- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

RE: [Pigdog] Child Porn - The Lies of Ashcroft (fwd)
by emc＠artifact.psychedelic.net 11 Aug '01

11 Aug '01

Eugene Leitl <Eugene.Leitl(a)lrz.uni-muenchen.de> writes: > A somewhat dissenting opinion, and from a lawyer, no less. The we won't tell the joke about the bus going over the cliff with one empty seat. :) > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Philip Kingston <pkingston(a)beenelawrence.com> > Uhh...Mr. Reedy admitted in interrogation that he knew that 40% of his > business was child porn, I've always regarded liability for content as a binary situation. Either one is or one isn't. The reading and viewing preferences of ones customers are hardly something under ones control. Does a library acquire liability when 40% of its customers look at the most controversial books? Does an ISP suddenly become liable for the contents of its news spool, if 40% of its customers should decide to investigate the naked children newsgroups? I think putting people in jail for knowing about content they have no control over is a very bad idea. Most adult sites located in more lax jurisdictions carry a variety of material, only some of which is in violation of US laws. Since not one of the Reedys' customers was charged with downloading any specific illegal image at the two foreign sites, and the 100 arrests were produced by an entirely separate entrapment scheme targeting the Reedys' customer base, it seems unlikely that evidence linking specific customers to specific images exists. At most we can say that the two sites containing some illegal (in the US) material reached an embarrassingly high level of popularity, and were visited by numerous people, some of whom may have looked at stuff the US Government forbids. Or may not have, for that matter. > he had a link on HIS site that said "Click here for child porn," Of course, this is one BIG problem with child porn laws. No one can look at the site to see if what is being said about it is the truth. The claim that the Landslide Web site had a clickable link with the actual text "Click here for child porn" was made by an investigator who looked at the site, and was widely repeated in the press. I have been unable to independently coroborate this, and quite frankly, it's real hard to believe, especially since the site was supposedly operating according to well-clued legal advice. Anyone who could put up a mirror of the site stripped of potentially illegal images and artwork would be doing everyone who wants to verify amazing allegations like this a big favor. I'll go on record as being skeptical "Click here for child porn" was prominently displayed. > and two counts he was convicted on were for his personal library of > child porn. Again, that Mr. Ready may have downloaded images that were illegal in the US is not a crime meriting life in prison, and orthogonal to the entire age verification/liability for content question. > I can see a continuum of behavior that runs between innocently providing > access to illegal material and active child exploitation, and I'll be > the first to admit that I don't really know where to draw the line. I would argue that if one does not have liability for content, whether one is aware the content is illegal is immaterial. > However, this case doesn't get near that line; it's just about child > porn. It's about whether the government should be able to jail people child pornographers purchase goods and services from, when they are unable to get their hands on the child pornographers, who aren't breaking any major laws in their own jurisdiction. It's also about the Feebs getting their hands on the Reedys' not insignificant assets. Could Kodak executives be "child pornographers" if 40% of the images taken with some inexpensive digital camera they manufacture were demonstrated to be of tumescent child genitalia? Would this change if they were aware of this use? -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0

Why Joseph Asherwood Should Use Remailers
by Anonymous 11 Aug '01

11 Aug '01

Joseph Asherwood wrote: > I don't personally use remailers, I don't tend to do things that are > illegal, but if I did there are other methods that I'd use. You strike me as a fast learner, so I believe in a short time you will see that this is a silly statement. There's nothing wrong with learning, but this error is now linked to you forever.

2 1

Summer Time
by TonerCity USA 11 Aug '01

11 Aug '01

Summer Sale... Buy any type of toner at wholesale prices. If you own or lease any brand of copier, fax or printer you can get preferred pricing on all our toner products. Just call, email or fax us a list of the items you need and we'll return a quote immediately. We send out all orders the same day and shipping is FREE. TonerCity USA Toll Free: 1-866-FastToner (327-8866) Fax Number: 972-680-9548 Email Address: tonercity(a)wheelweb.com This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: SECTION 301, Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S, 1618. To unsubscribe simply reply with "remove" in the subject line.

1 0

Re: [linux-elitists] drew is so fuckin' l33t! (fwd)
by Eugene Leitl 11 Aug '01

11 Aug '01

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBMTO : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204 57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:58:38 +0000 From: M. Drew Streib <dtype(a)dtype.org> To: Don Marti <dmarti(a)zgp.org>, linux-elitists(a)zgp.org Subject: Re: [linux-elitists] drew is so fuckin' l33t! On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 10:02:04AM -0700, Don Marti wrote: > 1. Make contact with one of the isolated tribes of GPG users who are > not part of the strong set. All those people will then be connected, > but far away from everyone except you, bwah ha ha. Also, make contact with people far away from you _in_ the strong set, thus making a "bridge" between widely separated parts of set. This requires more people to "travel" over you for short paths. bwah ha ha. > 2. Teach a class on GPG and get all your students to sign your key. Vis a vis Peter Wan, #1 on the list, and a professor at GA Tech. Great spreader of the faith, this man... 4. Sell your house, clothes, and other belongings and become a prophet of cryptography. Normally, you would be faceless and noone would know who you _really_ were. But in this case, you'll have your GPG identity, which is better than any flesh-and-blood ID anyway. > Hey, wait a minute -- the ways to get more Drew juice are also > the ways to expand the usefulness of the web of trust and get more > people started using crypto. Way to use elitism for good. "Drew juice". :) One of my friends is very into PS2 Gauntlet recently, and suggests I begin assigning levels. "Don Marti, you are now a level 27 keywhore." But yes, I'm doing my best to only encourage _good_ behavior from this ranking, which is why the main report is structured as it is. > (I've already written a puff piece on Drew for LJ.) Heh, is this the wonderful email garden writeup, or am I to be expecting something different? You're quite the writer, my friend. BTW, I still have your server sitting in my bar. Maybe burnallmp3s.org becomes an Ogg Vorbis shrine. -drew -- M. Drew Streib <dtype(a)dtype.org> | http://dtype.org/ FSG <dtype(a)freestandards.org> | Linux International <dtype(a)li.org> freedb <dtype(a)freedb.org> | SourceForge <dtype(a)sourceforge.net>

1 0

Summer Time
by TonerCity USA 11 Aug '01

11 Aug '01

Summer Sale... Buy any type of toner at wholesale prices. If you own or lease any brand of copier, fax or printer you can get preferred pricing on all our toner products. Just call, email or fax us a list of the items you need and we'll return a quote immediately. We send out all orders the same day and shipping is FREE. TonerCity USA Toll Free: 1-866-FastToner (327-8866) Fax Number: 972-680-9548 Email Address: tonercity(a)wheelweb.com This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: SECTION 301, Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S, 1618. To unsubscribe simply reply with "remove" in the subject line.

1 0

Mind Rape
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 11 Aug '01

11 Aug '01

the data as memory thing is years old and now we've come full circle and arrived at the same old conclusion that RIGHT can be very, very wrong so now it's time for someone to say the laws of mathematics not of men and I'm thinking the glass is half empty most days but not all yet

1 0

Summer Time
by TonerCity USA 10 Aug '01

10 Aug '01

Summer Sale... Buy any type of toner at wholesale prices. If you own or lease any brand of copier, fax or printer you can get preferred pricing on all our toner products. Just call, email or fax us a list of the items you need and we'll return a quote immediately. We send out all orders the same day and shipping is FREE. TonerCity USA Toll Free: 1-866-FastToner (327-8866) Fax Number: 972-680-9548 Email Address: tonercity(a)wheelweb.com This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: SECTION 301, Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S, 1618. To unsubscribe simply reply with "remove" in the subject line.

1 0

Confirmation for subscribe meetingpunks
by meetingpunks-request＠majordomo.cryptorights.org 10 Aug '01

10 Aug '01

-- Someone (possibly you) has requested that your email address be added to or deleted from the mailing list "meetingpunks(a)majordomo.cryptorights.org". If you really want this action to be taken, please send the following commands (exactly as shown) back to "meetingpunks-request(a)majordomo.cryptorights.org": auth edf4b3da subscribe meetingpunks cypherpunks(a)minder.net If you do not want this action to be taken, simply ignore this message and the request will be disregarded. If your mailer will not allow you to send the entire command as a single line, you may split it using backslashes, like so: auth edf4b3da subscribe meetingpunks \ cypherpunks(a)minder.net If you have any questions about the policy of the list owner, please contact "meetingpunks-owner(a)majordomo.cryptorights.org". Thanks! meetingpunks-request(a)majordomo.cryptorights.org

1 0

RE: [Pigdog] Child Porn - The Lies of Ashcroft (fwd)
by Eric Cordian 10 Aug '01

10 Aug '01

Eugene Leitl <Eugene.Leitl(a)lrz.uni-muenchen.de> writes: > A somewhat dissenting opinion, and from a lawyer, no less. The we won't tell the joke about the bus going over the cliff with one empty seat. :) > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Philip Kingston <pkingston(a)beenelawrence.com> > Uhh...Mr. Reedy admitted in interrogation that he knew that 40% of his > business was child porn, I've always regarded liability for content as a binary situation. Either one is or one isn't. The reading and viewing preferences of ones customers are hardly something under ones control. Does a library acquire liability when 40% of its customers look at the most controversial books? Does an ISP suddenly become liable for the contents of its news spool, if 40% of its customers should decide to investigate the naked children newsgroups? I think putting people in jail for knowing about content they have no control over is a very bad idea. Most adult sites located in more lax jurisdictions carry a variety of material, only some of which is in violation of US laws. Since not one of the Reedys' customers was charged with downloading any specific illegal image at the two foreign sites, and the 100 arrests were produced by an entirely separate entrapment scheme targeting the Reedys' customer base, it seems unlikely that evidence linking specific customers to specific images exists. At most we can say that the two sites containing some illegal (in the US) material reached an embarrassingly high level of popularity, and were visited by numerous people, some of whom may have looked at stuff the US Government forbids. Or may not have, for that matter. > he had a link on HIS site that said "Click here for child porn," Of course, this is one BIG problem with child porn laws. No one can look at the site to see if what is being said about it is the truth. The claim that the Landslide Web site had a clickable link with the actual text "Click here for child porn" was made by an investigator who looked at the site, and was widely repeated in the press. I have been unable to independently coroborate this, and quite frankly, it's real hard to believe, especially since the site was supposedly operating according to well-clued legal advice. Anyone who could put up a mirror of the site stripped of potentially illegal images and artwork would be doing everyone who wants to verify amazing allegations like this a big favor. I'll go on record as being skeptical "Click here for child porn" was prominently displayed. > and two counts he was convicted on were for his personal library of > child porn. Again, that Mr. Ready may have downloaded images that were illegal in the US is not a crime meriting life in prison, and orthogonal to the entire age verification/liability for content question. > I can see a continuum of behavior that runs between innocently providing > access to illegal material and active child exploitation, and I'll be > the first to admit that I don't really know where to draw the line. I would argue that if one does not have liability for content, whether one is aware the content is illegal is immaterial. > However, this case doesn't get near that line; it's just about child > porn. It's about whether the government should be able to jail people child pornographers purchase goods and services from, when they are unable to get their hands on the child pornographers, who aren't breaking any major laws in their own jurisdiction. It's also about the Feebs getting their hands on the Reedys' not insignificant assets. Could Kodak executives be "child pornographers" if 40% of the images taken with some inexpensive digital camera they manufacture were demonstrated to be of tumescent child genitalia? Would this change if they were aware of this use? -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0

Re: Linearized computations - was OCR
by Dr. Evil 10 Aug '01

10 Aug '01

> I think text is the wrong approach. Put up some pictures, > and a question - 'Click on the white bunny' 'Click on the > chipmunk' 'Click on the Russian icon'. 'Click on the clowns nose' > 'Click on the clown's right hand' > > Taking text, which is explicitly designed to be readable, and > trying to find a degree of distortion which is human (but not machine) > readable is probably a bad approach. Try something a 6 year old > can do, but which is still a PhD thesis problem for computers. Actually, I thought about that option. There are two problems with it: First, I need to find a bunch of non-copyright clip art which displays clearly on any different browser, and then map it, and then write a big database of questions. This isn't difficult, but it's time-consuming. I'm a big believer in "do something now, refine it later on". The second problem with that is that for one of my applications, it needs to be highly cross-cultural. Many of the users will be non-English-speaking, who might not know what the word "clown" means, and any non-abstract image has a potential for offending someone. If one of my images is a pig, maybe some Orthodox Jews will be annoyed. If one image is a woman with her face exposed, maybe some Moslems will be offended. If one image is a policeman, maybe some c'punks will be offended. Who knows. People are constantly seeking new ways of being offended as a way of telling other people what to do. People should have thicker skins, but they don't, and when it comes to making money, I want customers, not controversy. The last thing I want is for some rumor that my system is anti-something because some image of something-or-other is used. As an example, for years there have been rumors about Proctor and Gamble being run by Satanists, because they have stars in their logo. Not goats, or a head with horns, but plain old stars! A hundred-year-old well-established brand! In my effort to support the largest user-base possible, numbers are the way to go. (Oh wait, maybe I had better put a filter so it doesn't display 666 or 69 or 444 or 13...) I'll make improvements as I go.

1 0