Slashdotters Demand Access to Child Porn

I went and had a look at the article.

To me their arguments are tantamount to saying "You can't outlaw rape or they'll start trying to outlaw legitimate sex next!" Dumb.

One idiot actually wrote: "Since when are there child porn web sites anyway? I thought it was all IRC and USENET." Talk about head-up-your-arse reasoning.

I agree with you, but this is also one of those circumstances where a private individual is deciding to prevent other people's ability to visit sites. Kudos to them in this case, why these sites exist is beyond me.

On the other hand I shudder to think what happens the next time some small town ISP's head honcho "finds Jesus" and decides his ISP won't have people going to those scary Harry Potter sites. When he goes to court, his lawyer is gonna point to this case and say "Hey, they blocked access to sites on their own prerogative, so are we."

Also, does this mean Abercrombie and Fitch will go? If you read child pornography laws you don't even have to be under-aged, you can also be portraying someone under-aged. Also, it is considered child pornography if the kids are in "sexual or suggestive" situations. That screws a huge amount of anime. There are tons of mainstream anime wherein a teen is thrust into sexual situations featuring nudity, etc. Mahoromatic, and several others, spring to mind.

The price you pay, I guess. I am all for these sites being wiped from the face of the earth along with the scum that profit from them. Honestly, though, you have to understand how a precedent like this will be abused by the interpretation of the holier-than-thou set. The Liberal set aren't completely sinless in this vein either. Will anti-abortion sites go when they start blocking "terrorist" sites? Yet another matter of interpretation left to the private individuals not to abuse.

I willingly accept this kind of move, but it relies on "common sense", which isn't all that common.

This simply proves my theory about liberal Linux advocates: they're paedophiles

Funny, I just read this. A couple of days ago I left a tounge in cheek reply on MasonM's blog about how his Linux based Opera browser doesn't work at JoeUser.com. I suggested it was because it was a commie pinko browser. Mason did not share in my moment of levity and promptly deleted my post. Geez, you Americans are sensitive these days. Anyhoo, today I read this post equating "Liberal Linux advoates" with pedophilia. Which makes even less sense than branding AOL users as diddlers. Mason, I hope you get my joke now, because this Robot guy is calling you a pedophile.

Robot, the Slashdot community is probably one of the most intelligent and diverse net communities on Earth, so I wouldn't make statements like "Once again, members of Slashdot.org have shown that they are complete idiots". Comments like that and your Linux/diddler theory demonstrates sufficient evidence of irrational thought to preclude you from reasonable discussion on this subject.

Robot, the Slashdot community is probably one of the most intelligent and diverse net communities on Earth, so I wouldn't make statements like "Once again, members of Slashdot.org have shown that they are complete idiots". Comments like that and your Linux/diddler theory demonstrates sufficient evidence of irrational thought to preclude you from reasonable discussion on this subject.

I think one simply needs to read a few of the posts on Slashdot to know how mistaken you are.

I agree with robot here. While Slashdot *may* have once been an exclusive online watering hole for the intellectual elite it is now just an open sewer full of retards and script kiddies who love to blather. Cowboy Neal has not done much of anything to control this so they control almost everything there now. Kinda of sad really.

Yeah, you guys are dead right as usual. The current issues being discussed at Slashdot (Cassini-Huygens probe reaches Phoebe, Open Source Biotech, Intel Plans for Dual-Core Prescott CPUs in 2005) are just flat out retarded. Obiviously 'an open sewer full of retards and script kiddies who love to blather', this is self evident.

The idea of controlling debate on Slashdot is anathema to everything Slash stands for; information wants to be free, as we propellorheads are fond of saying. Only someone like greywar who doesn't get it and never will would suggest Slashot would be better with editorial control. I guess it's easier to attack Slashdot than to defend your "Slashdotters demand child porn" and "Linux users are pedophiles" statements which are both patently false and indicative of irrational thought.

David - thanks for holding your self out there as an example of the cancer that has been eating slashdot from the inside out for years. Your behavior on this board alone is all the justification I would ever need to support my claims. Once thanks and happy asshatting to you:)

Greywar, you're the one who:

1)Calls people son - that's way out of line, Mr Netiquette
2)Blacklists people when they point out how incredibly wrong you are
3)Delete posts that prove your posts are wrong,
4)Then lie about content of said posts
5)Falsely accuse others of spam
6)Falsely accuse others of trolling
6)Use inflammatory language in every single post rather than logical, clear english, better to support your brittle and frail "arguments"
7)After you black list people, attacking their countries (Canada = haven for Islamofascist pedophiles) Real cowardly to attack my country without letting me respond in kind.
8)Overall, your tone is belligerent and bellicose. Show some respect for yourself and others.
9)You have repeatedly accused me of being some other guy who you've seen on Joe User before, which is both false and paranoid.
10)You automatically and comically accuse those who disagree with you as conspiracy theorists, which is sort of a weak response in my book. The tinfoil hat schtick is really wearing thin, get some new material.
11)You seem to think well thought out, vitriol-free comments are too long; maybe your lips get tired after a few lines of reading?

This is just a partial list of your buttock haberdashery, but overall I find your posts to be nasty, angry, and factually incorrect.

In my first post at JoeUser I stated I was here to keep a personal journal and explicitly stated I'd stay out of the political stuff. A week later, greywar posted his "Why Project Echelon is a Conspiracy Theory" post. I'm pretty sure I'm the only blogger to have made recent reference to Project Echelon in any of my posts. Additionally greywar mentioned he's had his eye on me as he seems convinced I'm some conspiracy theorist who has tangled with him in the past. So it doesn't take a Slashdotter to put two and two together and say his post was aimed at me. Is it cowardly to pick a fight with someone who has said they aren't here to fight? Or just dumb?

So don't blame me for getting involved in the political debate here at JoeUser, I didn't start this. As long as guys like greywar and robot here keep lobbing softballs down the middle don't blame me for hitting it out of the park. And I'll do it without name calling, lying, spewing angry vitriol, deleting posts, or blacklisting.

David - actually I said I though I recognized your posting style from somehwere else as it pertained to trolling but whatever. I will continue to delete any posts I feel liek on my own blog and smile afterwards:)

There are two people on my blacklist dave and you are one of them, select company:)

Find anywhere I referred to Canada as a haven for pedofiles? No, because I never said it.

Nonetheless all we two are doing here is hijacking this thread. My apology to Sayian Robot for my participation in this. This sort of hijacking is *exactly* the problem slashdot has fallen prey to. I would love to say I set this up for David to prove my point as some sort of experiment but I did not. I simply allowed him to draw me into a troll war for the second time. There will not be a third Davey.

Perhaps that proposed option to simply have an "ignore" list should be exhumed? It might help prevent this sort of thing from happening again. Again my apologies to Robot for messing about on his blog.

I take it back about Canada, I researched my own comments and did find that in a discussion of pedofilia someone pointed out that Canada apparently has a legal age of consent at age 14! that is a haven for pedofiles. Offtopic but I couldn't edit my earlier post to correct my mistake. sorry.

Yeah, you guys are dead right as usual. The current issues being discussed at Slashdot (Cassini-Huygens probe reaches Phoebe, Open Source Biotech, Intel Plans for Dual-Core Prescott CPUs in 2005) are just flat out retarded. Obiviously 'an open sewer full of retards and script kiddies who love to blather', this is self evident.

In other words, by discussing politics on this site, everybody's a political genius? If AOLers discuss the latest scripts they downloaded, suddenly they're super genius hackers?

Pardon me if this is too related to the original topic, but the way I read the /. argument was this:

If you cede control of what you are allowed to view to someone else, then you have no guarantee that they won't start controlling things outside of the original scope of the agreement.

It's like NetNanny and other "Parental control" software that has a proprietary, secret list of sites that it blocks; Turns out that instead of just blocking "indecent or obscene" materials, as advertised, they also block things like the National Organization for Women (NOW) site, Breast Cancer Awareness sites, AIDS information sites, and other important medical and political resources. They are using their filtering software as a means of subtly pushing their own political agendas. Given that it's already happened in those cases, why should we expect that another company starting from the same basic idea should end up with a better result?

When you think about it, we should abolish all laws against child pornography, lest it leads to more censorship. After all, once we outlaw "indecent" and "obscene" material, legitimate material is next. I hope Slashdotters go out onto the streets and demand that child pornography be legalized using their illogical logic and that their pictures are taken and shown in newspapers. Information wants to be free!

Yeah robot, another great example of brilliant deductive reasoning on your part. You're a political genius, all AOLers are super genius hackers, that's my thesis in a nutshell. You're dead on, as usual.

Yeah robot, another great example of brilliant deductive reasoning on your part. You're a political genius, all AOLers are super genius hackers, that's my thesis in a nutshell. You're dead on, as usual.

So discussing "intelligent" topics doesn't necessarily make somebody intelligent, meaning the evidence you used to prove Slashdot as a community of highly intelligent super geniuses is invalid?

"If you cede control of what you are allowed to view to someone else, then you have no guarantee that they won't start controlling things outside of the original scope of the agreement. "

If you live in the US you have already ceded control of what you can view to the government, you can be jailed for it if you opt not to. Mistype a Url or search, and you can end up commiting a crime for which you would have to register as a sex offender. In my state a single image is all it takes, and the browser cache is not a safe zone, nor are deleted files forensically retrieved.

Right now, mainstream ISPs' news servers are serving child pornography to people that can be jailed for viewing it. It isn't like Napster, the material is on their servers, downloaded from their servers. The titles of the newsgroups plainly state that what kind of material is on the group.

The time is gonna come that these providers are gonna be called upon to explain why the ability exists to almost instantaneously access child pornography via their service. It would be far safer for them to block known sources of such material now, than explain why they didn't later.

Let the geeks bleat, but there aren't all that many people who see doing away with access to child pornography as a 'slippery slope', and many who do think it is a necessary evil.

Let the geeks bleat, but there aren't all that many people who see doing away with access to child pornography as a 'slippery slope', and many who do think it is a necessary evil.

That's how I feel. The line between child pornography and everything else is pretty clear cut it seems, especially the child pornography that's usually thought of: i.e. preteens in sexual situations.

Yes i agree with this, it is not like these people are viewing pictures of girl who *might* be 18 or soemthing these are kids who are under 10 in sexually suggestive situations. I suppose the line becomes blurry when you try to figure out what doesn't make a situation sexual (what about the Ron, hermione, and harry sandwich int he most recent Potter film? hmmm) but I don't think it is a show stopper to figure it out.