[extropy-chat] the RBL racket
john.heritage at v21.me.uk
Mon Sep 11 15:37:48 UTC 2006
How fitting considering the recent discussion of privacy.
>Look up 'thought crimes'.
Pretty much any crime based around the simple possesion of something also
qualifies. E.g. drugs & guns. If I have a handful of magic mushrooms, it's
now a Class A offence in the UK. The fact I have a handful of them has
nothing to do with what I'm going to use them for. By having them in my
hand, I've done zero damage to the rest of society, or even myself. I could
empty them into the bin, I could mix them into some sweets and hide them in
>Looking at certain pictures on your computer gets you a prison
>sentence. Technically you are 'in possession' if they hit your screen.
>As around 90% of computers are malware infected, they are very likely
>to be involved in some criminal activity.
I take it you might be talking about S&M porno. Which, for the guys in the
US, has been under the spotlight in the UK just recently after a guy
murdered a woman and they found a whole load of violent porn on his
computer. So violent porno, even if it's just simulated violence, is now a
criminal possesion. This is a very, very old discussion that's been going on
since S&M and cameras got together. It's assault to just touch someone with
your hand. It's not asault to have a surgen slice your face up for cosmetic
reconstruction. Or a surgen operate on you without consent (e.g. barbaric,
ritualistic circumcision of restrained infants without anesthetic), or to
enter a boxing match, have people place bets on it and then televise it.
Theoretically, it's assault to have someone spank you, even if you ask them
to do so. A whole christmas sized pencil box full of greyscale.
Course, the interesting thing that Bill points out is malware and redirects
dumping this kind of stuff onto your computer whether you like it or not
(And I know that a lot of people don't know how to empty out their histories
etc even if they want to, and lots don't, because they don't even know it's
there to begin with). Although, I've yet to experience a piece of malware
that signs me up for a private torrent network and downloads 10GB of kiddy
porn onto my computer, then posts messages in fora asking for specific kiddy
porno - which is what the people with such content on their drives will try
for. Which is, of course, not to say that we won't eventually have something
that tries that.
>It's interesting that no one so far has made Microsoft liable.
>If you buy an unsafe vehicle, you can sue the maker for damages.
True, but to be fair, a lot of the damages that could occur to you, a
passenger in your car or a pedestrian will be through negligence or mistakes
(your's or another driver's). Or if the car suddenly explodes through no
fault of your's or any other driver's error. If, however, someone had
purposefully lifted the lid of your car and emptied nitroglycerine into the
engine, I doubt you'd get very far suing the manufacturer for not putting
locks all over the caps and an 'anti-nitroglycerine system' in. Or if the
car was stolen and the manufacturer hadn't fitted a lock to the door.
However, if the car was sold saying "Fitted with locks" and it wasn't, then
you'd have a reasonable complaint. If it was sold saying "Guaranteed,
totally imprevious to being stolen", you're on for a winner - but definitly
not a certainty. But they don't ever make such a stupid claim. It's just
"Fitted with locks for added security". When someone is actively trying to
damage a system, it liberates the manufacturers from a great amount of
blame. And rightly so if you want to live in a world where anything is ever
>I don't agree that possession of pedophilia media should be a crime
>(but the making of such should very well be a serious crime, unless
>casted with ). Here I also happen to disagree with public
>consensus and the legislation.
I'd go one step further and risk having my door kicked in and face squashed
into the carpet, I don't think the fundamental problem lies with the act
it's self (be it with a simulation or an actual human), only the conditions
under which in takes place (which seem universally traumatic for the
children involved - manipulation, threats, physical violence, etc). But I do
agree that the latter justifies a particularly extreme response.
Perhaps a more fair response to the megaphone idea, whilst still maintaining
everyone's freedom, would be whip out your own megaphone and shout back. Of
coarse, this wouldn't be very fair to the neighbours having to listen in
(This would be analogous to counter-spamming and hitting the wrong
addresses). Arguably, it would be fair if everyone around him started to
shout back as well, since they all had to listen to him in the first place.
Provided you could contain your channel back towards him (so as not to annoy
everyone else and make him enjoy the fact you're doing so, causing him to
prompt you yet further and cause more disturbances himself) and only those
people annoyed could shout back and for a roughly equal amount of time, that
seems reasonably fair.
You could implement some of these things with a private counter-spam system.
E.g. I download a client. The client watches my email for junk from know
spammers and/or with a known content and each piece gives me a
counter-spamming credit (Maybe two or three per piece of junk as additional
payment for initiating the waste of time in the first place). An _up to
date_ server then redirects my counter-spam back to the sender. Following
the Lycos idea, "Make love not spam". These kinds of systems would be too
tricky for individuals to implement themselves, so it's not entirely
analogous to everyone just implementing their own version of what's fair
with their fists - it would be easier to regulate the amount of payback to
keep it sane (no baseball bats for passing remarks).
Spam is also a global crime, and so deserves a global reply. The quickest
and easiest way of implementing this would be for some form of private
torrent counter-spam agent. The reality of trying to get global
harmonisation and cooperation on dealing with these guys is laughable. The
amount of lag required to put it through standard legal proceedings will
likely give even the slowest enough time to pick up his gear and walk away.
I suppose the important bit is disconnecting agenda from the system. Lycos
have an agenda in that they can encourage customers to like them with such
schemes and increase traffic through their network (with counter-spam). But
at the same time, Lycos don't also decide on whether or not I go to jail
(and make up such policies as part of some spare of the moment popularity
contest to get onto a higher soapbox).
I'll be interested to see if over the next few decades we end up with an
explosion in the number of 'freedom fighter' teams of hackers. The internet
is one domain where sheer military might has next to no importance when the
guy on the other end of the copper is an electronics / radio / computer
genius with a lot of time, will and places to hide.
When I was 16 or so, I worked alongside the chief of IT (head, or something
similar) for our local police force. I'm 99.9% sure I could have raided his
bank account and gotten away with it if I'd wanted to, even then. The only
hope these guys have is that the other guy I was working with, who wasn't
involved with the police, was reasonably minded and extremely able. And that
people like myself don't generally raid the accounts of people who, on the
whole, are just trying to help. An understanding returned when he handed me
an envelope with 3k in it to count for him. This doesn't work if that same
person decides they're going to start filtering out harmless aspects of my
I believe it's quite normal for the police for to be in regular contact with
small time (especially) PC repair stores; where the staff will almost
certainly be very able and they're likely to get people with questionable
content taking their drives (as opposed to PC World, although I'm sure lots
do). Whether or not the searching for dodgy porno is the service you're
paying for (or if the staff have just illegally searched your computer) is
I just noticed that last bits touch on something else I was thinking about
just recently. That IT is the first topic where in a percentage of the
students are already far more able than their teachers.
BullGuard Anti-virus has scanned this e-mail and found it clean.
Try BullGuard for free: www.bullguard.com
More information about the extropy-chat