Oh, yeah, these guys can surely be trusted with broad-ranging surveillance powers… :rolleyes:
Link to full story.
So…is it also illegal to have your own personal porn stored in such a way as to make it potentially accessible to children?
-Joe
Won’t somebody please think of the children? They might just be destroyed if they see people having sex. :rolleyes:
Oh suuuuuuure. Just do your own bloody searches, ya lazy bastards.
I sincerely hope Google has the testicles to tell the Bush crowd to go fuck themselves.
After this – http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=336147 – not a very surprising development.
This might have something to do with the Senate Commerce Decency Hearings that are going on right now. At some point, they segued into the Senate Internet Porn Hearings or maybe it’s the same hearing and they just changed the title.
Some of the comments are worth a chuckle or two. “We’re being attacked by internet porn!” I get the image of naked people leaping out of the monitor, whapping the senator with dildos.
That would do wonders for C-SPAN’s ratings…
What, ten posts and nobody’s stepped forward to defend this cockamamie move?
Not defending it, exactly, but perhaps there are some things we’re just learning to accept as inevitable.
I just Googled ‘jihad porn’ to fuck with them.
Even the people who are generally sympathetic to Bush realize that this is a bonehead move (which severely undermines the credibility of their “we double-pinky-swear that we only want to spy on terrorists” arguments on issues such as NSA surveillance, the Patriot Act, etc).
More interesting tidbits offered up by some senetor I didn’t recognize: Since the late 90’s, the number of porn sites has gone from 16 million to over 260 million. Isn’t capitalism grand? Now who wants to say that George Bush hasn’t done his share of job creation! Anyway, that doesn’t sound like a problem, it sounds like an industry that needs to be taxed.
Now please excuse me while I go stimulate the economy.
I’m a bit surprised by their approach, to tell the truth. The logical way to open this door would be to say that it was for child pornography. It’s a lot less popular to claim privacy rights when that is on the table. From there it’s a slippery slope to the deterioration of all privacy.
I’ve often wondered why adult internet sites aren’t just required to have some sort of code in their pages, or some specific IP address, with a corresponding regulation that ISPs or browser software recognize that and allow blocking accordingly. A bit like what they were trying to do with the V-Chip. That way adults can still enjoy their goat felching and the frustrated kids can only pick up their own porn in old hand-me-down stained magazines like we did, while dreaming of throwing their overbearing parents into a nursing home as soon as possible.
They say it’s for pornography. I’m cynical enough to believe that what they really want is to mine data to use against their political enemies. They want to revive a child pornography bill that was struck down two years ago by the Supreme Court and finding out how often porn comes up in Google searches is needed for that? I rather doubt it.
There was almost a “.xxx” domain. ICANN dropped the plans though. I think it would have been a good idea.
I guess I don’t see what the big deal is. Presumably IP addresses are not included with this information so I don’t see how it infringes on anyones privacy.
If you are searching for porn so be it. But what I think they are looking for is searches for say…nazi, looking for history of…but you get sex sites. And you do…trust me on this.
I also searched for diapers once…you don’t really want to know.