I discovered this when going to a site and the site was CLOSED! Holy shit. It's almost impossible for any websites to cross check their pictures. Imagine trying to hunt down the identity of an original photo over the internet. Photos are posted, then borrowed, borrowed, borrowed, borrowed! The original host sites for many pictures don't even exist anymore.

I guess this is a victory for many of you "(edited as of 6:00 am because it might offend mothers)" people.



Gee...darn the luck

But for us "Un-sophsiticated to the point that we stay up til 5:30 in the morning, scavenging for porn and posting on political forums" people, this is an outrage.

Awww...is 'im all outraged and stuff?

Call me a pervert or w/e, but there has to be at least some of you that feel cheated from all this.

Pervert? Maybe. Juvenile...certainly.

The internet is already our only crappy source of free porn, and it's being taken away.

Yeah, and we know how useful it is for you children. Can I suggest a National Geographic?

Seriously, go find yourself some porn, have fun, and please don't bother the grown-ups.

In another thread you practically begged me not to treat you like a "child". I see that my first perception was correct.

Finally...a political issue that I feel strongly about. All it took was someone to attack my most sacred part (the penis).

Sadly, that's how many leftists feel.

[TheRealLobo]

It's not about how objectionable you find porn and those who use it, it's about one's right to use it.

Right?

This measure is overkill.

Well, you mean that a measure to help stop the explotation of children that infringes upon your ability to see porn it "overkill".

Just wanting to get things explained here.

[UnkHiram]

Shoe

Either you are being

1) extremely sarcastic

or

2) A pervert who does not give a damn how many children are harmed by this sickness.


Which is it?

[Tumblehome]

This is not the big slam against internet porn that some seem to be thinking it is. The internet will adjust, likely in a matter of weeks if not days and porn will be just as available as it has always been. Technology is always two steps ahead of the law. Sure, they shut down mp3.com, but that just created napster. Sure, they shut down napster, but that just created our modern file sharing programs. The same will hold true for porn sites. They may fizzle for a little bit, but they'll be back in full force. Don't worry about that.

As for protecting minors from exploitation, I'm all for that. If this law can keep kiddie porn off the internet then its a major victory in my mind. I seriously doubt that will be the case though. As for regular run of the mill porn - it'll recover. Have no worries. In fact, maybe it will remove some of the thousands of crappy porn sites that do nothing but rip off the content of other porn sites. This may just backfire on the legislators and lead to a plethora of new, original, porn. :eek:

[Melz]

It's not about how objectionable you find porn and those who use it, it's about one's right to use it.

This measure is overkill.

One's right to use it? Who gave such a right to folks? Where is this right presented to anyone? Is the right to free porn listed alongside the right to liberty and pursuit of happiness.

This isn't some new provision on porn, it's not like someone made up a new law to target the porn industry. If those who pander the porn had followed the rules and kept records or not posted pictures of those they had no records on, then this wouldn't be an issue. If they haven't been following the provisions laid out for this industry, they deserve to get their sites taken away.

I feel no sympathy for the pervs who are missing out and I see nothing wrong with regulating porn to ensure there are no minors being used.

[JimRaynor]

This is not the big slam against internet porn that some seem to be thinking it is. The internet will adjust, likely in a matter of weeks if not days and porn will be just as available as it has always been. Technology is always two steps ahead of the law. Sure, they shut down mp3.com, but that just created napster. Sure, they shut down napster, but that just created our modern file sharing programs. The same will hold true for porn sites. They may fizzle for a little bit, but they'll be back in full force. Don't worry about that.

As for protecting minors from exploitation, I'm all for that. If this law can keep kiddie porn off the internet then its a major victory in my mind. I seriously doubt that will be the case though. As for regular run of the mill porn - it'll recover. Have no worries. In fact, maybe it will remove some of the thousands of crappy porn sites that do nothing but rip off the content of other porn sites. This may just backfire on the legislators and lead to a plethora of new, original, porn. :eek:

That's how the internet works... gotta love the techies.

[aaron11]

One's right to use it? Who gave such a right to folks? Where is this right presented to anyone? Is the right to free porn listed alongside the right to liberty and pursuit of happiness.

This isn't some new provision on porn, it's not like someone made up a new law to target the porn industry. If those who pander the porn had followed the rules and kept records or not posted pictures of those they had no records on, then this wouldn't be an issue. If they haven't been following the provisions laid out for this industry, they deserve to get their sites taken away.

I feel no sympathy for the pervs who are missing out and I see nothing wrong with regulating porn to ensure there are no minors being used.


Well said.

[Wolfcounsel]

Later this WEEK? This is already in effect. I'll bet that little asshole John Couey sues for his "right" to view kiddie porn.

[shoemoodoshaloo]

Shoe

Either you are being

1) extremely sarcastic

or

2) A pervert who does not give a damn how many children are harmed by this sickness.


Which is it?


It's 1. The internet porn industry isn't a huge part of my life. Thx to everyone that used this thread to display their incredible moral fabric. Congratulations, you think molesting kids is terrible. Join the club.

Still doesn't anyone see the stupidity of the method here? Child pornography is most ramped over A. File sharing networks. B. Underground networks. I dare anyone out there to go and google kiddie porn and see what you come up with. It won't be legit child porn. Know why? PEOPLE AREN'T THAT STUPID!

Kiddie porn and child molestation come hand in hand. When a guy takes a six year old into the backroom of apartment and touches his ass, no one condones that. But, shutting down a porn site isn't going to stop that. Maybe a better solution like raising the penalty for child pornography or as it was so eloquently put "rip their balls off and force them to run naked down the street carrying them in their mouths until they die of blood loss". My point is, this indirect attack on the internet may affect some porn sites where the person photographed was 17.9, almost 18. Finally justice. Thank God. Still, this does nothing to stop the asshole that is asked to "watch" his neighbor's six year old daughter, and turns it into a porn fest.

Special thx to real lobo for personally attacking my maturity (again). The "you're a dumb kid LOL OWNAGE" rip is getting old. At least I'm "grown up" enough to withhold the liberal stereotyping at the end of each of my posts.

(Because all leftists think with their dicks. Especially the women :whatever:)

[Wyatt_Junker]

This is not the big slam against internet porn that some seem to be thinking it is. The internet will adjust, likely in a matter of weeks if not days and porn will be just as available as it has always been. Technology is always two steps ahead of the law. Sure, they shut down mp3.com, but that just created napster. Sure, they shut down napster, but that just created our modern file sharing programs. The same will hold true for porn sites. They may fizzle for a little bit, but they'll be back in full force. Don't worry about that.

As for protecting minors from exploitation, I'm all for that. If this law can keep kiddie porn off the internet then its a major victory in my mind. I seriously doubt that will be the case though. As for regular run of the mill porn - it'll recover. Have no worries. In fact, maybe it will remove some of the thousands of crappy porn sites that do nothing but rip off the content of other porn sites. This may just backfire on the legislators and lead to a plethora of new, original, porn. :eek:

In the case of P2P(first paragraph) I don't buy the ever morphing, undefeatable evolution of mp3 anonymous one night stands into legitimacy. It had nothing to do with geeks. Peer-to-peer only 'adjusted' because 1)legitimate subscription services overgrew the guilty conscience of zit-faced dorm room dipshits and 2) pressure from the content providers. We can also throw in a thrid component but its too early to tell, that is to say the recent SCOTUS ruling. Even China is beginning to conform and yield to copyright holders which everybody thought was impossible.

Your scenario is like a bad Terminator 2 script. Shoot geek with shotgun blast to chest. Watch, amazed, as geek reconfigures before your very eyes as the hot molten metal recrystallizes. Geeks ain't all that. IF someone WANTS to fuk with something, it WILL get fukked no matter how much of a nerd superhero one wants to claim to be. With p2p, all somebody (or an organization) has to do is massively infect it with trojans to the point of saturation. It never happened, but it seems that now SCOTUS won't even stand in the way of it.

Napster didn't evolve. It was shut down. The labels gutted it, fired the pricks and then bought the lame nick and then flushed it with cash. It was re-worked at the same time iTunes came out. Legitimacy, not illegitimacy, overtook it. Your theory doesn't wash.

The internet is herd-based in the sense that, virally speaking, you can do a lot of damage in record time. Don't think so? Just watch the kiddie porn peddlers try to evade this one. Its not like trying to enforce a highway speed limit. Not online. Online you CAN enforce a speed limit once the law is clearly in place. All the FEDZ have to do is hire flanks of introverts with sunken-in chests and give them their instructions and the green light. Watch as the very internet you love to beat off to cums to a skuh-reeeching halt.

[Wolfcounsel]

"It's 1. The internet porn industry isn't a huge part of my life. Thx to everyone that used this thread to display their higher-than-thou moral fabric <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = V /><V:SHAPETYPE class=inlineimg id=_x0000_t75 title="Stick Out Tongue" alt="" border="0" src="http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/smilies/tongue.gif" o<img o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"></V:SHAPETYPE>referrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f"> <V:STROKE joinstyle="miter"></V:STROKE><V:FORMULAS><V:F eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></V:F><V:F eqn="sum @0 1 0"></V:F><V:F eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></V:F><V:F eqn="prod @2 1 2"></V:F><V:F eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></V:F><V:F eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></V:F><V:F eqn="sum @0 0 1"></V:F><V:F eqn="prod @6 1 2"></V:F><V:F eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></V:F><V:F eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></V:F><V:F eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></V:F><V:F eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></V:F></V:FORMULAS><V:path o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/> <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:LOCK aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></O:LOCK><V:SHAPE id=_x0000_i1025 style="WIDTH: 11.25pt; HEIGHT: 11.25pt" alt="" type="#_x0000_t75"><V:IMAGEDATA src="file:///C:/DOCUME~1/Kaluse/LOCALS~1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_image001.gif" o:href="http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif"></V:IMAGEDATA></V:SHAPE><!--[if !vml]-->:rolleyes:<!--[endif]--> Congratulations, you think molesting kids is terrible. Join the club." --shoemoodoshaloo


Uh,...yeah.

"Still doesn't anyone see the stupidity of the method here?" --shoemoodoshaloo

Seriously, I see what you're getting at. Like gun control imbeciles, they go after more "Don't do this" type of legislation instead of going after the assholes who blatantly molest, torture, exploit kids, and let slimeballs off on technicalities, while the civil liberties retards nod their heads in agreement over the wise judges' decision to err on the side of the monster.

Correct me if you meant something other.

[shoemoodoshaloo]

Wolf-Council that's exactly what I'm getting at.

I've always been partial to hating the cases that eliminate a majority to prevent a minority occurrence.

Maybe if a kid shoots up his school, the real issue is that he was teased, abused and neglected for years. Passing an extremely inconvienent law that destroys half of the gun industry isn't really going to help in a case like this.

[Pennville_Bill]

Call me a pervert or w/e.........

You're a pervert.

[TheRealLobo]

...

Special thx to real lobo for personally attacking my maturity (again). The "you're a dumb kid LOL OWNAGE" rip is getting old. At least I'm "grown up" enough to withhold the liberal stereotyping at the end of each of my posts.

You're welcome.

Your posts leave a lot to desire to show the humor in them. If you are unable to show humor with biting wit, I suggest a smilie or two.


(Because all leftists think with their dicks. Especially the women :hissyfit: )

Oooh, so close sonny. No, what I was pointing out is that leftists only get all bent out of shape over either "single issues", or when something personally affects them. In your case, you specifically mentioned it was your penis. Many leftists actually got bent out of shape by the recent SCOTUS ruling becuase it might actually affect them.

BTW, you'll find out one day that women, even leftist women, don't have "dicks", unless you're already married, in which case, one does.

Now, if you have anything else to say, you might want to start by thinking before you type.

For the record though, the one thing that HAS dominated your posts is a lack of maturity, shown by a poor choice of words. If you'd like to continue, you might want to work on that.

[TheRealLobo]

Wolf-Council that's exactly what I'm getting at.

I've always been partial to hating the cases that eliminate a majority to prevent a minority occurrence.

Maybe if a kid shoots up his school, the real issue is that he was teased, abused and neglected for years. Passing an extremely inconvienent law that destroys half of the gun industry isn't really going to help in a case like this.

Porn=useless
Gun=tool

Porn in any form has no valid use other than to satisfy some adolescent desire.

Firearms are actually a useful tool.

Score: 1.4 for bad analogy, though the Russian judges will likely score it higher.

[Warlady]

Shoe I do not allow links to porn sites to be posted on FC.

[DoctorDoom]

It's not about how objectionable you find porn and those who use it, it's about one's right to use it.

This measure is overkill.So you believe that child porn is okay because there are sick sons of bitches that like it. Is that about right?

[DeclinetoState]

I should stay out of this one, but I'll throw in my two-cents' worth anyway.

Going online to buy adult or kiddie porn is a waste of money and time, even if you enjoy looking at naked people. Chances are, no matter how whacked out you are, there will be some types of porn you like a lot more than others. You might, for example, be turned on by pics of gay men, but find lesbians in a pillow fight boring. Yet if you buy porn, even if you think you're getting one thing, chances are you'll be getting a lot of other stuff (or so I've heard).

Further, even if you're turned on by, say, country bumpkins doing the big nasty on horseback behind a red barn, how many photos are you going to find on the Internet of that? Probably not many.

FYI, none of the examples given above should be taken as representative of any of my personal tastes in any sort of entertainment.

[shoemoodoshaloo]

Shoe I do not allow links to porn sites to be posted on FC.

Sorry, I've since edited. It won't happen again.

Dr. Doom, I don't think anyone here condones child pornography.

Real Lobo, I'm sorry my wit and analogies aren't up to par with your almighty posts. Here's another one of my threads. Here. (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=24195&page=1&pp=20)

You'll notice that the thread is actually a civilized discussion, without any altercations. It lacks the lobo touch. Maybe you could go in there and start attacking me. Maybe you could quote snippets of my original post and make crappy quips about each one. Here I'll get you started.

"It would be neat if the teachers actually debated their theories with those of creationists."

What a juvenile, hive mentality statement. All you liberals are the same. Why don't you go get potty trained. HAHAHA I"M CLEVER!

I wont even comment on the gun=tool porn=useless statement because getting into a debate over that may be a new low for everyone here.

BTW, you haven't added anything to the topic of the thread. All you've done is bashed me and made generalizations about liberals.

For the sake of the rest of you, I won't respond to this thread anymore. I don't want it to turn into a “me vs lobo” argument. I'll let it die, as it should.

[Wolfcounsel]

"FYI, none of the examples given above should be taken as representative of any of my personal tastes in any sort of entertainment." --DeclinetoState


WHAT?? Things like that are on the internet?:eek:

Good thing I only stick with the funny pictures.:laugh:

[TheRealLobo]

...

Real Lobo, I'm sorry my wit and analogies aren't up to par with your almighty posts. Here's another one of my threads. Here. (http://showthread.php/?t=24195)

Nope, link doesn't work. Oooh, I guess you showed me.

You'll notice that the thread is actually a civilized discussion, without any altercations. It lacks the lobo touch. Maybe you could go in there and start attacking me.

Gee, after such witticisms as found here, I would have absolutely no reason to attack you. :rolleyes:

You'll note that when you don't make an ass of yourself, as you did here, and in the only other thread I attacked you in sonny, I actually didn't attack for that very reason. You might ought to check other threads where people make asses of themselves. I'm good at asking/demanding people to be responsible for their statements.

It's only THEN that I give it the Lobo touch®.



Maybe you could quote snippets of my original post and make crappy quips about each one. Here I'll get you started.

Yeah, let's see.

"It would be neat if the teachers actually debated their theories with those of creationists."

No, I'd likely ask whether said teachers would be qualified to participate in a debate as such. If not, seeing as you aren't acting as juvenile as the two posts I've pointed out to you, I might not make a comment to you at all.

Notice a common theme here sonny?

What a juvenile, hive mentality statement. All you liberals are the same. Why don't you go get potty trained. HAHAHA I"M CLEVER!

Ahh...I get it. You think that if you act juvenile, irresponsible, moronic, idiotic, stupid, or like an ass, you shouldn't be called on it.

I'll tell you what, I'll ask Warlady and the rest of the Admins if it would be possible for the board to support an unsupervised Romper Room style of forum. That way, those with a desire to interject such wit into the internet can do so without actually being held responsible for their idiocy. Than the big bad ol' Lobo won't pick on you anymore.



I wont even comment on the gun=tool porn=useless statement because getting into a debate over that may be a new low for everyone here.

Lad...you don't have ANYTHING to "debate" that statement.

BTW, you haven't added anything to the topic of the thread.

The particular topic is unworthy of serious discussion. Your little heart is all broken because adults have decided you can't look at naked pictures of little girls, and it hurts your feelings.

All you've done is bashed me

Ooh...no, I've agreed with you on most of your points. You asked to be called a pervert, and you've shown yourself to be a juvenile. You mentioned that it was the only political topic that affected you. Can you show where I "bashed" you, other than at your request?

and made generalizations about liberals.

Darn...another one wrong. I made a statement about "leftists" only being emotionally charged about things that affect them personally, and it's been supported by your original statement.



For the sake of the rest of you, I won't respond to this thread anymore.

Translation: "I acted really stupid, Lobo called me on it, and my position is indefensible."

I don't want it to turn into a “me vs lobo” argument.

Translation: "I think I started a battle with the majority of the people on the board, and I don't want to be embarrassed anymore."

I'll let it die, as it should.

Translation: "This was a stupid idea, and I'm sorry."

[JimRaynor]

By the way, each time the courts shut down a P2P program ten more open up.
So not really like the terminator 2, more like replicators.

[DoctorDoom]

Inasmuch as the thread was about enforcement of a pre-existing child-porn law, NOT about denying a bunch of pathetic losers the only sexual outlet they'll ever have, the extent to which the thread has deviated from it is interesting. Personally, I'd like to see the Web purged of that vile garbage, but to each his/her/its own.

Your little heart is all broken because adults have decided you can't look at naked pictures of little girls, and it hurts your feelings.Or of naked little boys.

<hr>
As for P2P, the technology itself is not the issue. The problem is that it is used primarily to distribute copyrighted material without the recompense or the approval of the copyright holders. We've had threads dedicated to this subject, and I've seen all the lame "arguments" justifying wholesale theft and piracy. Every one of them was a rationalization of manifestly criminal activity.

The fact that there are people out there who proclaim a "right" to steal and distribute intellectual properties, and the technology to do it on a world-wide scale, does not change the fact that it is illegal and immoral.

[Little Bit Farm]

Yippee! Anything that slows down the ugly, disgusting porn industry is wonderful IMHO!!! I feel sorry for poor sad sick Shoewhatsisname! Doesn't have anything better to do with his time! Addicted! Ever thought about therapy? Best one is a little black book called the Bible!

Romans 1:18-32

<SUP>18</SUP>For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;


<SUP id=en-KJV-27950>19</SUP>Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

<SUP id=en-KJV-27951>20</SUP>For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

<SUP id=en-KJV-27952>21</SUP>Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

<SUP id=en-KJV-27953>22</SUP>Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

<SUP id=en-KJV-27954>23</SUP>And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

<SUP id=en-KJV-27955>24</SUP>Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

<SUP id=en-KJV-27956>25</SUP>Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

<SUP id=en-KJV-27957>26</SUP>For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

<SUP id=en-KJV-27958>27</SUP>And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

<SUP id=en-KJV-27959>28</SUP>And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

<SUP id=en-KJV-27960>29</SUP>Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

<SUP id=en-KJV-27961>30</SUP>Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

<SUP id=en-KJV-27962>31</SUP>Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: <SUP id=en-KJV-27963>32</SUP>Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[2nd_Amendment]

All completely immaterial. Meaningless feel-good legislation. Kiddie porn sites hi-jack servers and run their addys thru mailing lists of known member emails ands SPAM. They are gone in days and then back up somewhere else. Usually Far East servers, or in Africa and SA. They are untouchable by US laws anyway.

Pornographers using adults will simply manufacture whatever they need. Under investigation? Here's a scanned release/age verification. Also, if I am not mistaken, there was a case a few years ago that settled whether a site is responsible for what happens to be on a linked site, answer being no. So the law is useless for its intended purpose.

Thing is, legislators know this, so that makes me wonder what it is they really had in mind? Is it just feel-good crap to make soccer moms happy? Or is it a cornerstone for controlling other information linking and sharing? Time will tell.

[Wolfcounsel]

"All completely immaterial. Meaningless feel-good legislation." --2nd_Amendment

All that has to be done is catch the assholes dealing in child pornography, and cut their genitals off before they are executed, on live TV. That'll pretty well stop any more efforts by the scumbags. Then all we have to deal with are the pedophiles at the ACLU. Shoot them next.

[nene]

All that has to be done is catch the assholes dealing in child pornography, and cut their genitals off before they are executed, on live TV. That'll pretty well stop any more efforts by the scumbags. Then all we have to deal with are the pedophiles at the ACLU. Shoot them next.

I thought I was the only one that thought this way. I am not alone.

[2nd_Amendment]

OK, Wolf. But you won't catch any major players with this legislation(you know it's been the law for years that they all have to have age verification on file anyway, right?). And Pedos at the ACLU? Maybe NAMBLA...

[Wolfcounsel]

"But you won't catch any major players with this legislation(you know it's been the law for years that they all have to have age verification on file anyway, right?)." --2nd_Amendment

That is why it looks like "feel good" legal stuff. It reminds me of the policeman telling the criminal, "Stop! or I'll tell you to stop again!"

I don't know what type of baboons the ACLU has, but I'd say the scum at NAMBLA is gearing up for a fight.

[DeclinetoState]

"All completely immaterial. Meaningless feel-good legislation." --2nd_Amendment

All that has to be done is catch the assholes dealing in child pornography, and cut their genitals off before they are executed, on live TV. That'll pretty well stop any more efforts by the scumbags. Then all we have to deal with are the pedophiles at the ACLU. Shoot them next.

The problem is that there are others out there who would get their jollies watching men castrated and executed. For every taste (or lack thereof) there is an idiot willing to pay for it.

[DoctorDoom]

All completely immaterial. Meaningless feel-good legislation. Kiddie porn sites hi-jack servers and run their addys thru mailing lists of known member emails ands SPAM. They are gone in days and then back up somewhere else. Usually Far East servers, or in Africa and SA. They are untouchable by US laws anyway.IOW, since we can't stop ALL of the sick sons of bitches who sexually exploit kids, why try to stop any? Surrenderist attitudes like that have brought this country to where it is now, one "only" at a time.

[2nd_Amendment]

Oh don't you pull that scam on me, Doc. That was not what I said nor what I intended and you damn well know it. I commented purely on the law in question, which is indeed feel-goodism and will probably never result in a conviction. Too easy to get around and doesn't have any authority over most of the problem anyway. Anyone it does catch will be simple-minded garbage too stupid to cover their own tracks in even the weakest way.

But you know, in the end, you're right. On this one we might as well surrender for multiple reasons.

First off, we have allowed a desire for porn of all kinds to grow in this country and allowed the industry to grow that fulfills the need. We could argue which came first, but who really cares. Kill either and the other dies...but we as a nation don't have any real desire to kill the beast, do we? OTOH, we can throw some waterbombs at that In-tra-Net thingy and wrestle with the symptom instead of the disease. Then the politicos can look all helpful, look saddened when it fails, and the sheep at home will vote for them cause, well, they tried. *yawn*

Not bitching at you, Doc, but really, this is crap and the politicritters know it. Pointing out the fact doesn't make me surrenderist(interesting word) or a supporter of pedos.

[Wyatt_Junker]

By the way, each time the courts shut down a P2P program ten more open up.
So not really like the terminator 2, more like replicators.

Why the incessant need to romanticize peer-to-peer? Feeling excessively maudlin for the underdog won't mean shit when the DRM kicks its ass.

Fine, the court shuts down one. 10 more open up. Shut those 10 down. Can I get a 20, a 30, .... ???

Sold.... to the entrepreneur with the deep pockets in the back.

I know there's a ridiculous need for Gen Y'ers to foist the idea that the internet is like the Old West and is unreformable. But its just that, first wrong and second pathetic. If the court gives Daddy Warbucks power, you can kiss your little patch of cyber rebellion goodbye.

All the labels had to do was infect Grokster with unlimited viruses. They pulled their punches back until now, until SCOTUS spoke. Time to infect 'em with VD.

[2nd_Amendment]

Let 'em infect away. Any minimally intelligent droid can beat the viruses imbedded.

P2P will win in the end. There's simply no way to stop it since technology advances equally on both sides of the battle. Right, wrong, good, bad, it matters not. It's a war of attrition and the only people it really costs money to fight the war are the corporations and government.

And Wyatt, being actually involved in the wild and wooly aspects of the net as i am in running this ISp let me tell ya, the In-tra-Net ol' Al invented fer us is very much indeed the Wild West. Would that it remain so for a long time to come.

[DoctorDoom]

Oh don't you pull that scam on me, Doc. That was not what I said nor what I intended and you damn well know it.That's the way I read it. Sue me.

I commented purely on the law in question, which is indeed feel-goodism and will probably never result in a conviction.So let's eliminate ALL laws that "will probably never result in a conviction." There's a whole lot of feel-goodism going around, obviously.

Look at it any way you want, but if the law gets even ONE of those contemptible bastards off the streets, it's worth it. Criminal law is not a deterrent. It never has been. It exists to define a crime and the consequences of committing it. The fact that people get away with breaking the law does NOT justify eliminating the law.

I couldn't possibly care less whether you think that's "feel-goodism" or not.

First off, we have allowed a desire for porn of all kinds to grow in this country and allowed the industry to grow that fulfills the need.And it happened because a nation of apathetic sheeple listen every time the civil-rights agitators say, "Well, it's ONLY this or that little change. No one is affected, and you don't have to look at it, so shut the f**k up!" And ONLY piled on ONLY resulted in the moral disaster that has all but ripped the heart out of America in less than half a century.

Incrementalism is a cancer. And through incrementalism the sordid tastes of a microminority of degenerate scum have so infused the culture that now we're not safe even in our own homes from the immorality and perversion that saturate "one nation (formerly) under God".

You might think it's "feel-goodism", but I think it's a long overdue first step to shutting down the "industry" that has polluted the Internet, and indeed the country, with raw sewage in the name of "freedom of speech". Smut is NOT protected speech. It never was. In fact, it's not speech, period. It's grotesque photos of scuzzballs that appeal only to the lowest common denominator of society, the pathetic losers whose only interest is masturbating while looking at the garbage.

I for one think that we've catered to those perverts far too long and far too often. They'll always exist in this sinful world, but the society that debases itself by pandering to them at the expense of its morality and decency will die. Every June we are reminded in the most graphic way of what happens to a culture that abandons absolute standards of right and wrong to appease the most wretched and immoral of its citizens.

<center><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/QPIX/Q12.jpg" />

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/QPIX/Q6.jpg" /></center>

How many onlies did it take to sink that far?

[DoctorDoom]

P2P will win in the end. There's simply no way to stop it...That's wishful thinking. DRM is in its infancy. A generation of machines is coming that will have hardware blocks against unapproved programs. They won't even be installable, let alone usable. Pirated CDs, DVDs, MP3s et al will not play on the machines. They will allow archiving, but only for the specific machine. The DRM hardware will be undefeatable without destroying the computer. And computers not equipped with the technology will be barred from the Internet.

And why are such drastic measures necessary? A: because there are people who have no respect for anyone or anything except what they want, and who brazenly ignore copyright laws because they delude themselves that it's their "right" to steal if they don't like the victims of their theft.

My heart will bleed for the assholes when it happens.

[2nd_Amendment]

No argument overall, Doc, but I fail to see what this accomplishes? At this point I don't know where a "solution" could even begin, but I do know I hate to see some cowards in DC puff up and point to this and say "Looky what we did!" What they did was nothing, again. It's not even a first step and they know it. But there's plenty of clueless half-wits out there who will get all dewey-eyed over how those good men tried(I need a barfing smiley).

I get complaints about all kinds of SPAM and some of it is just this sort of crap. The amount is increasing, too. The people pumping it out are mostly untouchable. We can't even block IP's, since they move in a matter of days. You can't even really stop the SPAM itself. And as long as there is a demand for it laws like this literally do nothing. Nada.

You want to make a difference, you have to reduce/eliminate the demand. Your own pics demonstrate how unlikely we are to accomplish that. Personally, short of a plague that wipes most of the slate I'm not certain how we could even start. Just as reclaiming liberty is far more difficult than protecting it, reclaiming decency is next to impossible once it's gone. The pervs aren't about to surrender their habits and become good people. Hell, they never were in the first place, just repressed by a society that has now long since surrendered.

Maybe a good slate-wiping is in order, since we really don't seem to have the moral or mental maturity to handle the level of technology we've achieved. But then maybe I'm just being a nasty tempered cynic today.

[2nd_Amendment]

THAT is wishful thinking, Doc. For every "solution" will come a counter-solution. Guaranteed. We're seeing the beginning of the end of intelectual property as it has been thought of for the past 50 years or so. Maybe that's another aspect of our moral and mental immaturity, maybe not.

[Melz]

2nd, you are seemingly one who thinks that, because it seems impossible, why try. Correct me if I am wrong by you seem to be willing to let someone to tell you that it can't happen. Have you thrown this entire Constitution out of the water? Do you think we are sunk?

Maybe I am too hopeful or perky or however it seems. But your posts are all about giving up. All about what is wrong with what is going on instead of solutions. Not that I require them...lol. But, are you really giving up? You seem to with a lot of your posts.

[2nd_Amendment]

This isn't a constitutional issue. We as a society are largely rotten at the core. That's just exactly the way certain interests wanted things. I am unaware of how to put that genie back in the lamp. You can't kill them(you can, but you'll never make a dent). You certainly can't reason with them. You can't stop the providers themselves(and yes that is an admission of defeat. Short of shutting down the internet you can not stop them).

And it isn't just us, the US. We are rotten globally and the rot spread here. We can't even manage our own pervs and I have no clue how we'd set about managing the rest of the miserable planet much of which doesn't even see a problem in the first place...

We have KIDS searching this stuff out. How did they get that way at 12 years old? Girls and boys? How do you fix that? It took a generations to unleash the monster and it will certainly take longer to put it back and nobody is really even trying. Every solution is like the one here, useless, or it targets everything and equals a mask for more government control that still doesn't actually attack the problem or the symptoms.

We're talking redefining society and I frankly have no idea how to do it, nor do I see any 'leadership" willing to seriously discuss it. So yes, I think we may well be sunk.

[Melz]

2nd, I do get what you say on this and I feel it too. The message is that it is pretty much unstoppable. Some of us thing it is sick and scary as far as our children go, the availability and their access. Most of us only have so many means to control it. Are you saying that, because it is pretty much an e-monster that no one can stop, that the law should stop putting out legislation? Yes I know these ****ers can get into every computer and every crevice and can hack away at every virus protector (whatever, I cannot computer talk..lol).

But just because they can, no legislation should be made? Because someone can beat the legislation with their little hacker mentality?

As long as someone is looking for an asshole, I cannot control what the asshole can become, but one day, an asshole will be found.

And as long as we make laws controling such assholes, it won't control said assholes, it will just make their "asshole on the run" stickers more noticable.

I don't care who we catch or what the chances are. If it has to do with underage porn, make a law. Someone will catch em.

[DoctorDoom]

I apologize for overreacting, guy.

Your own pics demonstrate how unlikely we are to accomplish that.The pics are some of the tamer ones that I've found while researching fag "pride" parades for use in the Culture forum. They're not porn, but they definitely are repulsive, and this crap happens every year in major cities across the country. Why? Because no one stood up and said, "NO!" for fear of being labeled "intolerant" or "homophobic" or of inciting violent protests.

Someplace in my newspaper clippings is a story from the New York Post of a decade or more ago re a fag "pride" parade that deliberately deviated from its approved route in order to pass St. Patrick's Cathedral to "protest" Cardinal O'Connor's stance against faggotry. The marchers were literally naked. The police did nothing. When asked why, they replied that they were afraid of starting a riot.

We've reached a sorry state when perverts can do as they please because of thinly veiled threats to cause violence and rioting if they don't get their way.

Back on topic, I have no illusions that the law will make a significant dent in the trafficking in child pornography, but removing a few of the scumbags from society is well worth it.

God bless!

[Wyatt_Junker]

Let 'em infect away. Any minimally intelligent droid can beat the viruses imbedded.


And you don't know wtf you're talking about. Viruses are only limited by one's creativity. Send out as many as you need and as often as you want, upgraded and altered as often as you'd like, and hire as many people as you need to get the job done. McAfee, Norton...they won't have enough updates in the world to contend with organized chaos. All that will be left is a smoking router.

In essence, its a battle of stubborness and will. I could care less. I actually cheer a war. I'd love to see America's cute little novelty fry. We made do then. We'll make do now. A seesaw war means a halt, btw.


P2P will win in the end. There's simply no way to stop it since technology advances equally on both sides of the battle. Right, wrong, good, bad, it matters not. It's a war of attrition and the only people it really costs money to fight the war are the corporations and government.


Apparently this cliché is still enormously satisfying to a lot of folks, typically dormroom bedwetters and closet rebels. p2p hasn't even BEGUN to be systematically fukked with yet. You don't know what the aitch you're downloading. And when the guv gives corporations the greenlight to enter the fray fully unimpeded, enlisting the help of as many computers it needs, all infected with novel virii, yer lil' party is over. It won't just be decoys then. It will mean mass computer eulogies.


And Wyatt, being actually involved in the wild and wooly aspects of the net as i am in running this ISp let me tell ya, the In-tra-Net ol' Al invented fer us is very much indeed the Wild West. Would that it remain so for a long time to come.

Would that it indeed.

You people are hilarious, trying to make this thing bigger than life. Its a frikkin phone line piggybacked by graphics. You have no idea how deep the MPAA pockets run. The only reason the labels and the RIAA sat on their ass for so long was to actually see which way SCOTUS was gonna lean.

Now, its time to play and play they will.

[CzechPrince]

That's wishful thinking. DRM is in its infancy. A generation of machines is coming that will have hardware blocks against unapproved programs. They won't even be installable, let alone usable. Pirated CDs, DVDs, MP3s et al will not play on the machines. They will allow archiving, but only for the specific machine. The DRM hardware will be undefeatable without destroying the computer. And computers not equipped with the technology will be barred from the Internet.

Doc when is this DRM supposed to become, what's the word, "mainstream?"

[DoctorDoom]

DRM (Digital Rights Management) is already active to a limited extent, but there's big money and brainpower involved in expanding it to make piracy exceedingly difficult if not impossible. I don't know if I saved the story about the premise of hardware enforcement of DRM. I have a couple of gigs of file to search through, and it was a few years ago.

When the technology matures, DC will enact laws requiring it for all future computer systems, DVD and CD recorders/players, etc. And, although I have not seen this in print, the logical next step would be to require ISPs to install software/hardware that disallows connections to the Net if the computer doesn't ID itself as DRM-approved.

The raw power of the industries hopelessly outmatches the efforts of the free spirits.

[2nd_Amendment]

I'd guess, Wyatt, that it is you who doesn't have a clue. The giveaway is the complete refusal people who deal with this have for making absolute statements. Norton et al won't offer the kind of absolutes you tout. They haven't because they learned the hard way every single time they think they have something downpat they discover they don't even know where they are. Same with MS, etc. And the only ones trying to make it bigger than life are you and yours. The rest of us see it as exactly what it is: Piss-ant corporations sweating the dollars vs piss-ant punks with nothing better to do in life than **** up the works.

Hell, we have two of the most secure servers known to man sitting behind the wall immediately behind me that we host offsite for Crane NWSC and they can't even keep the punks out of them. I can't even get TO them physically and yet at least once a month some idiot with pimples and piss-poor attitude mangles at least one. The government then mangles him. Wash, rinse, repeat.

It's a never-ending escalating war of fools and the only absolute fact is there are no absolutes. Kid yourself if you want but you aren't kidding me.

[2nd_Amendment]

...the logical next step would be to require ISPs to install software/hardware that disallows connections to the Net if the computer doesn't ID itself as DRM-approved.

That is in fact the next step. And it has already been acknowledged that this is also the exploit and it's something they can't get past.

Every security system requires an identifier of some form and every method of identification can eventually be manipulated. Think about that and get back to me with another absolute statement.

The raw power of the industries hopelessly outmatches the efforts of the free spirits.

Yup. Seven years ago that's what they told us about SPAM. I couldn't guess how many orders of magnitude worse the problem is now. The solution? There is no solution within the parameters of the Net as it now exists. The only way to deal with it would require a total recreation of the fundamental aspects of how things work and THAT would lead to another absolute: Unexpected new exploits.

But we can always listen to the Wyatt's of the world and keep believing everything will be rosy if we just throw enough money at it.<!-- / message -->

[Wyatt_Junker]

I'd guess, Wyatt, that it is you who doesn't have a clue. The giveaway is the complete refusal people who deal with this have for making absolute statements. Norton et al won't offer the kind of absolutes you tout. They haven't because they learned the hard way every single time they think they have something downpat they discover they don't even know where they are. Same with MS, etc. And the only ones trying to make it bigger than life are you and yours. The rest of us see it as exactly what it is: Piss-ant corporations sweating the dollars vs piss-ant punks with nothing better to do in life than **** up the works.

Hell, we have two of the most secure servers known to man sitting behind the wall immediately behind me that we host offsite for Crane NWSC and they can't even keep the punks out of them. I can't even get TO them physically and yet at least once a month some idiot with pimples and piss-poor attitude mangles at least one. The government then mangles him. Wash, rinse, repeat.

It's a never-ending escalating war of fools and the only absolute fact is there are no absolutes. Kid yourself if you want but you aren't kidding me.


Actually you're making my point. Perhaps you should re-read my post? The systematic, organized attack by a hired legion of corporate 'punks', all paid exceptionally well, working 24/7, will end peer-to-peer literally overnight. My point was that no anti-virus is EVER fast enough to stop the continual ingenuity and creativity of manufactured viruses. Think of a chronic renewal here. An actual team, department, whatever in every office of every content provider of any particular format injecting riot into a p2p.

You wrote my last paragraph of my last post.

Uh... thanks?

[Wyatt_Junker]

Perhaps I should clarify so you can understand. Its not the punks you can control. Its the mass herd who wants something for nothing. For the same reason you can control a hundred head of cattle with a single yipping sheep dog.

IF the punks are legitimized and HIRED by the corpys as per the law's allowance, no one and I mean NO ONE in their right mind will ever freqeunt a p2p ever again.

THAT'S how you control it.

[DoctorDoom]

One of the problems that I perceive if the veritable glorification of hackers, especially by Hollywood. Has anyone ever seen a film dealing with them that didn't depict them as the good guys fighting against EEE-vill corporations and government?

Ever hear of Kevin Mitnick? He has been all but canonized despite the fact that his ass was busted for making a career out of computer crimes.

With that sort of perception of flat-out criminal activity, hacking/cracking attracts zit-popping little pukes with no social life who want to be in on the thrill of the Net underground and make names for themselves by breaking into enticing government or corporate systems.

One giant step would be to create a public image of them as ignorant little bastards who are incapable of creating and who must express themselves by destroying. They're on a par with vandals and taggers and need to be depicted as the lower lifeforms that they are. Take the glory out of their "trade" and you remove the major incentive to be a part of it.

IAC, the hardware changes that will enforce DRM will make it impossible to install the script-kiddy "warez" on new machines or to connect to the Net using older boxes.

[2nd_Amendment]

Money again. You obviously missed the entire point if you think I was supporting your position. Right now "the Man" is represented by hardware and users. What you see as the future redefines "The Man" as an attack dog of virii which will then in turn become the new target. Defense will equal destruction because it is opposition. That's it. Simplistic as all hell. Maybe that's why corporate America doesn't get it.

Most of these punks are not what is popularly perceived as the kid looking to make it big. You can't hire them. They don't want to be hired. They don't want to succeed. The destruction is the thrill. Which ever way that destruction goes is the end result they seek. If hacking servers to bits and writing script does the job, goody. If taking apart other people's defenses, whether they be virii or encryption or hardware is the destruction, so be it.

We had a kid here who is brilliant. He had XP hacked before it ever hit the market. He's probably single-handedly responsible for half the pirated XP copies that floated around for the first six months after it went gold. He's knocked off every major game I know of before it hit the racks for the last five years at least. He *could* be rich. Instead he couldn't even hold down a tech job with us. Had no desire too. So long as he makes enough money to feed himself and spend every waking minute wrecking whatever "The Man" creates he is happy. This will include everything you are talking about.

Your biggest lapse is trying to relate these kids to normal, well-rounded and ambitious human beings. They aren't. They are single-purpose devices whose whole being revolves around manipulating whatever electronic concept/device appears. They are often almost autistic in this sense. You can't buy them because they don't care. I suggest they don't even understand it. The world to them begins at their keyboard and all of us are some other dimensional existence they want no part of. I have wondered of late if they aren't eventually going to become some sci-fi subset of our species. Grasp that and you might just get why I laugh at all these absolutist claims. You're dealinjg with a new and truly weird breed.

Clarify so I can understand? Stick with your prose. It's what you're good at.

[2nd_Amendment]

Problems, Doc:

They are capable of creating. IF it suits their narrow little self-satisfying desires. They create destruction and that destruction can take any form, just so long as it opposes whatever the goals are of their perceived enemy.

You won't stop older boxes from getting online. First theres the public outcry. We still have people using Win95 in boxes that old. We have people using 486's. Tell these old geezers, hordes of them, that they have to go spend 2k if legislation XYZ passes and then listen to the counter-bellowing and the charges of "discrimination" against the elderly, the poor or the stupid.

But more importantly, to the punks, NOT Script Kiddies, punks, the ones who do create something and a lot of it, trying to keep anything offline is just another aspect of trying to restrict a game or OS to purchasers. They'll have it knocked off before it even hits the operational phase and will be sitting there waiting for it. If they are aware of any social issues regarding it at all they'll perceive it as enabling gramaw and her 486...

I think this may be the problem and as I said above and you mentioned. It goes back to this Hollywood created myth of these creatures as "good guys". People standing up for others, or pursuing something better for themselves. That image is stupidly absurd. Their definition of life begins and ends with their comp and what they can do with it. It literally defines them. If you understood just how downright bizarre some of these kids are and just how many of them there are you might get why I find the idea of "control" to be laughable.

If they can touch it in any way they can wreck it. If they can wreck it they are orgasmic. Simple as can be.

Hmm, I said above something about a sci-fi subspecies. I wonder if laying it at the feet of some new, undefined form of autism might not be more accurate. Think weird. Square it. You aren't even close yet.

[2nd_Amendment]

Let me clarify one thing: You won't stop older boxes if the underlying technology remains the same. If the net and communication and data transmission remains the same. If your method of control is anything related to identification or confirmation it will fail. IF the fundamentals are changed, as I noted above, then you'll have a window. BUT, you'll knock out a whole segment of society who can't or won't upgrade AND you would have to redefine whole aspects of the data industry, not just the end-user on his PC.

And the ones you actually want to control will be the first ones back in the game. The damage will be most obvious to those on the trailing edge of the technologiucal curve, not those most obsessed with it. In this age of people claiming "hi-speed" internet is some kind of right to be built in to new housing projects I can't see how you'd pull this off except, maybe, over a period of years and that in itself is self-defeating.

But hey, what do I know. *sigh*

[Wyatt_Junker]

Somewhere we got off track on this discussion. First it was going after kiddie porn. Then, I made some points about p2p. That's where I was... still.

But then you went ass over teakettle, did a couple backflips and then landed onto a diatribe about 'the net' that included some new breed of human cyborg. :question:


Okay then. Sure.


Back to my point about p2p. Load it with junk using tons of anonymous servers. And as russian roulette goes, the more bullets you stick in the chamber, the higher chance you have of blowing your brains out. p2p only gains its ability to function based on the trust of other users. Take away that trust, take away p2p.

[2nd_Amendment]

Because you don't get it don't try to misportray my point or what I said. Try to keep up.

If you actually think a trust issue will damage P2P you really, seriously, don't have a clue about the subject. P2P is already a crapshoot. There's more trash and destruction out there NOW than good files. People are already managing to work around it and it continues to grow in the complete absence of trust today. If your entire "solution" is to make it worse then you really are just kidding yourself.

If you make it to the point where 99% of traffic is in some form hazardous people will still use it AND they will eventually find a way to reduce the potential for harm. If that's really all you have then you're already screwed. Trust? That isn't even a consideration.

I really thought your argument had some kind of depth to it.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Awww. Now yer just sticking your hand in your armpit and making wet fart noises. Yeah people want to fry their puter. Its fun!

Go eat a burrito (http://onion.com/news/index.php?issue=4126&n=2).

[CzechPrince]

DRM (Digital Rights Management) is already active to a limited extent, but there's big money and brainpower involved in expanding it to make piracy exceedingly difficult if not impossible. I don't know if I saved the story about the premise of hardware enforcement of DRM. I have a couple of gigs of file to search through, and it was a few years ago.

When the technology matures, DC will enact laws requiring it for all future computer systems, DVD and CD recorders/players, etc. And, although I have not seen this in print, the logical next step would be to require ISPs to install software/hardware that disallows connections to the Net if the computer doesn't ID itself as DRM-approved.

The raw power of the industries hopelessly outmatches the efforts of the free spirits.

Thanks Doc, that power will be nothing short of amazing if (or should I say when) they will be able to market it.
That is amazing.

[Wolfcounsel]

This is still off the original topic, but, whatever one can see or hear on the computer monitor, one can make a copy of, electronically, with as many traps as a geek can put into it. The only solution is to kill the pirates.


Sorry. I'll make me another pot of coffee and shut up.:laugh:

[DesertFox]

Its the mass herd who wants something for nothing. I resent that!

[Maggie_T]

I thought I was the only one that thought this way. I am not alone.

You're in good company. Add me to the list. ;)

[Maggie_T]

"But you won't catch any major players with this legislation(you know it's been the law for years that they all have to have age verification on file anyway, right?)." --2nd_Amendment

That is why it looks like "feel good" legal stuff. It reminds me of the policeman telling the criminal, "Stop! or I'll tell you to stop again!"

I don't know what type of baboons the ACLU has, but I'd say the scum at NAMBLA is gearing up for a fight.

Oh, I wouldn't put the ACLU past kiddie porn, no sir. They're already in bed (pun intended) with the homos, why not kiddies?

[2nd_Amendment]

See, that's why I just fundamentally don't take some people seriously. The discussion leaves them behind and rather than try to get with it they post something like the burrito and grin because "they be cool". Ok. I guess I should be saddened I outgrew that sort of thing at age 12, eh?

I indulged in the discourse I did because I believed you had an understanding of the topic and an argument that was multi-faceted. You now say it's about "trust" and messing up a computer is a big deal.

It's only a big deal to the soccer moms on AOL commercials.

It's only expensive if you can't turn your own screws or order something online.

I have a comp assigned at home for my daughter to get her music. First off, right NOW, 7 of 10 DL's are bad in some fashion. This results in wacking the comp and re-installing periodically. The machine is a bull-moose 3+gig with 1.5 gig of memory...and a rinky-dink little 20 gig HD and onboard sound and video with the MB. Reason being there's nothing expensive there. Worst case scenerio it takes me $150 to rebuild it.

Hack away. Bury it in viruses. Big deal.

That's because there is no trust now. Today. You can't wreck trust because it hasn't existed among anyone with any functional knowledge of the Net since, probably, a week after Al flipped the switch.

In short you have no argument and no position and no solution at all and I really thought better of you than that. So I offered you a better argument. Pardon me for rating you more highly than you deserved.

But ya know what? I can tell you how to fix this...for a while. It even involves trust, so maybe you're not so flighty, eh?

We use Internet v1.1. That's really what it is. Various colleges and research programs and the government utilized their own closed networks, populated by trained, intelligent and usually courteous people. It worked well. So then we went and spread that out all over the world and let every rabid inbred fool play in what was a nice clean little sandbox. Now it's nothing but cat turds, though it did pretty well for a first try.

Now it's time for V2.0, which will have to be introduced independently and operated comcurrently with v1.1. It will operate under a whole different set of protocols and demand a whole different set of technology, just as Doom suggests. But it won't arbitrarily replace this version, it will gradually bait over users from this version who seek a system with standards and trust. That's how you fix the problem. It's also the solution for the porn problem. It will also be hacked to bits in a few years at most, but for a while we'll have something better.

But that will take years and for quite a while it will leave open this mess. And this assumes the "powers that be" are even willing to expend the resources. That's iffy, because while piracy is a big deal to you guys, and porn is a big deal to me, to the bean counters neither one may be enough to actually "justify" doing anything at all. That's a big part of why I am so disgusted with the stupid laws that initiated this thread AND with our possibility of ever fixing anything AND people who sit around making grand pronouncements when they don't have a clue what the issues even involve.

But I'm sure the mighty burrito will help you grasp all that. :rolleyes:

[Wyatt_Junker]

Hey Secondy Second, c'mere, shhhhhhhhh, shaddap, don't want anyone to hear. Are we still talking 'bout cyborgs? You know, the new breed. Cause that's still classified information.

BTW, I hear the nachos rock. Maybe you should give those a shot. Then get back to us with a review.

[2nd_Amendment]

Sad that anyone would take you seriously. "...full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". I assume you can find the first part of that quote on your own...

[Rink]

is this P2P peeps are talkin bout just p2p's here in America?

There's one thing for certain p2p's cannot be shut down, too many 'smart' types do the warez style servers and at that they are smart enough to go offshore with their garbage.

Dunno how you can shut Warez sites down its impossible to do, as they can hack servers to gain access here, spoof their IP's and many mote ways to getting around the authorities.

push hard enough in America and the porn peddlers will go offshore, push further offshore and they'll go underground.

There's already an underground p2p network goin that has not yet been touched one inch because they're always one step ahead of the authorities.

I have in spam to Date 1103 for the month of june alone and thats with one of my emails being down that month for my outlook. (I can check that email on the web so its spam dont count)

I cant block em, I cant stop em, I get porn crap through em and I cant stand it.

Kids dont even have to 'look' for porn, it gets thrown at em on their free-mail like hotmail and/or yahoo mail, it gets tossed their way through bots crawling the net looking for email addresses, and then their private supposedly safe email addresses gets filled up full of spam, up to their eyeballs.

Go search an innocent website with an innocent name and you can get a load of porn sites, there's some legit sites that get hijacked by porn sites, then there's porn sites that literally hijack servers to get their garbage out, some use trojans on your comp, in effect using your computer as an unwitting 'server' to spread their filth even more.

Now ya wanna talk bout viruses?

All anyone has to do anymore nowadays is click a website, the pics load and one pic infected can mess up your machine, go to a site and you can literally get your browser hijacked, Had that happen more times than i can count, want to go to a news site? popups alone can mess your machine up something terrible, and some of those popups can be bad.

Trojans, viruses, and more are a bane we constantly fight, how do you eliminate it? I have absolutely no idea.

You can shut all the porn sites down in America but they'll all just pop up overseas, 2A has a point, no matter what you do the demand for this filth will continue, its imbedded in our sexed-up society, heck take a look at Hollywood, thats a good example of popular culture uber-saturated with sex, porn and garbage.

How do you stop that?

Thats the big $65,000 question here.

[PrezLeefun]

whoa go Rink that was kick ass!

[Wyatt_Junker]

is this P2P peeps are talkin bout just p2p's here in America?

There's one thing for certain p2p's cannot be shut down, too many 'smart' types do the warez style servers and at that they are smart enough to go offshore with their garbage.

Dunno how you can shut Warez sites down its impossible to do, as they can hack servers to gain access here, spoof their IP's and many mote ways to getting around the authorities.

push hard enough in America and the porn peddlers will go offshore, push further offshore and they'll go underground.

There's already an underground p2p network goin that has not yet been touched one inch because they're always one step ahead of the authorities.

I have in spam to Date 1103 for the month of june alone and thats with one of my emails being down that month for my outlook. (I can check that email on the web so its spam dont count)

I cant block em, I cant stop em, I get porn crap through em and I cant stand it.

Kids dont even have to 'look' for porn, it gets thrown at em on their free-mail like hotmail and/or yahoo mail, it gets tossed their way through bots crawling the net looking for email addresses, and then their private supposedly safe email addresses gets filled up full of spam, up to their eyeballs.

Go search an innocent website with an innocent name and you can get a load of porn sites, there's some legit sites that get hijacked by porn sites, then there's porn sites that literally hijack servers to get their garbage out, some use trojans on your comp, in effect using your computer as an unwitting 'server' to spread their filth even more.

Now ya wanna talk bout viruses?

All anyone has to do anymore nowadays is click a website, the pics load and one pic infected can mess up your machine, go to a site and you can literally get your browser hijacked, Had that happen more times than i can count, want to go to a news site? popups alone can mess your machine up something terrible, and some of those popups can be bad.

Trojans, viruses, and more are a bane we constantly fight, how do you eliminate it? I have absolutely no idea.

You can shut all the porn sites down in America but they'll all just pop up overseas, 2A has a point, no matter what you do the demand for this filth will continue, its imbedded in our sexed-up society, heck take a look at Hollywood, thats a good example of popular culture uber-saturated with sex, porn and garbage.

How do you stop that?

Thats the big $65,000 question here.

The point is not shutting down a p2p, its infiltrating it, becoming a part of it and flooding it with as many viruses as you can. This hasn't happened yet systematically. Content providers have only introduced spoofs and decoys, not an element of destruction. They were only waiting for SCOTUS to shed some light before they went a bit more... malignant.

That, too, will probably be challenged in court, but whose to say which way it will go. Take kiddie porn, for instance. Whose actually worse, the purveyor or the one trying to thwart the purveyor by destroying personal property? It could go either way, and frankly, I don't care. We've been waiting too long for 'nice' actions and approaches re the net. Kill it.

[Rink]

Um Wyatt, why do you think the RIAA is going after the little people for? They know those hackers that run warez p2p sites are dangerous and if RIAA went after them they would LOOSE.

Sending viruses against those who create them is just ASKING for trouble Wyatt.

I know of one individual that collects viruses and can take em apart and reconstruct them the way HE wants them.

RIAA has every chance to go after p2p sites but they havent, why? because they'd be in a war they'd loose, those that run warez sites can literally take down the net, they run alternative servers, yes they'd get hurt in the long run but not half as bad as We would get hurt, and it would take them less time getting back up than we would take after the damage has cleared.

[DeclinetoState]

Shoe I do not allow links to porn sites to be posted on FC.

Does this mean that I can't post this link to a photo of a bra-less Senator (http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/photos/big-kennedy.jpg)?

[JimRaynor]

Um Wyatt, why do you think the RIAA is going after the little people for? They know those hackers that run warez p2p sites are dangerous and if RIAA went after them they would LOOSE.
.

And 2nd is right, hackers (or crackers, depending on their preference) live for computers. To call them cyborgs is to miss the point he was trying to make.
The computer is their womb and the internet is the umbilical cord, so to speak.

It's hard to believe since you don't know them, but trust me MANY exist.

[DoctorDoom]

Does this mean that I can't post this link to a photo of a bra-less Senator?It's certainly repulsive, but Shamu K isn't nearly sexy enough for it to be porn. In fact, that photo could make the average pornophile go cold turkey.

[shoemoodoshaloo]

Sorry I started this thread with such a sarcastic tone. Here is why I think that this solution is just bs.

Gun deaths in America are very high, but this is because of street violence. Legal gun owners aren't usually the culprits of gun murders. So, making gun laws stricter doesn't do much. Those who legally own guns have to go through more hassle, while those who illegally own guns are unaffected. That kind of legislation makes people feel safer, but really, it is stupid.

The same goes for this ban on porn. Child pornographers won't stop because of this legislation. They are sick perverts, and what they are doing has always been illegal. Making porn harder to access doesn't stop child pornographers (if it does plz explain); all it does is inconvenience the average legal user. Sure, it makes mommies think that baby Tommy is safer, but he is not.

[Wyatt_Junker]

I agree that a ban on kiddie porn probably won't work in the same way that interstate speed limits are a source of revenue for the CHP and in no way reduce the speed limit.

However, that being said, I think the best way to deal with rampant child porn is by flooding it with decoys, adults posing as kids trolling for pervs, donut eaters, cops, moms and dads, senior citizens groups, anyone who is interested in taking one of these fiends offline.

Its like fishing except you use more hooks. Just increase the number of user decoys and, networking with them, pass on all your info to the locals or, seeing as its an online problem, the Feds.

The best way to deal with a massive, uncontrollable problem is not through legislation but by accepting reality, then making a new reality using networks, organizations and groups that are really interested in protecting innocence.

[Wolfcounsel]

"However, that being said, I think the best way to deal with rampant child porn is by flooding it with decoys, adults posing as kids trolling for pervs, donut eaters, cops, moms and dads, senior citizens groups, anyone who is interested in taking one of these fiends offline." --Wyatt_Junker


Don't forget also, it will take prosecutors and judges who are not wannabe members, or members of organizations like NAMBLA, to put away the perverts.

[DeclinetoState]

It's certainly repulsive, but Shamu K isn't nearly sexy enough for it to be porn. In fact, that photo could make the average pornophile go cold turkey.

It's obscene. Of course, putting Teddy K in the same sentence as "obscene" is no stretch.

Yegad--now I just put Teddy K in the same sentence as "stretch."

:(