What is Digg?69 Comments
- stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -3/+41Many people on Digg enjoy sarcasm.
- pjack91, on 10/12/2007, -9/+36Thank God because I know a few child abusers, and the pictures they email me look horrific
- Recluse, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24Indeed. Lately it seems many more don't understand sarcasm.
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Who is General Failure and why is he reading my email?
- Spanktacular, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Have any of you nitwits even bothered to read 1984? Even once?
- i440, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17I don't see what the issue is here. I voluntarily send all my e-mails to the Department of Defense for national security's sake, and you should do the same.
P.S.: I read the article, really I did. Um, maybe not. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13encrypt everything
- Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15"I didn't need to write stuff before but now I feel obliged to write obscenities just because I was forced to register!"
Nobody forced you to use Digg. - hackershandbook, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I have read 1984 - and I have to say it still remains a "key read" even today.
Once upon a time there was a happy internet without porn and kiddie porn - and lo! - the media started to make a fuss about kiddie porn on the web, and it came to pass that kiddie porn perverts flocked to the web to try and find this porn - but in vain! so they decide to upload it anyway - because once the media convinced everyone there was porn on the web - it came to pass.
Then the liars and fathers of liars said: Behold! The web is full of kiddie porn just as the media we control hath said it is - now we have the perfect excuse to censor the web - because we all know that "free speech" is bad unless it is controlled by us ...
... and thus it came to pass ..... - terminalpariah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11If you wouldn't put it on a postcard, you shouldn't put it in an (unencrypted) e-mail.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"New plans to scan e-mails for illegal images of child abuse "
What about legal images of child abuse?
Also, how can it tell the difference between a child and a young looking woman? How about the difference between a photo of your goofy kid taking a bubble bath that you're sending to grandma and a picture of an eight year old riding the Sybian?
Also, can it scan what the image looks like if it's encrypted and then transmitted in a passworded compressed file? If not, then what's the point? It's just another excuse to make the whole of society submit their civil liberties to government with false fears. After all, your child is more likely to get molested by a priest or a school teacher than they are to be molested, videotaped and shared over the ***** web.
Something I was just wondering as well... is if it is illegal to have a photo of a child being sexually abused, is it illegal to have a photo of a child being physically abused? That is, if your dad punches you around or beats you -- that might be illegal (again _MIGHT_ -- but I think that it's usually not)... but if a neighbor photographs you getting punched in the face or hit across the back with a switch from a tree -- is that neighbor committing a crime?
Just seems weird. - artanis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"I think it's awesome how people have modded you down because they're not sure if you're a complete ***** moron"
I modded him down because he IS a fool. This helps no one except the people who want unrestricted access to you and your life. - FluffyArmada, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Last time I checked, the ability to understand sarcasm was a higher mental function. Some people just aren't cut out for it. :-s
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Wow... dugg down because Digg users not only don't understand sarcasm, but also haven't read 1984 (in most countries this book is mandatory pre-high school reading). Quite the intellectual bunch here indeed! LOL!
- Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10That's a great idea! I'd be happy to forward them the 15k-20k SPAM emails I get a month.
That's a conservative estimate as I cut down to about 3 email addys - my domains catchall probably sees 100s of thousands a month.
Anyone know the attorney generals email addy? I'm sure he'd like to get right on the job of scanning my spam personally. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I would assume that 90% of kiddie porn on the net has already been driven 'underground'. The vast majority of paedophiles that distribute through the net are not stupid enough to transfer images and information insecurely through standard email channels, making this whole thing a farce. This could just as easily have happened for anti-terrorism measures - al Quaeda uses email so TPTB must monitor it all, when in reality real terrorists are not stupid enough to discuss plans through ***** Yahoo or AOL. Next up will be IM messages logged and scanned. All in the name of protecting our children and protecting our freedom.
- jdavid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9This really bothers me! Child porn should stop, but most of it is from non US sources, why does the government need to read my email?
- Karkian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8You mean those who read one word at a time like a 7 year old?
- leszek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7if you didn't read 1984, you can start now :
http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/books/1984.htm - mythril, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I don't know, but seeing as he is a general, maybe you should just be a good little citizen and submit to having your email read </sarcasm>
- irieKEN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Go grab the Bugmenot Firefox extension, and your article reading should be made easier.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Who is reading your email?
* They guys at your ISP. All of them.
* Anyone who owns a router between you and the guy you are sending email to.
* They guys that own the ISP of the person you are sending email to.
* Possibly, the person you are sending email to if their spam filter doesn't take out your message first.
How can you expect anything less? E-Mail by design goes all over the place, as plaintext on an open network. If you have any expectation of privacy when using email then think again. - stomicron, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Are you being sarcastic?
- Salvo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10maybe not.
All that SPAM from 'Lolita69" would probably cause him concern. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I watched an Apple commercial a long time ago that was based on the Orwell book. Is that good enough?
I would presume that buying a copy of 1984 or checking it out at your local library is a really good way to end up on some government list or another. After all, we can't have citizens capable of critical thinking and excercising it. Next thing you know, they wont' be falling for "BUT THE CHILDREN!!!" anymore. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"As a result the feds now have a huge database of known "real" kiddie porn."
Ick. - hackershandbook, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6as a father of three children I'd rather the goverment DID something about it - rather than enforce censorship on people who don't need it, don't want it and which does not stop child abuse anyway.
Lets tackle the problem - not the symptoms - blocking child porn does not stop children being abused - and ensures that there is control over everything you see, hear or do on the Internet. - arizonagroove, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Yes. It is double plus good.
- Bhima, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5no this doesn't seem wierd.
it seems ***** stupid - jmccorm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm sure it has been posted before, but this new system would also be ripe to people wanting to abuse it. What? You mean, a few operatives would bombard a target with unsolicited child porn emails? Unthinkable!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@5555
Well, I can't speak for all American highschools, but in ours (in the early to mid 1990s), our literature class read Michael Chrichton's Jurassic Park.
Yeah, I know... And then we wonder why kids can't compete internationally. I would say most highschool students these days have never even _heard_ of, say, Antigone. These days, you'd probably be singled out by the profilin systems in schools as a "mopey goth with potential to blow up the school" for reading such subsersive materials as 1984. - nabster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Don't they already read your emails ;)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8This should only scare you if you have something to hide, Goldstein.
- fulldecent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"... recent research from Binghamton University, New York, indicates that every digital camera has a different 'signature' that can be used to identify which pictures it took."
Anyone catch this? - irieKEN, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9"Nitwits?" It's not our fault that we're conditioned to have the attention spans of goldfish;)
Big government is double plus good. - gpmidi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4by karamba_kid 1
"I encrypt my emails so well there is no way to determine that it is actually encrypted."
That's call stenography. - jramos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@stonebear: yes, because you're required to enter your social security number and your one-and-only e-mail address when registering. Of course.
- karamba_kid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I encrypt my emails so well there is no way to determine that it is actually encrypted.
- kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I've said it before and I will say it again... aspergers.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9many studies have proven that most people have trouble reading sacasm when reading it.
- stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Almost all e-mail programs have an encryption feature for your sensitive content. It's a little inconvenient, but it's not much of a stretch to learn how to use it for things you don't need unintended parties to view. Why the government wants to do this is questionable, since child pornographers (and terrorists) are invariably well versed in e-mail encryption techniques.
- bdefrogg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Have you watched the Dateline NBC TV news show stings on guys meeting underage girls recently? Most of those guys were so dumb, some even suspected that it was a sting and still came. One even had his baby with him when he went to meet the girl, because he couldn't find a sitter.... and these guys will think to encrypt their email? (The VA doesn't even do that with 26million Vet's SSN numbers!)
But what did the kiddy porn folks do before the Internet? (gee, I assume porn was around b4! ) The most that would happen, is that the big wig ones would go back to their old methods, and all you would get is the dumb ones... :-/ - gpmidi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2With current laws the police have to be able to -prove- that the photo was of a real case of abuse. Simply finding the picture that looks bad isn't enough. This stems from an court decision that said that fake kiddie porn is legal (US). As a result the feds now have a huge database of known "real" kiddie porn.
- hsfrey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Re: Digg continually demanding you to register or re-login:
I had the same problem with Firefox.
You have to go to tools/options/privacy/cookies
In "view" Check whether you have digg.com blocked. If so remove it.
Then go to "exceptions", type in "digg.com" and click "allow".
That fixed my problem
Harvey - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That sucks. Thieves are always stealing my digital cameras and photographing toddlers engaged in sexual activities. I'm so screwed.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Actually, that's a bad idea. Most companies (like the one I work for) reserve the right to fire you if you encrypt your communications. Also, we now live in a society where excercise of privacy is cause for presumption of guilt.
- irieKEN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The article says that the e-mail monitoring is probably a superficial way to deal with child pornography, but if the content of images can be identified automatically, then images of any particular subject can be censored. Images of black helicopters and the like can be intercepted before they make their way into the wild.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2when you log in check the box remember me to set your cookie.
- Flashman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hey! That's a slander against seven-year-olds.
- nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They just want you to accept that they do, so they can prosecute people in public without getting *****.
"We were doing a routine check for child porn when we discovered... allow us to introduce as evidence this e-mail..." -
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is