BitShares Forum
Other => Meta => Topic started by: liondani on September 28, 2015, 07:33:52 pm
-
(https://s3-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fusalbiologica.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F07%2F0-internet-privacy.png&sp=ff4652635314a57a8c85de6b27e1921b)
"United States as world leaders from China, Russia, and even The Vatican gathered to discuss the future of mankind at the United Nations headquarters in New York. Tenets for a so-called “voluntary” initiative called Agenda 2030 were discussed, and one issue that was addressed was an official recommendation to begin controlling the Internet, reports the Washington Post."
http://cointelegraph.com/news/115349/world-leaders-meet-at-united-nations-control-of-the-internet-on-the-table
-
All the more reason why political security needs to be figured out.
-
china already diong this, and now thailand to follow, many other countries may introduce lag to outside internet to create a sort of intranet. Also censoring for their own purpose (intelligence gathering)... its all because cyber attacks, mainly started by the united states. I feel it is a hack and not solving the real problem.
Perhaps a more elegant solution is something like: http://cointelegraph.com/news/113919/bandwidth-for-bitcoin-bitmesh-displays-working-prototype
however that is elegant for us average joe's, it is unconvenient for those in power tryign to get a handle on things. Perhaps a middle ground can be found with what bytemaster was eluding to.
-
All the more reason why political security needs to be figured out.
i am really happy that you give credit to this. How things are preceived matters a lot.
-
This is the very reason we need decentralized solutions to DNS. I'm STILL shocked this never seems to gain the momentum the problem warrants. Even those that recognize the problem don't give it the priority it deserves and their efforts fade away.
How effective will BitShares be if all websites are censored? How will people know who to vote for? How will worker proposals or delegates be evaluated?
A free internet the THE MOST IMPORTANT priority, not just for engineers and techno-geeks BUT FOR THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE (excepting control freaks and psychopaths). People have said America is the last vestige of freedom, I say no, THE LAST VESTIGE OF FREEDOM IS THE INTERNET.
-
if you share a private key in DACPLAY with others , you can already send message on a blockchain level as diary . Even the ones posted the diary won't be able to delete it .
-
This is the crap that concerns me most. Add to that these people have written books about the world they want to create and you can see their views out in the open. This stuff is not conspiracy "theory" anymore...as we can all see. The kind of power they want over us is now reaching into the level of precrime:
http://shadowproof.com/2015/09/10/spy-chief-james-clapper-compares-u-s-intelligence-community-to-spider-man/
Thom is 100% right about decentralized dns. Paging @toast. Many of us never wanted DNS to die. I actually was learning to run my first delegate there when we watched it become forgotten. :(
It was a very sad day for me...
-
Go tell that to usa which forced china to start censoring, the world is following chinas footsteps. If usa simply stop the cyber attacks this would go away, We are not solving the root problem by applying a hack howver, although the hack would work at the expense of innovation.
This is why government trust is going out the window, right on time for armstrong,
-
How is child porn handled in a decentralized DNS world? How are terrorists handled? Hate groups?
I only ask this because these are the obvious touch points for why they talk about controlling the internet. So with the alternative.. how do we handle these things better? How does a decentralized DNS maintain the internet as a tool and not become weaponized?
-
From the guy who invented bittorrent: Project Maelstrom (http://project-maelstrom.bittorrent.com/)
-
How is child porn handled in a decentralized DNS world? How are terrorists handled? Hate groups?
I only ask this because these are the obvious touch points for why they talk about controlling the internet. So with the alternative.. how do we handle these things better? How does a decentralized DNS maintain the internet as a tool and not become weaponized?
in the name of terrorism(9/11),corruption, etc. they will enslave us with our permission....
PS even if you find solutions for all of these problems nobody will expose your ideas to the public/masses.... their ideas are the "best" for a reason!
(https://s3-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%2F736x%2F49%2F34%2Ffb%2F4934fbcef27c636cd0ecf9d23c60a30d.jpg&sp=dec8c7fa1563925c4b75fec71432ee3a)
-
How is child porn handled in a decentralized DNS world? How are terrorists handled? Hate groups?
I only ask this because these are the obvious touch points for why they talk about controlling the internet. So with the alternative.. how do we handle these things better? How does a decentralized DNS maintain the internet as a tool and not become weaponized?
I don't think that's the right question. Might as well ask how we make sure knives are only used for good and not evil. These things are just tools. You have to take the good with the bad. It's the person that weelds the tool and their intent that impact the world for the better or the worse.
That's also true of blockchain technology. We may try to devise procedures and systems of checks and balances but in the end it will be people's intentions that win the day regarding the impact it will have. It's not hard to see how total transparency would be great to hold public officials responsible for how they vote and what they spend, but that same power can be used to know everything citizens spend their money on determine what they are planning, making it much easier to stop them before they act to carry out those plans.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution thought they codified the "technology" to constrain the power of government, but later conceded that it wouldn't work unless the people were informed and vigilant. Some were, most weren't. I think we can say the same thing about our efforts.
-
How is child porn handled in a decentralized DNS world? How are terrorists handled? Hate groups?
I only ask this because these are the obvious touch points for why they talk about controlling the internet. So with the alternative.. how do we handle these things better? How does a decentralized DNS maintain the internet as a tool and not become weaponized?
I don't think that's the right question. Might as well ask how we make sure knives are only used for good and not evil. These things are just tools. You have to take the good with the bad. It's the person that weelds the tool and their intent that impact the world for the better or the worse.
So you are saying in a decentralized internet, exploitation of those who cannot protect themselves should just be 'hey.. good with the bad'?
All you are going to end up with is better tools that are weaponized for such purposes. To put it in bold abstract terms. Look Satan, I made an even sharper pitchfork for you to use.
Further to this... masses who have a moral imperative to protect the weak from those that will exploit them would in a heartbeat give up whatever perceived benefit a decentralized internet has to a centralized authority if they think it means saving lives.. saving children... protecting our humanity over our perception of 'rights'.
So what exactly IS the right question then if not this? Because you will NEVER have a decentralized internet where the world turns into a carpet to be walked all over as you have stated for the 'good with the bad'.
This needs a solution... not rhetoric.
-
I don't think that's the right question. Might as well ask how we make sure knives are only used for good and not evil. These things are just tools. You have to take the good with the bad. It's the person that weelds the tool and their intent that impact the world for the better or the worse.
+5% +5% +5%
-
How is child porn handled in a decentralized DNS world? How are terrorists handled? Hate groups?
I only ask this because these are the obvious touch points for why they talk about controlling the internet. So with the alternative.. how do we handle these things better? How does a decentralized DNS maintain the internet as a tool and not become weaponized?
Terrorists are the result of government oppression, eliminate the government interference and you eliminate the terrorism. Statistically speaking, you are more likely to die in a car accident than a terrorist attack.
Child porn is like money laundering, moving money isn't the crime, it is stealing it in the first place. In other words, stop kidnapping and child abuse which happen outside the internet and you stop the real crimes. If you want to remove the ECONOMIC incentive to generate NEW child porn, then you should make existing child porn freely available to undercut the market. I do not like child porn, but I hate state violence more. I do not like drugs, but am smart enough to know that making them illegal only INCREASES the market price of drugs and thus incentive the market to produce. Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
Hater's going to hate. Those that hate the hate groups and wish to deny them free speech are a bigger threat than the hate groups themselves. You fight hate groups with love, not with violence which only fuels their hate.
At the end of the day the "solutions" magnify the "problems" they try to solve by initiating force, restricting supply, preventing the free market from working, and increasing the profit for those who do the real crimes. You do not FIX social issues with violence, you just introduce more problems.
The challenge is that 99% of people feel compelled to violently resist and control other people. 99% of people are AFRAID of what would happen if they respond in love rather than violence and control.
If there is to be FILTERING of internet content it should be up to individual PRIVATE businesses to decide, not mandated via state violence. Think something like parental controls. Market forces will tend to relegate those kinds of websites to dark corners where normal people never have to look at them.
-
How is child porn handled in a decentralized DNS world? How are terrorists handled? Hate groups?
I only ask this because these are the obvious touch points for why they talk about controlling the internet. So with the alternative.. how do we handle these things better? How does a decentralized DNS maintain the internet as a tool and not become weaponized?
Terrorists are the result of government oppression, eliminate the government interference and you eliminate the terrorism. Statistically speaking, you are more likely to die in a car accident than a terrorist attack.
Child porn is like money laundering, moving money isn't the crime, it is stealing it in the first place. In other words, stop kidnapping and child abuse which happen outside the internet and you stop the real crimes. If you want to remove the ECONOMIC incentive to generate NEW child porn, then you should make existing child porn freely available to undercut the market. I do not like child porn, but I hate state violence more. I do not like drugs, but am smart enough to know that making them illegal only INCREASES the market price of drugs and thus incentive the market to produce. Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
Hater's going to hate. Those that hate the hate groups and wish to deny them free speech are a bigger threat than the hate groups themselves. You fight hate groups with love, not with violence which only fuels their hate.
At the end of the day the "solutions" magnify the "problems" they try to solve by initiating force, restricting supply, preventing the free market from working, and increasing the profit for those who do the real crimes. You do not FIX social issues with violence, you just introduce more problems.
The challenge is that 99% of people feel compelled to violently resist and control other people. 99% of people are AFRAID of what would happen if they respond in love rather than violence and control.
If there is to be FILTERING of internet content it should be up to individual PRIVATE businesses to decide, not mandated via state violence. Think something like parental controls. Market forces will tend to relegate those kinds of websites to dark corners where normal people never have to look at them.
That's good, BM.
-
How is child porn handled in a decentralized DNS world? How are terrorists handled? Hate groups?
I only ask this because these are the obvious touch points for why they talk about controlling the internet. So with the alternative.. how do we handle these things better? How does a decentralized DNS maintain the internet as a tool and not become weaponized?
Terrorists are the result of government oppression, eliminate the government interference and you eliminate the terrorism. Statistically speaking, you are more likely to die in a car accident than a terrorist attack.
Child porn is like money laundering, moving money isn't the crime, it is stealing it in the first place. In other words, stop kidnapping and child abuse which happen outside the internet and you stop the real crimes. If you want to remove the ECONOMIC incentive to generate NEW child porn, then you should make existing child porn freely available to undercut the market. I do not like child porn, but I hate state violence more. I do not like drugs, but am smart enough to know that making them illegal only INCREASES the market price of drugs and thus incentive the market to produce. Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
Hater's going to hate. Those that hate the hate groups and wish to deny them free speech are a bigger threat than the hate groups themselves. You fight hate groups with love, not with violence which only fuels their hate.
At the end of the day the "solutions" magnify the "problems" they try to solve by initiating force, restricting supply, preventing the free market from working, and increasing the profit for those who do the real crimes. You do not FIX social issues with violence, you just introduce more problems.
The challenge is that 99% of people feel compelled to violently resist and control other people. 99% of people are AFRAID of what would happen if they respond in love rather than violence and control.
If there is to be FILTERING of internet content it should be up to individual PRIVATE businesses to decide, not mandated via state violence. Think something like parental controls. Market forces will tend to relegate those kinds of websites to dark corners where normal people never have to look at them.
So the answer to the decentralized internet is to take away the incentives for these things to happen is what you are proposing.
These are important questions to answer in perception... this is why I am pressing for answers. As you have said before, it requires political will to secure. Can the average person get behind these ideas and still 'feel' morally aligned to do so? Is it going to be a better 'selling' option than the centralized one we see today and taking greater form?
If taking away the incentives is what will make it work, than how can that be accomplished? Do we literally create a "Sicko Squad" that does nothing but find child porn all day and duplicate it?
Terrorists are on a whole other level and nothing we can do about in terms of the economic situations.. however, how do we prevent from being viewed as a conduit for such?
I agree that a parental controls like way to handle undesirable content is the way to go in regards to haters.
These other matters though I don't think has yet been presented in a way that masses would be 'sold' on as a better way to do the internet.
This is the crux of my questioning.
-
Some things can not be eliminated, but can be avoided as far as possible.。It's too early to talk about it.
-
So there are two issues:
1. what is the object best approach to minimize the harm to society caused by these issues
2. what is the approach that most people will subjectively believe to be the best
As a society only 1% have the time, critical thinking, and emotional maturity to recognize the "right" answer. This means that 99% will reject the "right" answer and instead opt for something else.
If you want to get people to join the cause for freedom, you need to give them something to fear more than child porn, terrorism, and hate speech. It is sad to say, but you must manipulate people into taking the right actions for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, this is how the elite justify the propaganda machine. Many of the elite believe they are doing the "right" thing and thus feel morally justified in manipulating the masses to vote against their own best interest.
So this leaves us in the tough spot of having to find reasons the average man can get behind for supporting free speech.
First they came for the Child Pornography, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not into child porn.
Then they came for the Terrorists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Terrorist.
Then they came for the Hate Speech, and I did not speak out—
Because I did not hate.
Then they came for me—and it was illegal to speak out for me.
-
Some things can not be eliminated, but can be avoided as far as possible.。It's too early to talk about it.
We need Batman... Bitman perhaps? :D
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Can you explain why it doesn't apply?
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Let's ask Jared.
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Let's ask Jared.
Let's ask the Grand Inquisitor
-
So there are two issues:
1. what is the object best approach to minimize the harm to society caused by these issues
2. what is the approach that most people will subjectively believe to be the best
As a society only 1% have the time, critical thinking, and emotional maturity to recognize the "right" answer. This means that 99% will reject the "right" answer and instead opt for something else.
If you want to get people to join the cause for freedom, you need to give them something to fear more than child porn, terrorism, and hate speech. It is sad to say, but you must manipulate people into taking the right actions for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, this is how the elite justify the propaganda machine. Many of the elite believe they are doing the "right" thing and thus feel morally justified in manipulating the masses to vote against their own best interest.
So this leaves us in the tough spot of having to find reasons the average man can get behind for supporting free speech.
First they came for the Child Pornography, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not into child porn.
Then they came for the Terrorists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Terrorist.
Then they came for the Hate Speech, and I did not speak out—
Because I did not hate.
Then they came for me—and it was illegal to speak out for me.
So the bottom line is that we will need to go through a discovery process of our own to determine how to sell decentralization to the masses.
I don't think they will reject the right answer.. it's just going to be the answer that is best sold... which depends on if we have the right answer packaged as such.
Freedom lovers can't just keep beating their chests and play the martyr underdogs forever. If we are serious about imposing our will on the masses to be freedom lovers than we need to take more affirmative steps as the centralizing players.
Yes.. I worded it that way on purpose. No need to sugar coat what we are talking about here. :)
-
"To give you some feel for the moment, here is a passage from J.P. Barlow’s A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, published in 1996:
Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.
So, with a separation imperative in mind, we were confronted with the fact that some kind of law or justice service was necessary. And so, I began digging into the subject."
Justice Without State
http://www.freemansperspective.com/justice-without-state/
-
99% of people are AFRAID of what would happen if they respond in love rather than violence and control.
One of the best sentences I read on this forum +5%
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Can you explain why it doesn't apply?
That logic can't apply because if already existing child porn were legal, the kids who were in it would be exploited in an ongoing manner, every time somebody watches it, it's an infringement on their rights.
I would say real child porn should be illegal. Computer generated though? That could subsidize the market reducing incentive to produce while not legitimizing trade in content that already shouldn't have existed.
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Can you explain why it doesn't apply?
That logic can't apply because if already existing child porn were legal, the kids who were in it would be exploited in an ongoing manner, every time somebody watches it, it's an infringement on their rights.
I would say real child porn should be illegal. Computer generated though? That could subsidize the market reducing incentive to produce while not legitimizing trade in content that already shouldn't have existed.
If a child porn user looks at a child's picture and no one ever knows about it, then was anyone actually harmed... did it actually happen? Claiming the child continues to be harmed simply because some anonymous pervert *might* be looking at their photo is a bit of a stretch, especially because whether or not you attempt to "block it" the statement remains true. That same pervert may be looking at that same photo acquired over freenet and said child wouldn't know the difference.
That said, I am sure that some adult children may volunteer their childhood photos to the cause and still other children may be dead along with their parents. In which case it should be trivial to voluntarily take down any photos at the request of the child in question which eliminates any "imagined" to the child. The end result is to reduce the value of child porn and thus the incentive to produce it.
All of that said people are not always rational about these kinds of topics. Some people would gladly kill someone just for looking at child porn the wrong way. Others would gladly spend unimaginable amounts of OTHER PEOPLES in the hope of preventing even a single instance of child abuse.
It is the pursuit of perfection that drives people to pay extreme prices to achieve meaningless gains.
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Can you explain why it doesn't apply?
That logic can't apply because if already existing child porn were legal, the kids who were in it would be exploited in an ongoing manner, every time somebody watches it, it's an infringement on their rights.
I would say real child porn should be illegal. Computer generated though? That could subsidize the market reducing incentive to produce while not legitimizing trade in content that already shouldn't have existed.
If a child porn user looks at a child's picture and no one ever knows about it, then was anyone actually harmed... did it actually happen? Claiming the child continues to be harmed simply because some anonymous pervert *might* be looking at their photo is a bit of a stretch, especially because whether or not you attempt to "block it" the statement remains true. That same pervert may be looking at that same photo acquired over freenet and said child wouldn't know the difference.
That said, I am sure that some adult children may volunteer their childhood photos to the cause and still other children may be dead along with their parents. In which case it should be trivial to voluntarily take down any photos at the request of the child in question which eliminates any "imagined" to the child. The end result is to reduce the value of child porn and thus the incentive to produce it.
All of that said people are not always rational about these kinds of topics. Some people would gladly kill someone just for looking at child porn the wrong way. Others would gladly spend unimaginable amounts of OTHER PEOPLES in the hope of preventing even a single instance of child abuse.
It is the pursuit of perfection that drives people to pay extreme prices to achieve meaningless gains.
I just want to officially state the following:
1. I am 100% against child pornography and do not wish to support it in any way.
2. I am 100% against harming children and wish to see every measure taken to minimize that harm
3. I could be wrong in my own assessment of how best to minimize the production and distribution of child porn at the expense of children.
I am merely expressing my opinions on how to achieve the same goals as everyone else and nothing I say should be construed to suggest that I support harming children in any way.
-
If a child porn user looks at a child's picture and no one ever knows about it, then was anyone actually harmed... did it actually happen? Claiming the child continues to be harmed simply because some anonymous pervert *might* be looking at their photo is a bit of a stretch, especially because whether or not you attempt to "block it" the statement remains true. That same pervert may be looking at that same photo acquired over freenet and said child wouldn't know the difference.
If it were legal the child would have a means of finding out if their pics are being looked at (looking for himself on the cp market), it would also bring more potential eyeballs to them. Additionally, it could cause reputation harm. I wonder if some elitist country club might someday exclude members known to be subjects of child porn.
Same logic for why hacking celebrity iPhones to see pics of J-Laws butthole is illegal. Consent to appear in porn matters and a kid can't give it. Also if it's legal there's no take backs, it's there and legal for the whole world to see, and in all likelihood will eventually work its way to a website of some kind.
That said, I am sure that some adult children may volunteer their childhood photos to the cause and still other children may be dead along with their parents. In which case it should be trivial to voluntarily take down any photos at the request of the child in question which eliminates any "imagined" to the child. The end result is to reduce the value of child porn and thus the incentive to produce it.
I was thinking about this too after I read your comments. Problem I see here though is that if there is a legal market for childporn, some people might think, "Hey how can we guarantee little Suzy has an income option in the future regardless of how her life pans out? Hmmm....." Especially with the job market being like it is. Supply for labor is going to continue to shit all over demand for the foreseeable future, especially with automation, and people are only going to get more and more desperate (barring some kind of blockchain and/or politically based economic revolution).
Also, it wouldn't be trivial to voluntarily take down photos at the child's request... this is the internet, come on now...
All of that said people are not always rational about these kinds of topics. Some people would gladly kill someone just for looking at child porn the wrong way. Others would gladly spend unimaginable amounts of OTHER PEOPLES in the hope of preventing even a single instance of child abuse.
It is the pursuit of perfection that drives people to pay extreme prices to achieve meaningless gains.
This I agree with 100% People are way too emotional about the issue to be able to make rational policies about it. The entire criminal justice system needs a good hard looking at with a giant dose of objectivity.
-
Yes, you should take as much precaution as possible when discussing such emotionally loaded issues, even when you're demonstrably right. Sadly, the vast majority of people are not utilitarian, and do not reason based on the maximization of the success of the end goals.
I often rethink of this case of an Indian policeman that caused public outrage because he compared "the inability to enforce a law against illegal betting is like saying to women, ”because you can't prevent rape, you should enjoy it”." http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/prevent-rape-enjoy-it-india-police-chief
It was an analogy, probably a bad one, and for a bad motive. Regardless of that, he never said that he thought "women should enjoy rape", but was treated exactly like if he had, just because he put those two words one after the other. Most people can't stop and think.
-
Yes, you should take as much precaution as possible when discussing such emotionally loaded issues, even when you're demonstrably right. Sadly, the vast majority of people are not utilitarian, and do not reason based on the maximization of the success of the end goals.
I often rethink of this case of an Indian policeman that caused public outrage because he compared "the inability to enforce a law against illegal betting is like saying to women, ”because you can't prevent rape, you should enjoy it”." http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/prevent-rape-enjoy-it-india-police-chief
It was an analogy, probably a bad one, and for a bad motive. Regardless of that, he never said that he thought "women should enjoy rape", but was treated exactly like if he had, just because he put those two words one after the other. Most people can't stop and think.
Yea. I appreciate the attempt to get people to think about issues in a different way, but DE is gonna have a field day with this post. LOL
-
Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Can you explain why it doesn't apply?
That logic can't apply because if already existing child porn were legal, the kids who were in it would be exploited in an ongoing manner, every time somebody watches it, it's an infringement on their rights.
I would say real child porn should be illegal. Computer generated though? That could subsidize the market reducing incentive to produce while not legitimizing trade in content that already shouldn't have existed.
If a child porn user looks at a child's picture and no one ever knows about it, then was anyone actually harmed... did it actually happen? Claiming the child continues to be harmed simply because some anonymous pervert *might* be looking at their photo is a bit of a stretch, especially because whether or not you attempt to "block it" the statement remains true. That same pervert may be looking at that same photo acquired over freenet and said child wouldn't know the difference.
That said, I am sure that some adult children may volunteer their childhood photos to the cause and still other children may be dead along with their parents. In which case it should be trivial to voluntarily take down any photos at the request of the child in question which eliminates any "imagined" to the child. The end result is to reduce the value of child porn and thus the incentive to produce it.
All of that said people are not always rational about these kinds of topics. Some people would gladly kill someone just for looking at child porn the wrong way. Others would gladly spend unimaginable amounts of OTHER PEOPLES in the hope of preventing even a single instance of child abuse.
It is the pursuit of perfection that drives people to pay extreme prices to achieve meaningless gains.
I think you took an EXTREMELY puritan view of what child 'porn' means.
These are often children which are being forced to commit sex acts in various forms and/or to be naked. The captured videos and images of these acts are the continuation of their real world violation. The crime WAS committed, and now that crime is being replayed over and over to the masses of sickos. The compulsions that drive the thinking of these people is like that of a drug addict. Unaddressed/Untreated they need their fix. Cost means nothing to them. Security in anonymity means everything.
That said, I have not heard of any of the child porn rings getting busted in recent history mentioning anything about how much they were profiting from it. For some, there is just the 'joy' in committing the acts and then sharing them. Having a following. The more people they can reach, the more they get off on it. Their profit motive is fame among his/her peers.
With that said, the decentralized internet is his and others sickos dream come true. They get to share in their crimes even more.. with even greater security with no way for legal enforcement agencies to do anything about it.. it's the same situation the US now frets over empowering their terrorists counterparts with more secure communication capabilities that put them in the dark.
In the centralized internet where your privacy and rights etc can be trampled on, enforcement is more likely to be able to track down the perp/perv and stop them from committing the crimes in the first place. Prevent more at least.
The fact is that there are really bad people in the world who want to do really bad things to others. Their rights end where your rights begin. A decentralized Internet could very well ensure this protection of everyones rights.. We don't have it yet, so there is no way to really tell how that technology is going to look yet.
In my scenario, the decentralized internet is enhancing crime... helping in hurting/destroying the rights of children in this scenario. I use it as an extreme example because it's an easy example that nobody in their right mind has any other position on it other than prevention. It just becomes a debate of how you prevent.. what tools can you use? The decentralized internet took away law enforcements best tool for prevention if it is one where there is no way to respond to certain things which are undeniable violations of others rights.
I think we need to figure out ways that things like this can be handled in a manner that is better than the way it is now. I don't know how that works yet or what it looks like, but what I am talking about isn't something like Silk Road where the legalities are questionable/debatable by some and a dark market is made from people who just want to buy sell their warz.. I am talking about fundamental rights to life and liberty of people.. and perhaps even animals while we are at it. Rights are not endless.. they end where others rights begin... and with that there has to be limits..it's a question of who decides that. The state has demonstrated what they can do to have zero regard for any rights when it suits them.
Anyways.. I know this has been debated to death before.. it's really kind of a pointless exercise until we have some kind of probable solution on the table to consider. Maybe the point is to just ask the question.. consider the possibilities.. allow creative genius to work on a solution that could provide an imperfect middle ground that the majority can get behind.
-
@datasecuritynode
You really really need to study a history of the Holy Inquisition before advocating taking power from individuals and giving it to righteous authorities. In power structures (power over others) it is often the perverts and psychopaths that rise to the top.
I don't have a solution to offer as to how to stop child abuse, but I suggest the place to begin looking is to loving family structures. Wanted and loved children are not likely to be abused.
Choose to live in a community where people know each other and shun anyone who exploits others, especially children.
The "authorities" to whom you want to give the power to spy on the internet are the "authorities" who ripped native kids from their loving families and cultural settings and sent them to residential schools where a large percentage underwent sexual and physical
abuse.
-
https://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0 (https://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0)
I think BM is completely correct. I think production should be very harshly punished. I think sexualization of children is terrible, for the individual, and for society at large. I wouldn't look at it if it were legal. I also think that decriminalization is the best way to reduce the number of exploited children going forward.
-
I hate to say it but this conversation is just bad PR. BM I would advise to put your disclaimer about child porn in every post of yours above.
-
I hate to say it but this conversation is just bad PR.
=/
-
Just delete the entire thread
-
@datasecuritynode
You really really need to study a history of the Holy Inquisition before advocating taking power from individuals and giving it to righteous authorities. In power structures (power over others) it is often the perverts and psychopaths that rise to the top.
I don't have a solution to offer as to how to stop child abuse, but I suggest the place to begin looking is to loving family structures. Wanted and loved children are not likely to be abused.
Choose to live in a community where people know each other and shun anyone who exploits others, especially children.
The "authorities" to whom you want to give the power to spy on the internet are the "authorities" who ripped native kids from their loving families and cultural settings and sent them to residential schools where a large percentage underwent sexual and physical
abuse.
I wasn't advocating giving the power to spy to authorities. I stated plainly where we see that had lead. I don't think that is the solution.
What I do encourage is considering to continue to ask questions and think of different approaches.
Its just a really tough subject to tackle.. but it's what we are up against in regards to the OP. We can either come up with a sellable solution, or people will accept the one being offered by the "authorities".
You are suggesting that loving families structures is the place to start.. that's a good start. Community yes! What if a decentralized internet means forming real communities that protect one another? It's associations like these that ultimately need to be used in such discussions.
Do you want the state poking around your business.. or do you want to build a strong community that protects one another?
I think that's the beginnings of a great narrative!
-
Just delete the entire thread
+1
-
Just delete the entire thread
+1
Hard to refer investors to the forum with this thread up in recent posts.
-
https://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0 (https://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0)
I think BM is completely correct. I think production should be very harshly punished. I think sexualization of children is terrible, for the individual, and for society at large. I wouldn't look at it if it were legal. I also think that decriminalization is the best way to reduce the number of exploited children going forward.
We can move this to random? I love it...so I don't want to see it deleted! This is important stuff!
I am not sure why this is bad PR to have concerns over a single world governmental structure wanting to control the net (or am I really living in Bizzaro World these days and it IS unpopular??). All too often we sweep things like this under the rug these days...and as soon as something resembles conspiracy people are afraid to touch it with a 10-foot pole. Sometimes what is right is not popular...head over to the EFF's Website (https://www.eff.org/) to see the cases with real and wide-reaching implications they fight against on a daily basis and you will begin to understand what i'm talking about.
This thread is gold and should not be harmed imho...
-
https://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0 (https://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0)
I think BM is completely correct. I think production should be very harshly punished. I think sexualization of children is terrible, for the individual, and for society at large. I wouldn't look at it if it were legal. I also think that decriminalization is the best way to reduce the number of exploited children going forward.
We can move this to random? I love it...so I don't want to see it deleted! This is important stuff!
I am not sure why this is bad PR to have concerns over a single world governmental structure wanting to control the net (or am I really living in Bizzaro World these days and it IS unpopular??). All too often we sweep things like this under the rug these days...and as soon as something resembles people are afraid to touch it with a 10-foot pole. Sometimes what is right is not popular...head over to the EFF's Website (https://www.eff.org/) to see the cases with real and wide-reaching implications they fight against on a daily basis and you will begin to understand what i'm talking about.
This thread is gold and should not be harmed imho...
I agree on both counts. Yes, it should be moved to Random Discussion. And yes, it is an important thread and well worth discussing. in the Random slot. Parts of the discussion are very uncomfortable to contemplate, but there are definitely attacks that we will be facing based on innuendo and fear mongering.
-
Just delete the entire thread
+1
great idea
-
There is two kind of speech control . One from government , one from oneself .
Expressing every single bit of your thinking and expect people should not judge you for that is not freedom of speech . Freedom of speech only prevents you from the government fallout , not from the public opinion .
Being true doesn't mean you should to tell your friend in the desert that you want to eat him even though you really want to .
Being true doesn't mean you should expect your friend to forgive you after justifying how reasonable for you to eat him .
The true freedom of speech comes with prices , some in actual jail , more in the jail of the public's heart . If you do not wish to be punish for your speech in the court of public opinion , then you shouldn't even throw yourself there to begin with .
It takes wisdom and thinking to start a controversial debate . It takes freedom of speech to protect and continue the debate . It takes more wisdom to end it when it brings more negative impact upon you and others .
Not every thing is about logic . If my teacher looks like a pig , I tell him that , which is totally logical and reasonable . Then I would be screwed seriously even though I actually have a point .
It's your freedom to express your own free will . It's also other people's freedom to give you hard time for that . It's also other people's freedom to inflict serious consequence upon you including a trial in public opinion and ruin things that you've worked so hard for and you end up paying more significant price than you expected . You shouldn't expect less because you live in a society . But if you're actually expecting less , then you haven't really prepared for it .
-
Just delete the entire thread
+1
+5%
I have not problem with that...
Waiting a moderator to do it since I have not the permission to do it .
PS I have a copy for members that desperately want it for their records (@fuzzy ?) :)
-
let me know if i can delete..
-
There is two kind of speech control . One from government , one from oneself .
Expressing every single bit of your thinking and expect people should not judge you for that is not freedom of speech . Freedom of speech only prevents you from the government fallout , not from the public opinion .
Being true doesn't mean you should to tell your friend in the desert that you want to eat him even though you really want to .
Being true doesn't mean you should expect your friend to forgive you after justifying how reasonable for you to eat him .
The true freedom of speech comes with prices , some in actual jail , more in the jail of the public's heart . If you do not wish to be punish for your speech in the court of public opinion , then you shouldn't even throw yourself there to begin with .
It takes wisdom and thinking to start a controversial debate . It takes freedom of speech to protect and continue the debate . It takes more wisdom to end it when it brings more negative impact upon you and others .
Not every thing is about logic . If my teacher looks like a pig , I tell him that , which is totally logical and reasonable . Then I would be screwed seriously even though I actually have a point .
It's your freedom to express your own free will . It's also other people's freedom to give you hard time for that . It's also other people's freedom to inflict serious consequence upon you including a trial in public opinion and ruin things that you've worked so hard for and you end up paying more significant price than you expected . You shouldn't expect less because you live in a society . But if you're actually expecting less , then you haven't really prepared for it .
well said
-
let me know ..if i should delete it .. moved it to forum management..
-
+ move to random
It's bad PR though, and cryptonomex has to put in some policies in place for their staff regarding public relations. in my opinion.
you don't talk about human trafficking or some other acts in the business part of the forum. I understood the intention to create controversy, but it'll scare new people off. not everyone is as smart as this community :)
-
Just delete the entire thread
+1
+5%
I have not problem with that...
Waiting a moderator to do it since I have not the permission to do it .
PS I have a copy for members that desperately want it for their records (@fuzzy ?) :)
All i know is we are never going to make the world a better place by sensoring ourselves. Saving this post in some hidden chest that has to be searched for doesnt really change this.
I say we all remain quiet about it and start calling those who talk about it "conspiracy theorists" to make sure people know we dont take tyrannical UN control over the inet seriously. THAT will help us battle 1984...by burning posts. :)