Banning privacy: A radical proposal

This came from Yahoo/ZDNet. Mr. Pappas suggests that we just ban anonymity
and privacy to "protect the children." Now where have I heard that before?
And yet again, the "Ethical Hackers Against Pedophilia" raise their heads,
no pun intended.

>Banning privacy: A radical proposal 
>
>By Charles Pappas 
>June 22, 1998 
>Yahoo! Internet Life 
>
>Copyright (c) 1998 ZDNet
>
>Privacy and anonymity are our most cherished tenets of online life. A
>need so immense that Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy
>Information Center declared that we might need a kind of Department of
>Privacy. He's not alone: 72 percent of surfers think there should be new
>laws to protect their privacy. 
>
>It's a radical, 180-degree turn to take, but...what if we're all wrong?
>What if this belief that privacy + anonymity = social good has become as
>self-destructive and delusional as a drunk who thinks one more scotch
>will make him feel better? 
>
>Like Marley's ghost, privacy may be coming back to haunt us. And that
>ghost's name is pedophilia. How bad is it? Disguised as a 13-year-old, I
>was directly propositioned on AOL in fewer than 10 minutes on each of
>six separate attempts. I entered a chat room--usually called something
>like "x9x10x11" or even "JonBenet Ramsey" (code words that alert
>pedophiles where to swarm)--and waited for the assaults to start. 
>
>Even when I didn't enter a chat room, the offers kept coming in from
>pedophiles prowling for victims. One wanted to send me pictures of
>himself. Another asked for a phone number. "I want to do my daughter,"
>one confessed to me. Later, when I searched for their screen names, they
>had all disappeared into the anonymous electronic mist. 
>
>AOL monitors kids' chat rooms continuously. (Parents can also set the
>AOL software so their children can't use chat rooms.) "We have a
>zero-tolerance policy when it comes to anything illegal," assures AOL
>spokeswoman Tricia Primrose. "We have about 8,000 monitors scanning up
>to 19,000 chat rooms, message boards, member profiles, and other areas.
>When we get any kind of complaint, we immediately check it out. And
>we're working with the FBI, customs, and other officials." 
>
>It's not just AOL, of course. Child molesters "operate on every avenue
>of the Net," says PhotonRain (not his real name) of Ethical Hackers
>Against Pedophilia, a group that aids law enforcement in combating child
>pornography. "WWW, newsgroups, IRC, ICQ, FTP servers..." 
>
>We already know it's widespread and easy to encounter. But how often
>have we heard--and parroted--the party line that problems on the Net
>just reflect real-world problems, no more and no less? Holland slays
>that sacred lamb: "The amount of pedophilia on the Net is extremely
>disproportional to...society as a whole. They hide behind the anonymity
>the Net offers. And they are aware of the small odds against being
>caught." 
>
>Ruben Rodriguez, director of the Exploited Child unit for the National
>Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), concurs: "The Net is so
>anonymous that molesters are very comfortable on it. They can go in and
>hunt kids down, and attempt five or six seductions at the same time." 
>
>"Let's face it," says a New York State investigator who requests
>anonymity, "the Net's anonymity enables the sickness. In a couple of
>hours I could easily get 2,000 pictures if I wanted, including the Baby
>Rape series," a popular collection of pedophilia photos whose name is
>horrifyingly self-explanatory. 
>
>In recent weeks, U.S. authorities have helped nab 60 online molesters,
>while the FBI reports that its 3-year-old Innocent Images
>investigation--an online task force identifying predators--has resulted
>in 184 convictions. An impressive stat, but less than confidence
>inspiring when research suggests the average child molester will have
>more than 70 victims throughout his lifetime. 
>
>At the same time we splash sex offenders' names online, our lawmakers
>weigh in with proposed privacy law after privacy law. "No one wants to
>give up privacy," says NCMEC's Rodriguez, whose organization now runs a
>CyberTipline for leads on the sexual exploitation of children. "But what
>do you do when your laws and protections are turned against you?
>Something's got to give." 
>
>But what? Our conventional wisdom that privacy is worth any risks? Just
>touching this petrified opinion will get me slapped with a swastika--but
>as philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said, "All truth passes through three
>stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third,
>it is accepted as being self-evident." 
>
>To be continued--that's for certain. 
>
>Copyright (c) 1998 ZDNet. All rights reserved.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <19980624011241.15925.qmail@hades.rpini.com>, on 06/24/98 
   at 01:12 AM, Anonymous <nobody@remailer.ch> said:

>This came from Yahoo/ZDNet. Mr. Pappas suggests that we just ban
>anonymity and privacy to "protect the children." Now where have I heard
>that before? And yet again, the "Ethical Hackers Against Pedophilia"
>raise their heads, no pun intended.

To hell with the children!!

If we need anything in this country it is a good supply of hemp rope so
whenever one of these control freaks tries to wipe their ass with the
Constitution under the guise of "saving the children" they are immediately
dragged out by their heals and lynched on the spot!!

If they are so anxious to "save the children" why don't they ban all
automobiles? I don't have exact figures but I am sure 1,000's of children
die and 10,000's are injured every year in auto accidents. I am sure that
Detroit and the oil industry might have a few words against it not to
mention 100 million angry motorist.

And if they really want to save some children why don't they shut down the
multi-billion dollar infanticide industry known as abortion. Why are these
medical hacks allowed to do to children what they would be jailed for
doing to a dog? Perhaps because it serves nicely with the elitist goals of
population control (need to keep the number of niggers, bean pickers, and
white trash down to a controllable number) not to mention that their
pockets are well lined by the hacks.

If they were truly operating on moral principals one would think they
would go after that which causes the greatest harm to the most children.
But of course they don't. They have no more morality than a bitch in heat.
Their "save the children" bit is just a pre-emptive trump against any
opposition (how can you not be for saving children!!).

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgp.html
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Tag-O-Matic: I'm an OS/2 developer...I don't NEED a life!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a-sha1
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBNZCziI9Co1n+aLhhAQFCJgQAms7GyayB9pF3OMDHIrT+5Dp8TvXlkTRh
HBifHyMhTTnOIfsRryhXzgdM+20ALIVzWat0KSjnpW26e/JRnuIEnAN3B1pYcfVy
P//irI9EbVhAnYWt5hSwhxEOhZxYwUas+tUw7vKXioiK3LQw8iigWvs9HhP16Gpu
y+P+XpPxpxs=
=Nd63
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wed, 24 Jun 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> And if they really want to save some children why don't they shut down the
> multi-billion dollar infanticide industry known as abortion. Why are these
> medical hacks allowed to do to children what they would be jailed for
> doing to a dog? Perhaps because it serves nicely with the elitist goals of
> population control (need to keep the number of niggers, bean pickers, and
> white trash down to a controllable number) not to mention that their
> pockets are well lined by the hacks.
> 
    no, abortion does not serve the interests of limiting the
    "undesirables" to meet elitist population control ideas.  quite
    the opposite --the various machinations of the extremeist
    conservative [bowel] movement and depriving of abortion funds 
    has meant that abortion is available only to the haves. same
    result in U.S. foreign policy which excludes not only abortion
    services from foreign aid disbursement, but also birth control.

    so, the population of "bean pickers, niggers, and white trash"
    increases relative to the desired "white" population --rather
    dramatically --"elitist" families have negative population
    growth; several of the others have factors as high as 300%.

    personally, I am against abortion-- however, I'll be damned if
    I would deny anyone else either the right or the means to make
    that personal decision. it is not a question of morality; it is
    a fundamental right to freedom of choice unencumbered by an
    increasingly invasive federal government --the first Bitch can
    take her Global Village into her house, not mine.

	attila out...

__________________________________________________________________________
    go not unto usenet for advice, for the inhabitants thereof will say:
      yes, and no, and maybe, and I don't know, and fuck-off.
_________________________________________________________________ attila__

    To be a ruler of men, you need at least 12 inches....
    There is no safety this side of the grave.  Never was; never will be.

On 24 Jun 1998, Anonymous wrote:

> This came from Yahoo/ZDNet. Mr. Pappas suggests that we just ban anonymity
> and privacy to "protect the children." Now where have I heard that before?
> And yet again, the "Ethical Hackers Against Pedophilia" raise their heads,
> no pun intended.

	Thanks for the info.  Maybe some merry band of pranksters
	would be willing to sneak into this guy's house and install
	an obvious-looking mock camera over his shower head?  I mean,
	just in case he's a child molester and all.

	Maybe once we're done legislating the internet, we can
	legislate the topolology of Euclidean space, so that every
	point is within earshot of a mike and eyeshot of a camera.
	After all, those evil child molesting evil bad evil people
	might take to doing evil stuff in their basement, or the
	nearby woods!

==-  Xcott Craver -- Caj@niu.edu -- http://www.math.niu.edu/~caj/  -==
"Also note that elecronagnetic theory proves that if you microwave a
 bar of Ivory soap it turns into a REAL MARSHMALLOW THAT YOU CAN EAT."
                                                   -James "Kibo" Parry