Slashdot Mirror


Cops Walking the MySpace Beat

theodp writes "Meet the point-and-click police. Newsweek reports that a growing number of ordinary officers are working a new beat, turning to MySpace to collect clues and crack offline cases. Most of the nabbed wrongdoers have been victims of their own hubris, like the two boys who uploaded video of themselves firebombing an abandoned airplane hangar earlier this month."

278 comments

  1. Disappointment.. by chrismcdirty · · Score: 4, Funny

    Most of the nabbed wrongdoers have been victims of their own hubris, like the two boys who uploaded video of themselves firebombing an abandoned airplane hangar earlier this month.

    I was thoroughly disappointed when I clicked that link and saw that there was no video after the site had loaded.

    --
    It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    1. Re:Disappointment.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    2. Re:Disappointment.. by Phantom+Zmoove · · Score: 1

      Did that guy say "white power" in the video?

    3. Re:Disappointment.. by jftitan · · Score: 1

      yes... yes he did... what an idiot. I would have used napalm. oh wait.... I mean... damn him for being a racist bastard.

      Disclaimer: I am not a racist... I just hate everyone equaly.

      --
      "Don't Forget to Salt the Fries"
    4. Re:Disappointment.. by patternjuggler · · Score: 1

      The part where he throws the thing into the window sort of looks like security footage, not homemade footage- or did the guy with the camera climb up onto the building they were trying to burn down, to get the shot?

    5. Re:Disappointment.. by azbrdhntr · · Score: 0

      yeah....I don't get how firebombing a abandoned hanger would prove anything.

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
    6. Re:Disappointment.. by azbrdhntr · · Score: 0

      I have that feeling at times.....I have been called racist sexist and suchforth.

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
    7. Re:Disappointment.. by supertoad · · Score: 2, Funny

      i am a racist. i hate these people

    8. Re:Disappointment.. by NitsujTPU · · Score: 4, Funny

      Warn us next time! I'm at Cornell University, the most politically correct place on the planet... sitting here, minding my own business. We load this video to check it out, and people hear the words "white power" screaming from my laptop.

    9. Re:Disappointment.. by bani · · Score: 1

      yeah. so much for white power eh? stupid fucking redneck. he obviously needs a long time in prison to come to his senses.

    10. Re:Disappointment.. by Scarletdown · · Score: 1
      Disclaimer: I am not a racist... I just hate everyone equaly.


      Or to quote Linus (Vanpelt, that is...)

      I love humanity. It's the people I can't stand.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    11. Re:Disappointment.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is definitely NOT the video. This is video of an actual white supremacist firebombing something that is definitely not a hangar. The tape was found after he was caught. This was on national news like months ago!

    12. Re:Disappointment.. by moro_666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      why don't you like soccer moms ? :p

      and man, you're really bad off if you don't like jedis ... luke will f you up.

      for the article: if you're dumb enough to blog your crimes, you're place is in the prison.

      --

      I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
    13. Re:Disappointment.. by unidentified · · Score: 1

      I actually felt bad for the guy tell he said "White power."

    14. Re:Disappointment.. by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Idiot moderator having a knee jerk reaction to the word "racist".

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    15. Re:Disappointment.. by TheCarp · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      you could just do what I do and stop giving a shit what people think.

      Its your laptop, you have every right to have "White Power" blaring out of the speakers whenever you please. No reason to be ashamed you fucking racist.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    16. Re:Disappointment.. by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure you've lost his sentiment, and you've definitly lost the sentiment of what "white power" slogan conotates.

      A better option would be for him to keep his laptop on low volume (or use head phones...frankly I don't want to hear anything coming out of someones laptop - be it racist or just the sound of someone logging in).

      The slogan "white power" is almost entirely used in a racist fashion - in fact I can't remember an instance where it isn't unless you are just trying to make fun of people who utilize the term - which are racists.

      Now if you were trying to be sarcastic/funny - that plane flew over my head - but since you weren't modded funny - i think that plane actually never took off.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    17. Re:Disappointment.. by TheCarp · · Score: 2, Informative

      heh just because it isn't modded funny, doesn't mean it wasn't a joke.

      Shit, I think I have been modded up to +5 informative on a joke before.

      If slashdot has taught me anything, its that all you have to do to impress people is sit down and write bullshit. It doesn't just fool high school english teachers anymore.

      (what? I passed the essay quiz? I didn't even read the book!)

      but yah, it was a joke son, yer supposed to laugh.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    18. Re:Disappointment.. by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Ohhhh, "haha" Ok if it was meant as a joke then that is fine (e-motes help). :)~ Sometimes people will mod funny posts as informative. That is because funny mods don't increase your karma and some people are offended that it does not do so, so they mod informative (or some other such).

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    19. Re:Disappointment.. by hey! · · Score: 1

      Indeed he did. Didn't it give you warm fuzzy feeling of multi-culti superiority?

      It reminded me of a quote from Voltaire:"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O, Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it."

      Granted, these guys probably think "Voltaire" is a brand of air conditioner.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    20. Re:Disappointment.. by 'nother+poster · · Score: 1

      e-motes are for the humor challanged. You know, people like me. ;)

    21. Re:Disappointment.. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      Ok, for next time:

      WARNING: THIS VIDEO FILE OF A COUPLE MORONS FIREBOMBING A BUILDING MAY CONTAIN POLITICALLY DISAGREEABLE LANGUAGE.

      (In my own experience I didn't find Cornell to be excessively PC, either. Maybe things have changed.)

    22. Re:Disappointment.. by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      Yes. I hate when noise blazes out of my laptop as well. I had forgotten that it wasn't muted.

      And, yeah, I wasn't sure that it was a joke either when he said that. Those white-power folks are nuts, so, you never know! Just to clarify... definitely not one.

    23. Re:Disappointment.. by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      Two words: Diversity Arches.

    24. Re:Disappointment.. by modecx · · Score: 1

      That's funny, I actually felt bad for him after he said "white power", 'cause you can be sure there's gonna be some 8' tall black man named "Bubba" that's gonna change his mind about that whole white power thing.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  2. Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by CRCulver · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most of the nabbed wrongdoers have been victims of their own hubris, like the two boys who uploaded video of themselves firebombing an abandoned airplane hangar earlier this month.

    Seems like MySpace will not only help cops, but give fodder to Jay Leno's idiot criminals skit or people producing books like The World's Dumbest Criminals .

    1. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Burn you Amazon affiliate spammer. (Posting history anyone?)

    2. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      If I refer to a book or other media item in my post--as I do quite often since as a university student I guess I've come to appreciate citation--then there's no reason not to put a link to Amazon.com in there. It's not as if it costs the reader anything, unless he chooses to buy something (and then it wouldn't cost him any more than usual, since referrer links don't add to the price). If anything, the reviews for item may be helpful and pertinent.

    3. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by Gordonjcp · · Score: 0, Troll

      Dude, the person commenting is an AC. If what they said had any merit, they'd log in to say it.

    4. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by ottothecow · · Score: 1

      I totally agree with you. I happen to have a dreamhost refferal link as my slashdot url and its not like it costs anyone money to click on it or more than they would otherwise pay should they choose to purchase hosting. If they hadnt seen it, maybe they never would have found such a wonderful (from my experiance across 3 domains) host. Granted, at one time there was a code that gave you teh full year for one month's price and using my link would be worse but that deal has since died. Actually, you can enter the code 7BACKNOW and you basically get the first month free (at the lowest tier) since you get $7 back.

      --
      Bottles.
    5. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      couldn't agree more.

      -ac

    6. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by name773 · · Score: 1

      it encourages more advertisements than normal by paying people to put them up.

    7. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by ottothecow · · Score: 1

      true but I would still suggest them if asked (such as the numerous ask /.s that ask for good hosts) even if there wasnt a refferal. They are nice because they arent such a big faceless corporation like my last host was--I still get fairly informal personal feeling email from them, problems are addressed quickly, and the feature set and how they make it available are done in a very geek-customer friendly manner.

      --
      Bottles.
    8. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 1

      It seems everyone's at it - the first poster in this thread is after a free PSP and there's a guy modded up to +5 further down who's spamming what appears to be a weight loss site outside of his sig (if you check his post history you'll see he's modded up quite regularly). Whatever gets that extra nickel, I guess.

      Personally, I find the whole idea kind of pathetic. You can argue all you want about it being harmless but I still cringe when I mouse-over a link and there's a little r=678207 or /bobsbooks/ winking back at me. Just the fact that it's underhanded - 99 percent of people don't say anything about a referral and just sneak in the URL like nothing's up. If someone were to say 'I've included a referral so that I'm rewarded if you buy something' I'd be more inclined to actually follow the link and give them their ten percent or whatever kickback they actually get. If they included two links, one with the cheeky referral and one plain, I'd hit their referral one every time just because they've been so gosh darn honest about it.

      I just have to ask, is it worth it? After you've got your five strangers to complete their credit card applications or one month's trial for blockbuster, registered free-ipodz.info as a straight redirect, spent hours getting your Slashdot posts modded up for maximum exposure and that shiny iPod hits your letterbox six months later, do you really feel like you've accomplished something, feel like you've beaten the system?

      As for twisting all your posts into some kind of sales-pitch for a book or DVD on Amazon, now that I've never seen before. It's sneaky yet so blatantly obvious at the same time that I don't know whether to laugh at the juvenille tenuous connection from subject to item or cry at the wanton shamelessness of it.

      --
      Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
    9. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not just MySpace; /. as well. This is from, Emphasis mine:

      Suspect blogged about cannibalism
      'Dangerously weird' fantasies would get him locked up

      On his blog, an online diary that he had kept since September 2002, Underwood described himself as "single, bored, and lonely, but other than that, pretty happy."

      He mentions cannibalism, asking "If you were a cannibal, what would you wear to dinner?" and responding: "The skin of last night's main course."

      In an entry dated February 4, 2006, Underwood wrote that he struggled with depression and social interaction.

      "Pretty much the only time I believe in God is when I blame him for something
      ," he said. "Or, when I'm really depressed, to cry and beg him to make me better, to make whatever is wrong in my brain go away, so that I can live like a normal person.

      "That's all I want in life, is to be able to live like a normal person."


      Apparently, this disturbed person, an obvious slashdotter, raped and killed a ten year old girl.
    10. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As we all know, no honest person would ever use anonymity or a pseudonym. Everyone who does is a criminal, and that proves it.

    11. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PROVIDENCE, R.I. Two teenage girls face child pornography charges after posting sexually explicit photographs of themselves on the Internet.

      The pornographic pictures of Elizabeth Muller, 19, of North Smithfield, and an unidentified 16-year-old Lincoln girl were discovered on MySpace.com, a social networking Web site, said a spokesman for the attorney general's office.
      The photos of the two teenagers together were posted on each of their respective Web site accounts, spokesman Michael Healey said.
      The 16-year-old was arraigned before a Family Court judge Monday on a charge of child pornography and violating a court-ordered curfew, Healey said. The girl is being held at the Rhode Island Training School pending a probable cause hearing Friday, he said.
      Muller was also charged with child pornography and was arraigned in District Court in Providence.
      A police officer assigned to Lincoln High School, where the girl was a student, discovered the photographs while monitoring the Web site.
      - I hope they get their asses raped in the prison and then chemically castrated for what they did to the poor kids

    12. Re:Stupid to do something illegal and blog it by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      I just have to ask, is it worth it? After you've got your five strangers to complete their credit card applications or one month's trial for blockbuster, registered free-ipodz.info as a straight redirect, spent hours getting your Slashdot posts modded up for maximum exposure and that shiny iPod hits your letterbox six months later, do you really feel like you've accomplished something, feel like you've beaten the system?

      If one makes $100/day doing this, which Amazon.com referrer links can do here, you're darn right one feels that one has accomplished something.

  3. idiotnet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Only a dumb ass would post things on the internet.

    1. Re:idiotnet by gijoel · · Score: 2, Funny

      And only a bigger dumbass would respond to something on the internet.

  4. First cannibal post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Weblog of confessed murderer Kevin Underwood. The internet made him do it:
    Underwood wrote that he rarely left his apartment for long stretches, except to go to work and to buy food. "I just sit here at the computer every minute of the day, when I'm not at work. A week or so ago, I spent my day off sitting here at the computer, barely moving from the chair, for 14 hours."

    He said one of his main interests was the online role-playing game "Kingdom of Loathing," in which stick figures battle one another.
    LOL
  5. Why I post AC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I behave as though anything I do on the internet will be recorded and saved forever. I'd rather not have to explain something I posted today to a potential employer twenty years from now. Ditto for some nutcase prosecuter with a creative theory about how I caused the war in Viet Nam (I'm exagerating for emphasis).

    1. Re:Why I post AC by pedantic+bore · · Score: 4, Funny
      I caused the war in Viet Nam...

      Damn you!

      --
      Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    2. Re:Why I post AC by Teun · · Score: 1
      a creative theory about how I caused the war in Viet Nam (I'm exagerating for emphasis).

      Are you sure?

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    3. Re:Why I post AC by Cromac · · Score: 1
      I behave as though anything I do on the internet will be recorded and saved forever. I'd rather not have to explain something I posted today to a potential employer twenty years from now.

      Talk about paranoid. What are you going to do, create a Slashdot account with your real name and SSN? Are you going to put your Slashdot profile name on a resume? How exactly do you think this mythical future employer is going to link you to any given post on /. or anywhere else if you don't use any real info like the other 99.9% of people who post here.

    4. Re:Why I post AC by damiam · · Score: 1

      Many people here display their real email addresses - anyone who puts my email address into Google can see all of my /. posts. Of course, if you're worried about that, you can turn off display of your address, but a lot of people don't think about that when they're creating accounts.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    5. Re:Why I post AC by Firehed · · Score: 1

      You can be pretty darned sure that every single post on the internet, 'anonymous' or not, has the poster's IP address attached. So unless you're using an IP masker, posting anonymously is as about as effective at hiding your identity as wearing a Darth Vader mask.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    6. Re:Why I post AC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So there I was in the internet cafe 3 towns over, wearing a Darth Vader mask... better hope the surveillance cameras aren't very good, I guess.

      IP address only gets you to the router, anyway, not inside the LAN.

    7. Re:Why I post AC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish everything was made immortal on the internet.
      For some reason I found the need to retort to a forum troll posting tubgirl pictures with metoday.jpg. Fight fire with fire, right?
       
      The problem is that the picture I am looking for seems to have vanished from the internet. It's source link at http://cheesythighs.com/metoday.jpg is no-longer functional. Not to mention google searches have yielded zero results with working links
       
      That being said, 1 free cookie to anyone that can get the image up online somewhere.

    8. Re:Why I post AC by Duds · · Score: 3, Funny

      Good point Steve.

      Ooh shit, sorry man.

    9. Re:Why I post AC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't worry about it. The last time I checked (1998) there were 7 people online with the same name as me, one of them semi-famous.

      I'm liable to get spme other poor schmuck in trouble. "No, dear, honest, that wasn't me that wrote about those dope smoking hookers!"

      I post AC just to piss off the /. mods. -1, troll flamebait AC

    10. Re:Why I post AC by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2, Funny

      A Darth Vader mask works fine 90% of the time. But if you go around saying "Luke, I am your father", you've blown your cover.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    11. Re:Why I post AC by SeanAhern · · Score: 1

      Do you have access to his IP address? I know /. does, but that's not public information. To put it very specifically - I am an employer, and use the net to do a bit of research on the people I consider hiring. But I have no clue what IP address that AC is posting from, so I have no way of correlating his /. posts, should I have any desire to. Seems to fit the 90%, if not the 99%, solution.

    12. Re:Why I post AC by ehiris · · Score: 1

      "Life is too short to remain unnoticed." - Salvador Dali

  6. Plain and Simple by PoitNarf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    By now everyone should be wise enough not to post every single piece of information about them anywhere online, let alone in one place. Parents should be more diligent not with monitoring every single thing their kids do on the computer, but educating them what's ok and not ok to do on the Internet. Am I the only one getting tired of all this MySpace business? On the bright side I was amused reading TFA and seeing how these people were done in by their own sheer stupidity.

    --

    "0101100101? It's just jibberish. *looks in mirror, gasps* 1010011010@!? AHHHHHH!!"
    1. Re:Plain and Simple by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      People who normally, would have boasted about their mayhem/stupidity to their friends, now post it online.

      It never fails to amuse me when people post pictures of their weed, bongs and/or them hitting the bong.

      The only difference between then and now, is that like your friends, the police (or your school, boss, parents) can also go online to see your pictures and videos.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:Plain and Simple by vistic · · Score: 4, Insightful
      "Parents should be more diligent not with monitoring every single thing their kids do on the computer, but educating them what's ok and not ok to do on the Internet."


      The problem here, is that you assume that parents possess that sort of common sense any more than their kids do.

    3. Re:Plain and Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Teaching kids what not to do on the internet is not what I am concerned about here. Teaching kids not to go out firebombing old buildings is concern.

    4. Re:Plain and Simple by NiteShaed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Parents should be more diligent not with monitoring every single thing their kids do on the computer

      Yeah, C'mon parents......teach your kids not to post video after they firebomb buildings. Make those nosey cops find the perpetrators the old fashioned way.

      --
      Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
    5. Re:Plain and Simple by ottothecow · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Going to a school that is recruited heavily by i-banking firms, future employers really want to know the "other side of the story" on their applicants, the one that isnt told to them by the resume and interview process.

      I know that they have been known to hire people with access to the schools facebook (either current employees who are alumni or simply "hey, we will pay you $x for y amount of time with access to your account"). Now that facebook has tagable pictures that are much more advanced than myspace's photos, it's not even what you put in your own profile that matters but what other people post pictures of you doing. They aren't going to care about the ubiquitous pictures of minors consuming alcohol (its college...) but there are people with profiles where 90% of the pictures show them with a bong/blowing out smoke/something else along the lines. All things being equal (or even not being equal), I'm going to take the applicant that has pictures showing them doing a variety of activities over the one where the majority of their photos show them smoking pot. Some of it is just simple common sense...the untag button is there for a reason.

      --
      Bottles.
    6. Re:Plain and Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The problem here, is that you assume that parents possess that sort of common sense any more than their kids do.
      Yeah, you go to their website, and it's all "LOOK AT ME!!! I HAD A KID!!!11", with proof that they spawned, and everything.
    7. Re:Plain and Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Parents should be more diligent not with monitoring every single thing their kids do on the computer, but educating them what's ok and not ok to do on the Internet.

      Well, duh. What does that have to do with the article? Should parents teach their kids to hide their pictures of drug use, weapons and petty vandalism better?

      We're talking about kids who commit physical crimes and brag about it online. I don't see where internet education has anything to do with it-- in fact, it's kind of a good thing they were stupid enough to post to Myspace. Twenty years ago those kids who burnt down the hanger would have gotten away with it and probably done it again, possibly to a supposedly empty building with an innocent bystander inside.

    8. Re:Plain and Simple by Kuvter · · Score: 1

      Are you saying we should be smart enough, by now, to not post the wrongs we do online, but not smart enough to just flat out not do them offline?

      What is there to get upset with MySpace for. MySpace just gives us a place to communicate. Blogs, e-mail systems, instant messengers, etc, all do the same thing on their own level. There is nothing wrong with MySpace. To me there is nothing wrong with allowing people to communicate.

      People are sinful. We're all going to do stupid things, wrong things, and irrational things. Are you upset with MySpace because now you can see what people are doing now, instead of being ignorant of it? I'd really like to know what people have against MySpace. Would anyone please share this information with me?

      --
      "To be is to do." --Socrates
      "To do is to be." -- Aristotle
      "Do-Be-Do-Be-Do..." --Sinatra
    9. Re:Plain and Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It never fails to amuse me when people post pictures of their weed, bongs and/or them hitting the bong.
      There's a huge difference between this and burning down a building.

      When a building is burned down, there is a concrete victim, and the jurisdiction of the crime is known. i.e. If your building is burned down, then you know a crime happened and you know where it happened and which Law Enforcement body to call.

      When someone hits a bong, there's no victim and noone screaming for justice. And even if some zealot does try to get LE involved, there's a problem. Where did the event happen? "Oh, I was outside of the US when that picture was taken. Why are you investigating me? You don't have jurisdiction." It might have even happened somewhere where the event was not a violation of any law.

    10. Re:Plain and Simple by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Funny

      Still, I've had to cut way back on having sex with 13 year olds since the cops started infiltrating Myspace.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    11. Re:Plain and Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      When a building is burned down, there is a concrete victim


      Even if the building is entirely made of wood??
  7. This is common... by spangineer · · Score: 5, Informative

    This has been going on for awhile, but primarily on Facebook to my knowledge. According to Wikipedia, Facebook has been used in numerous investigations, including one last year at my university to catch students who rushed the field. Students had set up groups saying that they had rushed the field, and the police matched pictures from security cameras to student pictures. At least several of them were kicked out of school. Needless to say, this caused quite a scene on campus, but really, what do you expect when you put the information online yourself?

    1. Re:This is common... by mpathetiq · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I work for a small municipality. The code enforcement officer uses Facebook and MySpace to determine if college kids are breaking various residency laws. It's amazing how many people put up actual information on these sites.

    2. Re:This is common... by oirtemed · · Score: 1

      residency laws? care to elaborate? Im assuming since the municipality is small there is nothing better to do than to seek out things, eh?

    3. Re:This is common... by oirtemed · · Score: 1

      I'd expect not to be kicked out of school for rushing a field. Thats a little much.

    4. Re:This is common... by spangineer · · Score: 1

      The people who were expelled had done things like evade arrest and assault police officers. When you're getting mace fired into your face, I think you get a little irrational.

    5. Re:This is common... by MikeFM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the police are notified that this information is online at such and such place I'm okay with them using it but I don't like them spending time just searching random sites like Facebook and MySpace. To me that smacks of tax payer money being spent so that cops can look at porn and blogs all day just so that now and then they can catch some petty criminals. Let the cops spend their time doing real police work instead of hanging out and just watching for America's dumbest criminals.

      From a privacy point of view I'm not sure what to think. On the one hand public forums are obviously in the public. On the other hand this is like sending someone undercover into a bar and having them sit there and wait for random people to brag about stupid things they've done. That's just a little bit underhanded (and still seems a waste of taxpayer dollars).

      I've used the Internet to discuss mistakes I made in my earlier life with like minded people. I'd hate to think that all of that was going to be used against me. Usually I don't use my real name but a clever person, especially with the right legal force, could track down my real identity easily enough - especially as I've gotten older and started doing business online. I don't think that's a good reason for people to feel they can't talk about things on their blogs or in discussion forums.

      So what, I can't run for President because on a blog when I was a kid I did usual teenage things and admitted to it. I guess smart kids have to plan ahead and keep all their skeletons well hidden.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    6. Re:This is common... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This is becoming increasingly the case, especially for kids. Crime for many kids is beyond testing limits, it is a feeling of invunerability. I am underage, I am a athelete, I am too smart, they can't arrest us all, the cops can't run fast enough to catch us. So these posting are not merely stupidity, they are a symptom of the narcisistic reckless kid that does not care a whit about anyone else.

      Now, schools who care will monitor the underground chat and try to apply consequences for the small things, in hopes of redirected a student to more constructive behavior. But what happnes more often, especially in the work place, is that they young person will be given enough rope until he or she hangs himself. For instance, the young person will be allowed to steal $20 a week, as the employer knows that at some point $20 will be $500, and the employee can be made an example of.

      So I think that many kids are creating an online dossier of their criminal activity, and for the most part it is not worthwhile prosecuting. But at some point, when they are trying to get a job, or brought in for questioning, these activities could be used against them. What scares me as far as the kdis I work with is they put every fight, every deal, every negative activity online. The kids I grew up with, some of them were frequently questioned with circumstantial evidence, such as walking to school in the area that yound black man was seen stealing a car, but all them kept out trouble, so it was mostly just a nuscience. I can only imagine what the cops, desperate to attach blame to some, anyone, for a crime, might do with they petty things these kids put online. The parents don;t seem to have the sophistication to stop the kids, and we don't have the power.

    7. Re:This is common... by robogun · · Score: 1

      If a kid puts he's from 90210 lol do they still run him? Seriously, Internet information is as often as not "disinformation."

    8. Re:This is common... by Orion · · Score: 1

      "It wasn't spying, Commander Vimes told himself. Spying was when you crept around peeking in windows. It wasn't spying when you had to stand back a bit so you weren't deafened."
            -- Jingo, Terry Pratchett

      While I agree I don't want cops wasting time searching these sites to find crimes, investigating crimes already reported to them this way seems fair to me. The time wasted is low, investigators will get a feel for how useful it really is, and it's all in the public.

    9. Re:This is common... by mpathetiq · · Score: 1

      Apparently you're not allowed to have more than 3 non-related people living in the same household. Apparently this cuts down on big party houses or something. I think it's pretty ridiculous myself.

    10. Re:This is common... by Lehk228 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      if a police officer uses mace on a college kid for rushing the field he/she is not a real police officer just a common pig and deserves to get shot by a bunch of gangbangers, sadly it's often the real police officers who are out investigating violent gangs and such who are the ones placed in real danger while the pigs sit around chowing on donuts and fucking with college and highschool kids for the power trip.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    11. Re:This is common... by moosesocks · · Score: 1, Troll

      What's even scarier are the Christian colleges in the south using myspace to expell students who do not necessarily live up to or agree with their college's hyper-conservative model.

      It's sick and disgusting that practices like these are still allowed in the US. Nobody should have to hide who they are. A college expulsion these days is like having a criminal record.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    12. Re:This is common... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      getting away with stealing $20/week? i work stocking shelves but if you get caught stealing even a buck where i work you bet your ass you are getting fired. and if i ran a business it would be the same way. i would specifically allow empoyees to bring home reasonable amounts of office supplies but theft would be dealt with swiftly and severly (automatic immediate termination, contact police and press charges) if someone is willing to steal who says they won't sell sensitive business planning knowledge to your competitor or worse, steal personal information of your customers ruining your business reputation as a safe place to buy.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    13. Re:This is common... by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      That's really screwed up. I think, however, that the heritage of those laws is to prevent brothels.

    14. Re:This is common... by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      It's the same as listening to someones private conversation in a public place. It may be legal but it's still rude.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    15. Re:This is common... by rodoke3 · · Score: 1

      In groups of people who know better, yes. But this isn't the case for the general populace. Some know not to give personal information out to random strangers on chat rooms, but these same people often don't give a second thought to providing it when they need to "register" for something.

      --
      There's nothing like a good gunfight to uplift the spirit--Calvin
    16. Re:This is common... by CRCulver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's sick and disgusting that practices like these are still allowed in the US. Nobody should have to hide who they are.

      It's sick and disgusting that the government should be allowed to determine who can and can't be a member of a private organization. Do you think it would be fair for the government to force a church to admit someone who likes sacrificing chickens to Satan during his free time?

    17. Re:This is common... by mpathetiq · · Score: 1

      These laws have been enacted relatively recetly in our town. I remember them being instituted back in the early 90s. Of course, they could have been on the books for many years but just started getting enforced recently.

    18. Re:This is common... by mpathetiq · · Score: 1

      Whoa... I shouldn't comment in the early hours of the day. I apologize for my grammar.

    19. Re:This is common... by drsquare · · Score: 1

      What does 'rushing the field' mean?

    20. Re:This is common... by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Wow.. I can be considered fairly anti-cop, but you've beat me. I think macing someone rushing the field is warranted. At least it's not rubber (or real) bullets.

    21. Re:This is common... by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Its a private hyper-conservative college.

      Duh.

      If you don't belong, and you want to weasel your way in, then get caught, don't be surprised they aren't happy about it.

      Go to one of those colleges that actually fits your standards instead.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    22. Re:This is common... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only a waste if it's ineffective. The same argument could be made that the police shouldn't patrol, only be dispatched upon request. A couple of good reasons for patrol units come to mind: They might see something, and their mere presence can deter unlawful activity. I think both apply equally to blog-surfing.

    23. Re:This is common... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      I think macing someone rushing the field is warranted.

      Why? It's essentially a victimless crime. Going down heavyhanded on such innocent phun will just spoil the appeal of sports events.

    24. Re:This is common... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      What does 'rushing the field' mean?

      After a football (or other) game, spectators run en masse into the playing field to celebrate victory, or just for the sheer fun of it.

    25. Re:This is common... by Politburo · · Score: 1

      While it is technically victimless, it's a breach of the peace and can quickly escalate into an uncontrollable situation. Plus, if you know you're going to get maced in the face, that's a deterrent for all but the drunkest fans.

      I never knew that the appeal of sporting events was rushing the field. I guess I've missed out...

    26. Re:This is common... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      While it is technically victimless, it's a breach of the peace and can quickly escalate into an uncontrollable situation.

      Yeah, especially if you unexpectedly get maced in the face...

      Plus, if you know you're going to get maced in the face, that's a deterrent for all but the drunkest fans.

      Yeah, and the most drunken fans are also those most like to create an "uncontrollable situation".

    27. Re:This is common... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While it is technically victimless, it's a breach of the peace and can quickly escalate into an uncontrollable situation.

      My experience is that nothing can escalate a situation like spraying a chemical irritant into the air.

    28. Re:This is common... by J.R.+Random · · Score: 1

      So long as the college makes sure the students know the rules before they accept admission, I see nothing to object to. If you want a party college, apply to a party college. There's plenty of them. No one is forced to go to a Christian college.

    29. Re:This is common... by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      I'd probably agree but take the other opinion - that patroling is a waste of time and money. How many serious crimes are stopped by cops that just happen to be wandering by? It might help cut down on some petty crimes but I would doubt it'd help stop murders, kidnapping, drug deals, etc.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    30. Re:This is common... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They got maced and expelled for that? Blimey, here in Australia you're encouraged to 'rush the field' after the siren. It's to inspirie the little kiddies to be footy players and that, but then I guess the chances of anyone being a gun-toting madman and shooting up the place are nil.

    31. Re:This is common... by robogun · · Score: 1

      What you're saying is true also, insofar as filling out webforms, etc. But in keeping with the topic, webform information (usually) does not end up publicly searchable on google for idle law enforcement officers to browse thru.

      I would guess that the myspace users, knowing and wanting the information they post to be publicly visible to their peers, would be prone to exaggeration in their attempts to raise their social standing, get laid, etc. and the temptation for police to act on this supposed information would be great. There could be potential fourth amendment issues if law enforcement were to start breaking down doors, only to find a bunch of powdered sugar, an aralia plant, airsoft guns, etc.

  8. Video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone have a link to a recording of the video?

  9. YRO? by RyoShin · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm not quite sure why this is under YRO; it's certainly news worth, in my opinion, but why YRO? Are we saying that the police are crossing a legal boundry by looking at MySpace pages? Maybe it's this line:
    By conducting such surveillance, says Electronic Privacy Information Center senior counsel Chris Hoofnagle, an officer risks crossing "the line between crimes that have been committed and crimes that haven't. Next he'll be sucking down information just in case he needs it--and that's the type of action that upsets a user's rights."
    If they were installing hidden cameras, taping phones, or installing keyloggers without cause, I really don't see the problems. If you can get a heads up about someone robbing a house tomorrow night because they were stupid enough to post it on MySpace, why should that be considered protected?

    If someone painted a sign saying "I've stolen three cars from this street!" and wore it on said street, is there any reason the cops can't at least stop and question him (even if he denies anything vocally) and check up on him later?

    As far as legal requirements for police goes, there's a "Plain View" clause (I'm sure there's a Latin term for it.) For the few who may not understand, it basically says that if the item is in plain view, it can be used. If the cops respond to a noise complaint at your house, look past you into the home, and see a meth lab, they can use that. They may not be able to bust in right away to arrest you (varies by state and circumstance), but they can call up a warrant PDQ. If they pushed their way into the house without cause, or just shoved you to the side to see it, it would most likely be inadmissable.

    In the case of the meth lab and the robbery, both are due to horrible stupidity on the perpetrator's part, and there really is no reason they should be protected because of it. If the cop is stalking someone on their MySpace page because s/he doesn't like their choice in music, and wants to make sure they don't decide to steal a CD of it or something, then we might have cause for worry, but this is more likely something done by the common public than by the police, who hopefully are out catching badies and don't have enough time to track every movement on MySpace.

    Now, as far as some smaller things go, like stealing CDs or smoking MJ, they can't just take the MySpace page and present that as conclusive evidence; they'd have to get other evidence (like the CD or MJ itself) to prosecute. Could it be enough for a warrant for the other evidence? Maybe. I think that's a legal battle that will come up, because you can't be sure if they actually did it or they're (erronously) trying to look cool for their interweb friends by posting it.

    As with much of the internet (which has brought on a lot of problems really fast,) the law is still trying to catch up, and things like MySpace, LiveJournal, and perhaps even sites like Slashdot and Fark could play a role in some big trials in the next 5 or 10 years, especially how global information is received and used in criminal cases.
    1. Re:YRO? by Agent+Green · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's easy why this is in YRO:

      "You have the RIGHT to remain silent."

      The best part is that you don't even need to be under arrest. You just need to learn when to shut up.

      --
      // Agent Green (Ian / IU7 / KB1JQO)
      // IEEE 802.3: All 10base Are Belong To Us
    2. Re:YRO? by jodaer · · Score: 1

      i think what your looking for is "No reasonable Expectation of Privacy" I have no reason to expect that this is a private communication between me and the original author of this post,....I know anybody can read it If the kids on My Space aren't that informed then it is Darwinian, Elimination of the stupidest

  10. I've been thinking this for a while by Rooked_One · · Score: 2, Insightful
    if you wanted to profile a group of people (ie people around the age of 15-30) it would be very easy to set up a free service, where you can post all kinds of neat stuff about yourself. You know - the pictures of your underage friends drinking, hitting a bowl, and who knows what else.

    I guess it does fall under the free information clause, but IMVHO I don't think anything found on there should be admissable. After all, how hard is it to falsify a myspace account?

    1. Re:I've been thinking this for a while by spangineer · · Score: 1

      I guess it does fall under the free information clause, but IMVHO I don't think anything found on there should be admissable. After all, how hard is it to falsify a myspace account?

      It's easy to falsify, sure, but it gives police clues. The evidence from myspace itself probably wouldn't be admissable, but police realize that getting information there can lead to new leads that are admissable. Or they just get the people to admit that they did it, which I suspect is more common.

    2. Re:I've been thinking this for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      After all, how hard is it to falsify a myspace account?


      Easy, but that's not what they're admitting. They're admitting the video, which is a little bit harder to falsify. Myspace is just making it easier to put the content out there and find it.
    3. Re:I've been thinking this for a while by iamdrscience · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I don't think anything found on there should be admissable. After all, how hard is it to falsify a myspace account?
      It's trivial to falsify a myspace account, but it's not like you can't find reasonable proof that an account is authentic if need be (friends' testimonials, logs of which IPs are used to sign into the account, etc).

      Furthermore, in the case of video or photographic evidence (particularly video evidence) it would be difficult to frame somebody. Sure, photos can be altered, but it's not foolproof, i.e. what if the background of the picture is the bedroom of the suspect, editing mistakes (it's not hard to photoshop somebody into a picture so that it looks believable at a glance, but it's more difficult to make it stand up under intense scrutiny), etc. The case is similar for video, but it's even harder to forge it -- photoshopping an image is one thing, but seamlessly photoshopping somebody into a video can be quite another.
    4. Re:I've been thinking this for a while by Isotopian · · Score: 1

      Well, just to be precise, it's called Rotoscoping when it's in a video, and while doable, you need to make 60 completely convincing photoshop jobs just to get two altered seconds of footage. That's why generally, only huge production studios do it. And nobody on myspace (by nobody I mean all but like 5 people) would even know how to start doing that, much less execute it.

      --

      It's poetry with a beat behind it! And guns! They're like beatniks with automatic weapons.

    5. Re:I've been thinking this for a while by bobbutts · · Score: 1
    6. Re:I've been thinking this for a while by bani · · Score: 1

      I'm sure this wasn't the only piece of evidence used to arrest them. Likely it was used for grounds for a search warrant, the police siezed evidence in their homes, and used that as evidence for the arrests.

      My guess is whatever they found in the searches was far more damning than the video alone.

    7. Re:I've been thinking this for a while by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's actually much easier to if you commit your crime in front of a green screen.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  11. but officer, that wasn't "my" account by E8086 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you're dumb enough to post incriminating material on the internets you deserve to get caught.

    Next time in the land of the SIMs...I mean MySpace.
    yes, there should be and probably will be more than enough investigation into tips/leads found there BUT you know there will be enough bored teenagers and even some others trying to "frame" the more/less popular kids and school yard rivals, that whole libel/slander/romour mill thing.

    Sure there's a chance of a good hit once in a while, just watch out for the false positive. Especially all those energetic prosecutors wanting to make a name for themselves even at the cost of a questionable guilty verdict and an innocent kid's freedom.

    Near worst case, but possible

    --
    F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
  12. You get back what you put out. by RunFatBoy.net · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you're sad enough to not realize the implications of making the wrong that you caused publicly viewable, you deserve whatever punishment received.

    Jim http://www.runfatboy.net/ -- A workout plan that doesn't feel like homework.

    1. Re:You get back what you put out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      stop spamming, lardass.

    2. Re:You get back what you put out. by tregetour · · Score: 1

      How about: realizing the implication of the wrong. Period.

      --
      take it easy, but take it.
    3. Re:You get back what you put out. by RunFatBoy.net · · Score: 1

      Well said. I did a bad job at conveying my message in the parent post.

    4. Re:You get back what you put out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      take your fat sig and put it in the signature field, so people who dont want to see your spam dont have to.

      asshole. Welcome to my foe list.

    5. Re:You get back what you put out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because you're too busy trying to whore your site.

  13. Idiots suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MySpace gives me a bad vibe. It did months/years ago as well. Which is why i shun it at every opportunity...which is 100% of the time. Its just vaccuous to me, and it borders on lame, immature and intellectualy barren.
    Ive been called an hopeless optimist before and I still believe that online access comes a responsibility much like one of gun ownership, or driving. Of being a GOOD global citizen, and using the net to LEARN about things. To try to get involved with something. To do something constructive.
    These idiots with bigotry, hate, malice, and too few brain cycles really make me sick.
    Not to mention that they are really quite stupid if they think that posting about crimes, potential crimes, luring children somehow is "OK:
    I would hope that most folks realize this, and im sure that most do. But these idiots should really be offline already.. They suck, and I hope they rot in hell.

    1. Re:Idiots suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      most of the people on there are flakes trying to market themselves as second rate fashion models to their own friends.

    2. Re:Idiots suck. by DeadChobi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I dont have a MySpace account because it's frequented by scenesters and goths who have no real other method of networking. The real nerds use IRC and multiplayer games to network, and do it quite successfully. A lot of my friends from college have Myspace accounts because they're trendy and you can get hooked up with people really easily on there. One of my friends solicits hook-ups on there. There's nothing wrong with it, but I'm not enough of a scenester to want to use that place. If I'm really hard-up for a date or some companionship, I could always join a social club like my dad did. I just dont belong to the same cultural set that produced the Myspace movement. I hang out with them though.

      --
      SRSLY.
  14. are they going to prosecute? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee. Sounds like a couple of young kids decided to do their chemistry experiments where nobody could get hurt instead of blowing up the family basement. Looks like its getting harder to be a geek...

  15. Evolution in Action by Shivetya · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It should not amaze us how stupid a great many people are. Yet at the same time we should be careful what we assign to the category of "stupid". There are many valid reasons to put what you think and do on the internet. The understanding is that there may be reprecussions and for that you must be willing to be subject to them.

    While this deals with criminal activity or intent never forget that laws change and are abused and what may be alright one day may not be the next. Never forget what laws exist in countries you travel because it isn't far off that you may find yourself in trouble while traveling all because your name showed up in some database because of what you put on the net.

    We always bemoan the government and even businesses getting into our personal existance and yet many will go out of their way to make it available on the internet and never once think about what they have done. Its no different than wandering the shady side of town at night but not as obvious to most.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Evolution in Action by fosterNutrition · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The way I see it, people are missing the real point here. It's not whether it is okay/wrong/justifiable/the greatest thing ever to have cops and bosses looking up your info online, it's about facing up to the consequences of your own actions.

      It has always bothered me how people distinguish between the act of doing something, and the event of having a boss/cop/whatever find out about it. If you don't want people to know you've been doing drugs, then the answer isn't to make sure no photos are posted online; the answer is to not do it. Maybe I'm a little too hung up on the existentialist books I've been reading, but it seems to me that you should only do things you are willing to admit to doing. If you think it's okay to do drugs, then do them, and be frank about it. It is a strong form of hypocrisy to do them and then hope nobody finds out.

      If you are a drug user, don't hide it. If you think it's the right way to be, don't lie about it. If you think it's wrong, if you're embarrassed and unwilling to put it out in the open... don't do it. You are the sum of your actions - don't become something to be ashamed of.

    2. Re:Evolution in Action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      In the case of drug users, they may be willing to admit they do it to most people but they know the consequences of letting certain people know are far too great.

      They may even actively participate in campaigning for legalization or something but when it comes to actually DOING the drug, the risks are too great. You can call the cops and tell them you are going to give a speech on why the world needs more meth but you cant call the cops and tell them when and where you are going to be doing a bunch of meth because that would inhibit your ability to continue doing so.

      In most ways, I agree with you that people shoudl be willing to do what they are willing to admit (like that cute girl I hooked up with last friday) but there are cases where they arent necissarily going to want to tell everyone like in the /. story a few days ago about the porn-guy who certainly wasnt personally ashamed of his business--he certainly told his mother--but didnt want everyone on his street knowing his profession. Note: this doesnt count for the ugly fat chick my roommate went home with. Despite the fact that he was getting quite desperate, he probobly was ashamed and somehowm everyone is still going to know about it...

      (AC because I moderated)

    3. Re:Evolution in Action by honkycat · · Score: 1

      While I like the spirit of what you're saying, when it comes to actions that are criminal, things become more complex. This is especially true for crimes which, like drug use, don't have an obvious victim. For example, I don't think there is anything wrong with (or oxymoronic about) responsible recreational drug use. If I did choose to illegally use drugs, I would not want anyone to know about it and I would be very unlikely to be frank and open about it with anyone I did not trust a great deal. Not because I would feel there is anything wrong about such use, but simply because the penalty for being "outed" to the wrong people is too high.

      Things are more complicated than simply being proud enough to stand up for the things you do. Hiding drug use is not a matter of being ashamed, it's a matter of not wanting to spend time in jail. In my case, I opt not to use illegal drugs at all -- not because I see any shame in their use, but simply as a pragmatic decision given the risks involved. That doesn't change the argument, though.

    4. Re:Evolution in Action by Skreems · · Score: 1

      There's a major problem with the "only do things if you're comfortable with the cops knowing about" idea: laws in this country are made with the understanding that they will not be anywhere near 100% enforcable. Any law impacting private behavior, at this point, is basically moot provided you break that law with a reasonable amount of discretion.

      Now, conducting that illegal action over the internet may not be a reasonable amount of discretion, but the point stands that society had never planned for the police to have perfect knowledge of every single infraction, and our behavior tends to reflect that fact.

      Also, there's a big disconnect between what we personally may believe is okay, and what others in society believe is okay. I know plenty of religious people who think that using drugs is actually immoral, while I tend to think they're completely nuts for holding such a belief. If I then choose to use drugs, because I find nothing wrong with the practice, that doesn't mean I want judgemental and small-minded people to know about it. If they did, they would either shun my company or refuse to hire me for reasons that I believe are wrong, or I would have to spend most of my time arguing with them over it in an effort to get the respect that they would give me by default if I just kept that fact hidden. If hiding some part of my typical behavior enables me to interact more smoothly with groups who I believe are wrong in their beliefs, is that bad? It's not hypocritical, because I'm not ashamed of the action itself -- I'm just realistic about the consequences of the reactions of others to finding out a certain piece of information about myself.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    5. Re:Evolution in Action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      If you think it's okay to do drugs, then do them, and be frank about it. It is a strong form of hypocrisy to do them and then hope nobody finds out.

      I have the privilege of living in the Netherlands, where smoking pot is legalised (decriminalised): I am honest about using pot towards friends and strangers, but I don't expect someone else in another country, where there might be a fine for using/possessing pot to do the same.

      In this case it isn't people's embarrassments that's holding them from being honest, but not wanting to go to jail.

      For good measure, let's tick the AC-button here: I never know if my future employer might be reading this! :D

    6. Re:Evolution in Action by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      Doing something in private and being ashamed of it are two separate things. I go to the bathroom and have sex in private, but I'm not ashamed of either one. I'm not embarassed or unwilling to admit to either, they are simply things that i do in private out of respect. You may think doing drugs is great, so by all means protest the laws and try to change them, speak out when possible. But actually doing drugs in private has nothing to do with shame or embarassment and everything to do with the fact that if you do it in public, a guy with a gun will show up and lock you in a cage for 20 years. Being willing to admit doing drugs and being willing to be locked in a cage because someone else thinks drugs are bad are two separate things that have nothing whatsoever to do with integrity or existential wholeness.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    7. Re:Evolution in Action by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 1

      Substitute for "I use drugs" the phrase "I am gay, and I live in Afghanistan" and see how far you get.

      I guess the problem with future laws is one we can't avoid. We can't be sure that future people won't be a bunch of uptight uber-moralistic assholes, but you can't live as if that's true. In fact, there's good reason that you should get all your weird sicko stuff done now while the price is right.

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
    8. Re:Evolution in Action by ultranova · · Score: 1

      If you are a drug user, don't hide it. If you think it's the right way to be, don't lie about it. If you think it's wrong, if you're embarrassed and unwilling to put it out in the open... don't do it. You are the sum of your actions - don't become something to be ashamed of.

      You forget that I might not be embarrassed about doing something or ashamed of myself for doing it, but others learning of it might get me in trouble nonetheless. It is entirely possible to not consider something wrong, but know that someone who can cause you trouble does consider it wrong. Nothing hypocritical about not telling him about it.

      A classical example would be a homosexual living in a fundamentalist community. Not a good idea to let others know the truth about you there. Does that mean that you should abstain from sex altogether ?

      It's easy to say "don't lie about it", but that leads to not doing anything others don't approve of, and doing everything others expect from you. It makes you are string puppet. We need privacy to develop our personalities; having every aspect of our life constantly scrutinized by the public makes us always worry about appearances first and about what we really want last.

      Think about it this way: if you knew that someone was always watching your thoughts, and punishing you from thinking disapproved thoughts, how long would it take before you developed doublethink - began censoring your own thoughts ?

      Facing up to the consequences of your actions sounds all noble and wise, but tell me: does it also apply to the French Resistance ? Are they horrible hypocrites for not going to the Nazi occupation force and confessing their actions ? And if not, then why - being executed was simply a consequence of their action ? Unless, of course, there's situations where this doesn't apply - in which case, why are drug use and posting online not among them ? Who are you to decide that ?

      "Do the crime, do the time" is all nice and good until something you like to do is declared to be a crime. And facing the consequences of your actions sounds nice until you realize that anything you do could have nasty consequences later on, so you either hide the fact that it's you posting these messages, censor everything anyone could possibly take any offense in, or run the risk of facing an arbitrarily harsh penalty later on. Philosophical crap aside, I see no reason to take option two or three.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    9. Re:Evolution in Action by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      If you're not ashamed of sex, if you don't feel dirty afterwards, then you're not doing it right.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  16. What's illegal offline is illegal online, too? by gearmonger · · Score: 4, Funny

    So you're suggesting that my recent investment in the social networking sites BankHeistSpace.com and WillTradeKiddiePornVids.net is a bad move?

    1. Re:What's illegal offline is illegal online, too? by Xemu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're suggesting that my recent investment in the social networking sites BankHeistSpace.com and WillTradeKiddiePornVids.net is a bad move?

      Actually, the ad revenue you'll get from ads if you target them at law enforcment should be enough to feed a family of four and the dogs.

      --
      Tell your friends about xenu.net
  17. Mr. Obvious notes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "That was very lucky," Laveroni said. "Anytime you are using an explosive you can cause harm to yourself, harm to witnesses, harm to the person who videotaped it and harm to the structure you are throwing at or setting aflame."

    Isn't that the point?

    That's like saying anytime you use a gun to shoot someone you may end up doing harm to them.

    1. Re:Mr. Obvious notes... by slughead · · Score: 1

      "That was very lucky," Laveroni said. "Anytime you are using an explosive you can cause harm to yourself, harm to witnesses, harm to the person who videotaped it and harm to the structure you are throwing at or setting aflame."

      Anyone else have a problem with misguided teens being sent to jail for causing "minimal" damage to an "abandoned" building under the guise of their own "protection."

      OK so some stupid prank done by stupid neo-nazi punks which doesn't hurt anybody (physically or financially) went down.. should people really have their whole lives thrown away for it? How about knocking it down to trespassing and destruction of property with a sentence of "how not to be fucking moron" classes and community service?

      We've all done stupid things as a kid. I for one was a total fucktard when I was a teen. Now I'm going for my PhD in pharmacology. It'd be a damn shame for kids to not have the same opportunity simply because they decided sniffing glue and being racist was "like totalleh awesome." Kids are kids. Think of the lost potential vs what they've taken from anyone else. They broke a window and made a scorch mark on some pavement, should they have a felonly with "neo nazi" stamped on it when they go to apply for a job several years later?

    2. Re:Mr. Obvious notes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, where did you read they were "sent to jail"?

      Secondly, there is the posibility of some felony charges here, like arson. Not sure if "possessing incediary devices" is, but that's a bit more serious than many juvenile pranks. Not saying they probably won't end up with a slap on the wrists, but that they deserved to be hauled down to the police office and booked.

    3. Re:Mr. Obvious notes... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Uh, they committed a crime and then posted evidence of the crime to a public forum on the net... at the very least, they should be prevented from breeding under the "too stupid to have children" principle!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  18. Too Much Time? by Philomathie · · Score: 1

    There are some people with way too much free time... Ive found myspace friends networks of completely fabricated myspace accounts of all world leader, most of the US government, and celebrities and odditities like severely obese people. e.g. http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=us er.viewprofile&friendid=6432557 There are some really immature people with wayyyy too much free time on their hands.

  19. Just another day on the job by buvic2 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "Next he'll be sucking down information just in case he needs it--and that's the type of action that upsets a user's rights."

    Maybe forgotten, but that's part of what police work is about. You walk the beat, get to know the population, learn the patterns, and when something happens you probably have some idea already of where to look or who to talk to. It's the whole idea behind having regular community / school / campus officers rather than having patrols by whatever unit happens to be around.

    Having been on the inside of digital police work, we should be damn happy that people leak information and hubris, and are generally clueless as far as digital security is concerned. People get caught through their own sloppyness and boasting, and hours of hard work from officers, rather than from the police being particularly technologically advanced. The referenced article is another example of this: regular officers spending time going through lots of potential evidence rather than advanced technoly.

  20. A slightly different take... by Elemenope · · Score: 1

    Anything that happens in public space is potentially viewable by anyone, ergo it is in the public domain and there is no expectation fo privacy. So far, so good.

    Now, how would you feel if every square inch of this public space was being constantly monitored by closed-circuit cameras whose feeds are reviewed by police officers? I know how I would feel. Not so hot about it, to say the least. Now is the monitoring technically invading the privacy of anyone? As far as the law is concerned, no. It is still a violation of the dignity of human beings? You bet. Psychologically, it is wearying to be constantly surveilled, and even though a police officer feasibly could not be looking at every camera all the time, the potential for active surveillance would likely cause the average human being to develop some serious nervous conditions.

    It is a comparable (though not, admittedly, a completely analogous) situation where you have a public space that is intended to be social (facebook, myspace, etc.) that is being effectively surveilled by an official party, there is a powerful chilling effect and takes away some of the value of that space.

    Now, admittedly, the examples so far were of idiots who were practically bragging about wrongdoing, but as these spaces are more effectively surveilled and being used for things they were not originally intended (such as employers looking for info about employees), the social value of the spaces will erode as people modulate their behavior to be less honest as they have their eye upon the possibility of other consequences for their career or for avoiding brushes with the law.

    --
    All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    1. Re:A slightly different take... by RyoShin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now, how would you feel if every square inch of this public space was being constantly monitored by closed-circuit cameras whose feeds are reviewed by police officers?

      If it were the government setting up the cameras or website, I'd say that you'd have a dead-spot analogy.

      However, this is more like someone else setting up the cameras, and the police just using them. Say, a mall installs cameras to satisfy those worried about safety. The cops think that someone is in the mall that they are looking for, or that someone might attempt to steal something, so they ask the mall guys "Hey, can we use your cameras?"

      Well, the mall guys sure wouldn't hate the idea of having two cruisers parked in front of their mall; it would give regular citizens a more secure feeling because of the (apparent) police prescense. Plus, if the mall needs help, they could say "Hey, cops, we helped you here, mind giving us a minute?" It's the mall's property, so the only way that the customers could have any say is if they were able to succesfully picket or boycott to have the cameras removed (which is probably unlikely).

      In any case, the cameras are already installed. The people at the mall are told the cameras are installed. Anyone that doesn't want to be on a camera doesn't have to go to the mall. And with the cruisers outside, a regular person could figure out that they might be looking at tapes or live camera feed.

      In the same way, MySpace is a private company, it's already set up, and it's already there for the taking. Anyone who posts to MySpace (or LiveJournal, or Facebook) knows that millions of anonymous people on the internet can see their entries (unless they choose the privacy options). If they don't want people looking, they'll not make a public account.

      And, in the same way, making this kind of thing public is helpful to MySpace- less parents will be worried about their child using it, and most regular users will have a better feeling that someone is trying to keep them safe.

      Now, if the mall (or MySpace) was the only location in a given range to get a component necessary for life, then we could worry about the private/public fiasco.

      Working the private/public part of this discussion, think about someone hanging a sign in the window of their (private) apartment saying that they murdered someone. Again, this is plain sight stuff, open to the public. Anyone can see it. There cannot be a reasonable expectation of privacy.

    2. Re:A slightly different take... by RLiegh · · Score: 2, Funny
      Now, how would you feel if every square inch of this public space was being constantly monitored by closed-circuit cameras whose feeds are reviewed by police officers?

      Good question; I'm sure there's at least one brit who posts to this site; let's ask them how it feels.

    3. Re:A slightly different take... by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      heck at my mall you can fgiure that there is at least a couple police walking about and during Golden Quarter (christmas shoplifting season) there is a whole police substation parked outside (with a dozen or so police walking around)

      Im mean really a climate controlled beat with a almost zero chance of seeing a gun: just what a guy needs to round out his 60 hours a week.

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    4. Re:A slightly different take... by AusIV · · Score: 1
      You think you're not already being surveiled most of the time? As a sibling post stated, most malls have surveilance cameras, as do banks. Grocery stores, drugs stores, gas stations, other convenience stores frequently have cameras at least monitoring who comes in. This is infrequent at restaurants (at least nicer ones), but in such cases your typically fairly close to other customers who might be watching your or listening to what you say. In cities, there are often cameras at stoplights and other intersections (not so much on the highway). My highschool had security cameras all over the halls. There were a few dead zones, and you weren't on camera in classrooms, but they could identify who was in what classroom at what time.

      I typically assume any time I'm in public, I need to watch what I say or do. If a minor goes and gets smashed in a public place, there's a good chance they'll get caught. If someone is sitting at a table at a restaurant and talking about how their boss is a huge ass, there's a possibility, however remote, that someone at a nearby table could be the boss's daughter (seen the twixt commercial?). Anything that happens in private and stays private is another story, but I don't think anyone would present an argument that online social networks are private (with the exception of private or protected posts that some blogs allow). I keep a blog, and I don't put anything on it if there's anyone at all I wouldn't want reading it. I anticipate the possibility of my parents reading my blog, or a future employer, the cops, or anyone else who might take an interest in what I write. I don't consider this detrimental to the material of my blog, I just consider it an aspect of blogs.

    5. Re:A slightly different take... by abirdman · · Score: 1

      Take my word for it (I'm over fifty, and grew up in a small town), kids have been committing vandalism and bragging about it to their friends for a looooong time. The difference between now and 35 years ago is now they can brag to 66 million "friends" on MySpace about it.

      I didn't watch the video, but what they're calling firebombing sounds to me like vandalism-- the property was abandoned and deserted and no permanent damage was done. Vandalism isn't new. The cops' getting leads from the "friends" isn't new (most of this kind of crime is solved by leaning on other people who might know who the perps are). In this case, MySpace is a commercial forum (it's owned by Rupert Murdoch and News Corp., who also own Fox Broadcasting), and despite the possibility of its being some incredible new social networking virtual world, the fact remains there was an actual piece of property that was damaged, and some kids that need a slap up side the head to let them know that's not an appropriate outlet for their creativity/destructivity.

      I doubt there are a lot of officers working on surveillance in MySpace, because frankly, it's probably not worth the effort. The grand thing about the internet is that it is too huge to surveill. Think of a school of fish. They stick together because the presence of thousands of them reduces the chances that any one of them gets eaten. Google may change all that, but maybe not. Rupert Murdoch is interested in MySpace (like the previous owners, who developed the concept and software and sold if for almost 600 million bucks) because it has the potential to make a lot of money. If police surveillance is part of that, I doubt he minds in the least. No one promised anyone that posting there would be like confessing to your priest. If it was that, no one would post there anyway.

      Someone needs to teach the kids that doing something wrong and bragging about it isn't right, period. My only problem with the story is that USA Today wants to call it a "firebombing of an aircraft hangar" and not some stupid vandalism prank in an abandoned building carried out by kids with no clue. Nowadays, instead of a slap on the head and attitude adjustment, that kind of prank can get them years behind bars. The fact the cops found out "whodunnit" by reading MySpace rather than twisting the arm of one of the perp's cronies-- who might have shoplifted or stolen a bike and hence would give up his pals in a heartbeat-- is less than newsworthy. And solving a vandalism case by reading MySpace seems like a pretty random event. I'm glad they caught them. I hope they charge them right-- with vandalism (or attempted vandalism), and not terrorism or using weapons of mass destruction or something.

      --
      Everything I've ever learned the hard way was based on a statistically invalid sample.
    6. Re:A slightly different take... by Jerf · · Score: 1

      Now, how would you feel if every square inch of this public space was being constantly monitored by closed-circuit cameras whose feeds are reviewed by police officers?

      I don't like physical metaphors when dealing with computers. Computers and websites aren't cameras, pictures, books, newspapers, or any other physical objects; they just differ in too many ways.

      Why make a belabored metaphor when the question here is quite simple: If you put up material on a website that a cop can access as a normal citizen with no circumvention whatsoever, and that includes both websites with no access control, with open registration, and anything that they can get into through normal channels (i.e., a cop who is also a college student can get into Facebook, I would gather), on what grounds are you going to exclude the cop?

      Are there answers to that? Well, I can certainly imagine some sort of argument. Are any of them likely to stand up in a court of law, win in a court of public opinion, be solid ethical arguments, or be in society's best interests? I can't come up with anything that can pass that gauntlet; all I got is "argument for the sake of argument" which is a popular pasttime but just because you can articulate some vague argument doesn't mean you actually have one.

      Basically, if you spew forth proof of your crime in a freely-accessible public manner, well, you lose. Be less stupid next time.

      I'm perfectly ready and willing to argue that there are some things that some people might consider crimes that you should have the right to hide; certain things we associate with "anonymous speech", for instance, are that important. I strongly support the Fifth Amendment. But a critical part of claiming your rights against self-incrimination is, you know, not self-incriminating.

      I find it hard to have that much pity for these people, or feel that anything should be "done" about this "problem".

    7. Re:A slightly different take... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Now, how would you feel if every square inch of this public space was being constantly monitored by closed-circuit cameras whose feeds are reviewed by police officers?

      I'm cool with that, so long as it's not the fashion police. Then I'm totally busted.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    8. Re:A slightly different take... by spood · · Score: 1

      Soon you can ask anyone from Brooklyn, too.

      --
      ---- Just another spud server.
    9. Re:A slightly different take... by soliptic · · Score: 1
      Moderate insightful, not funny.

      And, yeah, it feels pretty f###ing shit.

  21. pretty neat by recharged95 · · Score: 1
    This IMO is the great experiement about free Internet and F/OSS. Basically, the creators of the Internet have looked for free and trustworthy usage such that non-abusive practices will never prevail due to the standards and protocol developed and used on the internet.

    From the looks of this, myspace is really pushing the limits of 'stupid is what stupid does' and that the abuse (i.e.lack of education about usage?) is being exploited and now the other extreme (i.e. the cops) are essentially doing the same thing... to counter that usage.

    Unfortunately, this could make the case for tier internet much more compelling.

    1. Re:pretty neat by rmadmin · · Score: 1

      Its all about balance. The universe has a way of balancing things out. Sure it takes a long time in some cases and can get to an extreme... but it all balances in the end. If it didn't.. none of us would be here. :)

  22. This kind of news exposes the bigger problem... by HellYeahAutomaton · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The problem isn't just that all of the derelicts and sex offenders are attracted to MySpace like bugs to a light, it is that gratuitous adolescent self-promotion is fostered there.

    Sites like MySpace are effectively amplifiers for your garden variety attention whores.

  23. Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If you can get a heads up about someone robbing a house tomorrow night because they were stupid enough to post it on MySpace, why should that be considered protected?

    Back in 1999 or 2000, Audi brought back the S-series of cars in the USA with a performance version of the A4 sedan- the S4. It was a twin-turbocharged V6, and it was faster than the BMW M3- the yardstick at the time. As with many turbocharged cars, manufacturers don't push the limits of these engines for a lot of different reasons; insurance categories, "gentleman's agreements" on speeds or horsepower levels, reliability, stepping on other model lines, room for "improvement" in next year's model, etc. There's plenty of room for a "tuner" to release revised "chips" (tables used for fuel, timing, and boost pressure levels stored in [E/EE/P]ROM memory) that increase horsepower levels. The S4 biturbo reliably makes slightly over 300HP with a chip (from 250); my '91 Audi makes almost 280 (from 217. And it has done so for about 100,000 miles with no problems. It was chipped at 110,000 miles, so yes, some chips are perfectly fine.)

    Chip makers pushed the limits to offer the "best" chips- or did shoddy testing, rushing development, to be first-to-market. A few of the chips could overspin the turbos, and a couple people grenaded them.

    Dealers were wise to "chips" and would look for them if a car with damaged turbos came in (and Audi implemented various controls to make ECU-swapping much more difficult, but they've all been circumvented.) US warranty law prohibits them from blaming a failure on an aftermarket component unless they can prove reasonably that the changed component caused the failure; a chip is a pretty damn clear-cut case. So these kids (and many of them were in fact kids- rich off internet dot-coms, or mummy and daddy) would borrow a friend's stock ECU, put it in the car, and have it towed to the dealer and say "gee, I dunno what happened."

    Then the geniuses would go on Audiworld and brag about how they "tricked the dealer", complete with thumbs-up and grinning smiley icons, people congradulating them, etc. Someone at Audi Client Relations noticed (or was tipped off by people pissed at the scam), and ACR started surfing the forum regularly looking for fraud, and -completely- voiding the warranties of those they could find and in some cases going after owners for the cost of repairs, and postings in forums were cited as evidence. I don't remember if anyone was sued or not- I believe a few were.

    That wasn't shocking; what was shocking was the reaction from the Audiworld users. They were absolutely livid that Audi Client Relations DARED to "snoop" on "their" forum.

    It's not just the Internet- it has been my personal experience that few people take responsibility for their actions and many are infuriated when someone catches them doing something wrong, instead of being ashamed.

  24. The common Confusion by mazerin · · Score: 1

    Most of the time people find mainly two major interests on the internet, Entertainment and Information. The common confusion is that the people posting often enough can't determine the difference to what they are posting, what they think is entertainment for all, is information for the few. The article above is a great example of this.

  25. Excerpt from Police Report by Giant+Ape+Skeleton · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...the perps apparently escaped on what they called "LOLerskates".

    --
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.
    1. Re:Excerpt from Police Report by HTL2001 · · Score: 1

      The police will use ROFLcopters from now on to catch people trying to escape using this method.

      --
      By reading this, you have given me brief control of your mind.
    2. Re:Excerpt from Police Report by TeacherOfHeroes · · Score: 1

      Pfft...low tech n00bs, I usually take a roflcopter

    3. Re:Excerpt from Police Report by chris_eineke · · Score: 1

      and fled to a flying machine called the ROFLcopter...

      --
      "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
    4. Re:Excerpt from Police Report by Flame0001 · · Score: 1

      After which they cooly sipped a glass of LMAOnade, while eating some roffled waffles with a bit of MAPLOL syrup. When questioned about their motives behind the crime, the perps replied with 'We only stole enough for a Lolsroyce Automobbl. :/'

      --
      Slashdot, the only place where intellectuals can act like idiots... and still sound intellectual.
  26. Forget Future Employers by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    The guys in the black van are more dangerous. Who knows what parts of what you say today will be outlawed tomorrow.

    Posting AC may not get you anywhere however, your IP still is out there.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Forget Future Employers by RLiegh · · Score: 2, Funny

      No need to worry though; as long as you have the bases covered:

      1)Don't do anything wrong
      2)Make sure your computer isn't broadcasting an IP (I hear there are sites that can help you with that)
      3)Cmdr Taco dumps all of the MD5ed /. IP Hashes on a regular basis (I've been told /. does; but I have no first hand idea how often or even or not if that's true).

    2. Re:Forget Future Employers by patternjuggler · · Score: 3, Informative

      1)Don't do anything wrong

      But there's no way to know what will be considered 'wrong' in the future, which was one of the main points of the parent post. Some future American cultural revolution may decide that some perfectly acceptable activity right now is actually everything that's wrong with the country, so let's go detain/summarily-execute everyone we have logs of doing it...

    3. Re:Forget Future Employers by andreyw · · Score: 1

      Uh... what do you mean broadcast? Any traffic originating from your computer has your IP address in it. Any traffic going to your machine has your IP address in it. You may use a web proxy, sure, but who says the proxy server records cannot be made given-to the relevant authorities in a time of need?

    4. Re:Forget Future Employers by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Erm. no. that won't happen in the US. We have very strongly worded anti "ex post facto law" in the constitution. I sincerely doubt that an ammendment to repeal that provision would ever pass.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    5. Re:Forget Future Employers by name773 · · Score: 1

      i've seen apache conf files that don't have access logs. i've even seen them where only critical errors and above are logged so ip addresses don't show up in 404s.

    6. Re:Forget Future Employers by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Erm. no. that won't happen in the US. We have very strongly worded anti "ex post facto law" in the constitution. I sincerely doubt that an ammendment to repeal that provision would ever pass.

      We also supposedly have very strong "trial by jury" laws, warrant laws, etc... We can see how well those are currently working out for us now that the OMG TERRISTS have 90% of our population shitting themselves whenever a truck backfires.

    7. Re:Forget Future Employers by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      A reference to those "Your computer is broadcasting an IP address! Our software can help." popup scams from a few years back, I think.

    8. Re:Forget Future Employers by RLiegh · · Score: 1

      Exactumundo. I'm surprised they don't still have those around (it's not as if the internet population has gotten any more computer literate; just the opposite, I'd reckon).

    9. Re:Forget Future Employers by Inferno · · Score: 1

      This is why posting from behind a proxy server that you have no attachment to is helpful. =)

    10. Re:Forget Future Employers by Nick+Harkin · · Score: 1

      They still do, every so often when I have to use a terminal with IE and no ad or popup protection, there they are.

      You probably just block them, so don't notice. ;)

    11. Re:Forget Future Employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever hear of the ex post facto law?

    12. Re:Forget Future Employers by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're then assuming that the proxy server isn't operated by a CIA front company.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    13. Re:Forget Future Employers by TheCarp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And what makes you think laws and even constitutions can't be changed.

      What makes you think that all actors within the government, even today, act through above ground legal channels?

      The simple fact is, once the information is out there, it is out there. Come revolutions, come secret police, come criminal organizations.

      I came to the realisation the other day that just no good could come from posting my social networks online and cancelled my myspace and friendster accounts.

      Its a danger to me from connection with everyone that I know, and should I be affiliated with anything someone dislikes, a danger to all of my friends through me.

      Not cool, and not worth the only marginal fun that comes from using myspace.

      Not to mention that all the extended network bullshit is just that...bullshit. Because every account starts with that "tom" dude as a friend... and so everybody is in your extended network because some dickhead in every network hasn't dropped him.

      Or maybe everybody really is connected that well... but I doubt it.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    14. Re:Forget Future Employers by Politburo · · Score: 1

      You're right about legal issues. However, the consumer, tenant, and labor laws in this country allow many forms of discrimination. Who knows what wackiness employers, landlords and insurance companies might want in the future. They already want your credit report, a drug test, a bunch of references, etc etc etc..

    15. Re:Forget Future Employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's happening right now, think about affirmative action. There are also laws that make "possession" illegal even if the item was perfectly legal when aquired. The protection from ex post facto laws is pretty thin and getting thinner all of the time.

    16. Re:Forget Future Employers by CaptKilljoy · · Score: 1

      >This is why posting from behind a proxy server that you have no attachment to is helpful. =)

      Saying you can't be traced by using a proxy server is like saying you can't be followed home because you stopped at a convenience store on the way.

    17. Re:Forget Future Employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe not, but it won't save you from being labelled a sick fuck when, in 30 years, the age of consent is raised to 21 years and archive.org is telling the world how you were raping your "little" girlfriend (back when she was 20). Don't believe me? Ask some of those people arrested for having sex with their 17.9999 year old girlfriends how they feel about their "child rapist" sign they have to live with for the rest of their life.

    18. Re:Forget Future Employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are also laws that make "possession" illegal even if the item was perfectly legal when aquired.

      These are few and far between. Even ivory, eagle feathers, etc all have provisions that if you can show that your item predates the ban on such goods, it's not illegal for you to possess it (however, you cannot resell it, since the sale would take place after the ban). If you had this proof, you could probably even win on appeal for possession of opium (inherited a 17th century european vial of the stuff), depending on how Republican (as opposed to constitutionalist) the new SCOTUS turns out to be.

    19. Re:Forget Future Employers by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      It's very unlikely that said people would've been cought a mere 52 minutes before her birthday (or that they couldn't wait the 52 minutes having already waited until almost the birthday) Furthermore, they only get the "child rapist" sign if they were arrested for a crime that actually existed.

      If you disagree with a law, argue against its real flaws rather than some made-up flaws that exist in your own little world.

      For instance, various "Megan's laws" to which you implicitly refered have the underlying assumption that rehabilitation is either impossible or impossible to determine. Either way, this brings up the question of whether reintegration should even be attempted. Instead of that question being asked, and the actual crimes involved being examined, we gloss over the issue with a perminant badge of evil.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  27. LA Times Article by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here's an LA Times article from a paranoid MySpace Mom who spies on her daughter for fear of those pedophiles the idiot box keeps talking about. Best parts are the Mom doesn't understand private profiles, and asks her friends about the site before looking at it herself. And then she bans her daughter from the one form of Internet activity she can easily track. Now her daughter is banned from MySpace but we're all sure she won't be using IM and web-mail, right?

    1. Re:LA Times Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theres a certain amount of snooping all parents must do, but by far, trust is the better way. My parents went so far as to get an FBI friend to poke into my server and who knows what else. I lost all trust for my parents at that point and our relationship has been rocky ever since.

      Aggressively snooping parents only make things worse. Parenting should be incentive based, not authority/fear based.

      My mom was such a horrible snoop, when she was coming to visit me at college, and even though I had nothing to hide, I switched out my drawers with a friend whose were empty and I set up tripwires all over the place so that I'd know she'd been snooping. Sure enough, every single one of my markers was disturbed. There's no worse feeling than having your parents not trust you.

      I never did anything truly bad, but every time something even remotely bad happened (failing a test, whatever) I'd get screamed at. My mom wanted my whereabouts accounted for every second and every minute of hanging out with my friends planned out. I got to the point where I just was going to go over to one of my long time (several years) friends houses and we may end up at another long time friends house or whatever without a real plan, but so I just started lying about our 'plan' so I could actually have a dynamic evening for once. Again, never did anything bad or went somewhere I shouldn't (I was 18 anyway).. But my point is, my mom was one of those overly snooping sorts and it ruined our relationship. If she'd not blown up over the tiniest stuff and trusted me from the beginning, things would be very different now and they would know their grandson- which they've only seen once in two years.

    2. Re:LA Times Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      My parents went so far as to get an FBI friend to poke into my server and who knows what else.

      Ah, those spook friends. If that happened to me, I'd show him the shiny... ;-) Spooks are funny.

  28. and someone's watching where the cops.. by ehrichweiss · · Score: 3, Interesting
    are walking... Some of the cops in my town got busted for posting inappropriate material, like discussing a high profile case. The link isn't the original story as they charge $2.95 to view anything older than 7 days(lame, I know) but it does have some interesting facts.

    So Barney Fife and Roscoe P. Coltrain if you're listening...some of us are watching.

    --
    0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    1. Re:and someone's watching where the cops.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardly lame. They gotta monetize it somehow.

  29. MySpace cost a friend of mine a job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He doesn't think that it was an altogether bad thing:

    "Something very good and something very bad happened today.

    Yesterday I noticed on XXXXXXXXXX that there was a posting for a "computer writer" for YYYYYYYYYY - a fairly well-known name connected with AM radio talk shows, newspaper columns, and computer books along the lines of those aimed at "dummies". She's a big time franchise, and she's based in ZZZZZZZ.

    So I sent a writing sample and a resume and BANG! Today I got a call from her producer. We scheduled an interview for Monday morning and I was ready to knock it out of the park.

    That was the good thing that happened.

    Fifteen minutes later, I got a call from the same producer. It seems that YYY was uncomfortable having me come in for an interview based on some of the photos on my myspace page. So the interview was cancelled.

    That was the bad thing.

    I was probably lucky. I mean, if I had started working for YYYYYY and THEN they decided I wasn't moral enough to continue, I'd be fucked: out of work AND humiliated. As it is, I just continue with my dead end job no worse for the wear.

    But the really cool thing is I GOT AN INTERVIEW with a nationally syndicated team based on nothing more than a writing sample. That's totally the shit!

    I mean, hey... my writing is good enough to bag me an interview at a fairly high level in the mainstream media. And if the interview had actually happened, I am certain it would have lead to a job offer.

    Now all I have to do is find a media personality who is more comfortable with individual expression. I wonder if Al Franken is looking for a writer...

    So as much as it sucks to be told my art is unfit for some hyper-image sensitive folks, I still feel some vindication, in an odd sort of way."


    I asked him in an email if he volunteered the information about his MySpace account, he did not. Apparently they searched it and found his email address. The photos in question were not sexually explicit in that they did not depict sex acts, if they were the ones that I've seen in the past, they were of naked women covered in UV paint photographed under a black light. They're very cool.

    1. Re:MySpace cost a friend of mine a job by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me like Kim Komando. Is SandyB still in on that action?

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
  30. Is anyone getting this by no-body · · Score: 1
    Besides the usual: "they asked for it by doing it and posting" yada yada?

    From the MSNBS article:
    A searchable, public scrapbook of images, affiliations and written exchanges, it offers detectives raw data on 70 million potential suspects, witnesses or victims (Facebook.com has also served as a source of info, though it is limited to users on college campuses). MySpace has good reason to cooperate with the cops.

    Seems that police is getting some kind of back-door to get "raw" data.

    If police uses the normal frontend on the web publicly accessable it's ok, but if they get more than that from the provider without a court order or subpoena, I think it's questionable and an intrusion of privacy. If your provider is giving your information automatically to the police without you knowing about it, it's time to go elsewhere.

    Who cares? BB is everywhere with thousands of cameras

    1. Re:Is anyone getting this by stubear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is no different than any other cop going undercover to bust a car theft ring or the mob. As long as they do not encourage others to act in a criminal manner or partake in criminal behavior themselves then I see nothing wring with this.

    2. Re:Is anyone getting this by crossmr · · Score: 1

      Thats right, every unchecked myspace profile is a criminal let free, its good to see the mpaa/riaa mindset spreading.

    3. Re:Is anyone getting this by patternjuggler · · Score: 1

      Seems that police is getting some kind of back-door to get "raw" data.

      Facebook has a lot more controls on who can see the user data, building little barriers around individual schools and so on, it would be more of a candidate for special police back doors, but myspace is completely wide open except for when it comes to underage users. Once you register on myspace, you have access to everyone else. Now, the police my want a special database api back doors and so on so they can do wholesale monitoring of millions of people (which would be pretty disturbing and wrong), but if they are just looking for specific individuals they don't need any special access.

  31. Want Privacy? by Temujin_12 · · Score: 1
    I've avoided the whole MySpace scene completely. I think it is simply irresponsible and naive to think that it is safe to make public the level of information that the MySpace culture asks for. Besides, I'm about a decade too old for the demographic they're going after, which I am very glad for.

    If any of you want to enjoy a private and safe online social network (or want to set one up so your kids and their friends get off of MySpace), here's how to do it, if you or someone you know/trust has a moderate level of understanding about computers.

    1- set up a server on a spare computer (LAMP is pretty easy with a package based disro)

    2- install a SVPN on the server and anyone's computer that will connect to it

    3- install a BB, like phpBB on the server.

    4- configure your BB This way, not only is access to the server private (since it doesn't have a static IP) but when it is accessed via the SVPN, that access is password protected and encrypted end-to-end.

    Despite this, don't go uploading how you firebomb airplane hangers (you should be that stupid to firebomb one in the first place, let alone record it). But it is reassuring to know that even if you did it would be private and secure.

    --
    Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
  32. 5-0! 5-0! by AndyLandrews · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, crap. Now I gotta go change my MySpace profile. Are the cops checking Blogger, too? I hope not. What's the usual sentence for third-degree yoinking and aggravated shenanigans?

    --
    He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing.
  33. MyDeathSpace!!! by tyrnight · · Score: 0

    Im sure you all cant forget this strange site. http://www.mydeathspace.com/ Trust me, you will never forget this site.

    --
    Freaky Schitt always happens to me... WHY God WHY!!
    1. Re:MyDeathSpace!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just freaky.

  34. favorite background color #800000?? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

    gee folks whodda thunk that the police would use Myspace for this.

    Like a certain book has stated police like BBs because they are crammed full of evidence unhidden clear as day evidence

    (note look at the named html color list for the joke)

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  35. Should we change the phraze by eriedicatorX · · Score: 1

    Maybe now it should be "Don't do the crime if your gonna post it online."

    1. Re:Should we change the phraze by MooUK · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe it should just be "Don't do the crime"?

      Solves all these problems.

    2. Re:Should we change the phraze by Wellington+Grey · · Score: 1

      Maybe it should just be "Don't do the crime"? Solves all these problems.

      Crime according to who? Your 'solution' only works if you never travel to another country.

      -Grey

    3. Re:Should we change the phraze by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Um, for 99.9% of the time, the solution always works.

      I can think of one example -- and only one example -- of something the US will prosecute you for that you did abroad. Almost all other countries are the same. As long as we're talking about posting evidence of doing something physical on the internet and not some sort of new-age internet crime (where jurisdiction is still being sorted out), if you post evidence you did something in country X where it isn't a crime and travel to country Y where it is, country Y is NOT going to arrest you for what you did in X.

    4. Re:Should we change the phraze by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've always prefered "If you can't do the time ... don't get caught".

  36. How about right now? by wadiwood · · Score: 1

    Never forget what laws exist in countries you travel because it isn't far off that you may find yourself in trouble while traveling all because your name showed up in some database because of what you put on the net.

    "it isn't far off"?? How about right now in the USA? In fact, the USA has been like this for years. And if your name is David Nelson you don't even need to have an internet presence to be in trouble.

    And anyone who believes "you have nothing to fear, if you have nothing to hide" should be locked up in a home for the deluded.

    --

    -- it must be true, it's on the internet.
    1. Re:How about right now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and anyone who doesn't believe that should be locked up in a home for the fucking paranoid.

  37. Patrolling, or Trolling by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 0

    I have no problems with police patrolling a beat. If they see someone doing something illegal, they should intervene.

    However, I don't thing cops should be allowed to troll for crimes in a public space.

    If you are lawfully walking down the street, should a cop be able to come up to you and give you a "white glove" inspection? Take your ID, call in to check for any warrants, call your ISP to check for bittorrent traffic, ask your boss if any equipment has come up missing, call the DMV to make sure your car is properly licensed, and check with the IRS to ensure you don't owe taxes?

    When they pull up your blog, how many bad things will they find?

    Also, what seperates truth from fiction? How do they know that I didn't read about a recent arson attack and decide to write some fiction placing myself at the scene?

    There is an old adage: IRC. Where the men are men, the women are men, and the 14 year-old girls are FBI agents.

    My point? Not everyone is completely honest online.

    So, is my blogging about doing a 13yo Thai ladyboy truth? Is it sufficent grounds to start an investigation?

    If you threaten to investigate everything that everyone says that *might* be illegal, then how is that different from placing restrictions on my First Amendment rights?

    --
    I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    1. Re:Patrolling, or Trolling by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you confess to a crime in a public place, then yes, the cops have every right to open a case against you.

      This isn't rocket science, nor an infringment of your rights. It's simply common sense.

      Myspace is like walmart ( only I'd rather visit a walmart than myspace ). If you walk into walmart, and say in a loud voice over and over again how you had sex with an underage child, you can bet your ass you will be investigated. To do anything otherwise would be incomptence on the part of the cops.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    2. Re:Patrolling, or Trolling by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      I agree. However, MySpace cannot be used as evidence.

      I have talked publicly about doing unususal things. My friends and I used to talk about the best way to dispose of a body while looking around the sporting goods section of Wally World. Does that mean a cop can begin an investigation?

      What if he finds a body nearby that was disposed of in a creative manner with no other evidence? What would the trial be like? Just because they heard me talking about body disposal and they found a body, does that mean I'm guilty?

      Here's another example: Lets say I'm unpopular in school. To boost my reputation, I decide to blog about how I burned down a house. I got most of the details from $local_news and just made the rest up.

      Now, they always leave out details. Let'say I fill in $accelerant from last month's CSI. Just so happens that the real criminal got the idea from the same place.

      They have your claim, they have you knowing an unpublished detail. Will I be convicted?

      What if I have a pic of me testing a gravity bong with tobacco. Should my school (assuming I'm at least 18) be able to suspend me?

      What about if I post a chat log of me talking about BSDM with a 14yo girl? Just because there is text containing the claim that she is 14 does not, in fact, mean that she is 14...or even a girl. Should that open the door for a child-sex investigation?

      The internet is, in part, about the dissemination of fact. That was it's original intent; to share facts and information. However, the internet has become, in large part, a medium of entertainment.

      Who is to say that my blog is not a work of fiction?

      Do cops troll Hollywood movies looking for people discharging firearms within city limits?

      Then why should they troll MySpace looking for, and opening investigations on, stuff that may or may not be true?

      On a side note, I keep waiting for someone busted on Perverted Justice to claim that they had a reasonable expectation that the "girl" they were chatting with was, in fact, a guy. I mean, cmon! Does anyone really believe that 14yo supermodels are hanging out in Yahoo! incest and animal-sex chat rooms?

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    3. Re:Patrolling, or Trolling by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I have no problems with police patrolling a beat. If they see someone doing something illegal, they should intervene. However, I don't thing cops should be allowed to troll for crimes in a public space.
      MySpace, (or Slashdot), is (in the virtual world) a 'beat'. No different than your physical street, or the parking lot of the local mall.

      You can't have it both ways - either the cops can follow up on evidence found on the 'beat' (public space, [MySpace|street]), or they can't.

      If you are lawfully walking down the street, should a cop be able to come up to you and give you a "white glove" inspection? Take your ID, call in to check for any warrants, call your ISP to check for bittorrent traffic, ask your boss if any equipment has come up missing, call the DMV to make sure your car is properly licensed, and check with the IRS to ensure you don't owe taxes?
      If that was what they were doing - you'd have a point. But it's not. In the case of the TFA, they merely did in virtual space what they'd do in meatspace - examine the evidence and look for clues and/or holes in people's stories. In the instance of scanning MySpace for pedophiles (or idiots who firebomb buildings and brag of it), that's the internet equivalent of pulling over the driver who is weaving all over the road.
      When they pull up your blog, how many bad things will they find?
      In my case, absolutely none. Not because I haven't posted anything - but because I haven't done anything.
      Also, what seperates truth from fiction? How do they know that I didn't read about a recent arson attack and decide to write some fiction placing myself at the scene?
      It's called investigation and evidence - something the cops and educated people are aware of, and fearmongering slashdot posters seem not to be.
      If you threaten to investigate everything that everyone says that *might* be illegal, then how is that different from placing restrictions on my First Amendment rights?
      It only fails to be different to the fearmongers.
    4. Re:Patrolling, or Trolling by MoneyT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have talked publicly about doing unususal things. My friends and I used to talk about the best way to dispose of a body while looking around the sporting goods section of Wally World. Does that mean a cop can begin an investigation?


      If he has reason to think you are actualy looking to dispose of a body, yes.

      What if he finds a body nearby that was disposed of in a creative manner with no other evidence? What would the trial be like? Just because they heard me talking about body disposal and they found a body, does that mean I'm guilty?


      That's what investigations and trials are all about. Why is it that any time there is discussion about anything law enforcement does people assume they're going to be convicted and sentenced to life on one piece of circumstancial evidence.

      BTW, if you do ever get convicted on one piece of circumstancial evidence, sue your lawyer.

      Here's another example: Lets say I'm unpopular in school. To boost my reputation, I decide to blog about how I burned down a house. I got most of the details from $local_news and just made the rest up.

      Now, they always leave out details. Let'say I fill in $accelerant from last month's CSI. Just so happens that the real criminal got the idea from the same place.

      They have your claim, they have you knowing an unpublished detail. Will I be convicted?


      Again, please see investigation and trial by jury for more information as to how the criminal justice system works.

      What if I have a pic of me testing a gravity bong with tobacco. Should my school (assuming I'm at least 18) be able to suspend me?


      Again see investigation and trial by jury.

      What about if I post a chat log of me talking about BSDM with a 14yo girl? Just because there is text containing the claim that she is 14 does not, in fact, mean that she is 14...or even a girl. Should that open the door for a child-sex investigation?


      Um yes.

      Who is to say that my blog is not a work of fiction?

      If it is, that would be revealed in the investigation.

      Do cops troll Hollywood movies looking for people discharging firearms within city limits?

      Then why should they troll MySpace looking for, and opening investigations on, stuff that may or may not be true?


      I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here but if you're saying what I think you're saying, you realize that movies have to get permits for that right? As for the investiations thing, it's because it may be true. Isn't that the job of cops, to investigate?

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    5. Re:Patrolling, or Trolling by patternjuggler · · Score: 1

      If you walk into walmart, and say in a loud voice over and over again how you had sex with an underage child, you can bet your ass you will be investigated.

      I would have agreed with you, but I think using sex crimes against children as in a justification for some law or police tactic that is going to be used for much more that those kinds of crimes is like bringing up Hitler in a debate (and with Godwin's law you automatically lose that debate etc.).

    6. Re:Patrolling, or Trolling by yndrd1984 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      MySpace cannot be used as evidence.

      What? There's a constitutional right to MySpace privacy? This ought to be good.

      I have talked publicly about doing unususal things. My friends and I used to talk about the best way to dispose of a body while looking around the sporting goods section of Wally World. Does that mean a cop can begin an investigation?

      Duh, yes! Are you really saying that a cop can't talk to you or ask to look in your car under those circumstances? And I did say "ask".

      What if he finds a body nearby that was disposed of in a creative manner with no other evidence? What would the trial be like? Just because they heard me talking about body disposal and they found a body, does that mean I'm guilty?

      Duh, no! You can be investigated based on circumstantial evidence, but not convicted based on it. If they needed proof before they could investigate, what's the point of having investigations? - You already have proof! Cops investigate lots of people, and the cops know that most of them will be innocent, but in your freaky world, the cops couldn't even ask you if you have a alibi.

      Lets say I'm unpopular in school. To boost my reputation, I decide to blog about how I burned down a house. I got most of the details from $local_news and just made the rest up. Now, they always leave out details. Let'say I fill in $accelerant from last month's CSI. Just so happens that the real criminal got the idea from the same place. They have your claim, they have you knowing an unpublished detail. Will I be convicted?

      Whether or not you're convicted will depend on what other evidence they find and how fast you stop being an idiot. Bragging about committing crimes will attract cops - duh! And if you do get convicted, you have only yourself to blame.

      What if I have a pic of me testing a gravity bong with tobacco. Should my school (assuming I'm at least 18) be able to suspend me?

      In my opinion, no. If it isn't school related, the most they should be able to do is inform your parents, and sometimes not even that.

      What about if I post a chat log of me talking about BSDM with a 14yo girl? Just because there is text containing the claim that she is 14 does not, in fact, mean that she is 14...or even a girl. Should that open the door for a child-sex investigation?

      Duh, yes, again! Are you really saying that talking about commiting a crime in public isn't a reason to look at whether you've commited a crime or not? Not convict, not arrest, not even probable cause for a warrent, but just investigate?

      Who is to say that my blog is not a work of fiction?

      You are! If it's fiction, state that clearly (like most sites, TV shows, and movies), and don't be suprised if the cops ask you a few questions when a real crime happens that mimics one of your stories. You don't have to answer, and they can't do anything but watch you (while you're in public) and ask other people questions until they have some sort of solid evidence.

      Then why should they troll MySpace looking for, and opening investigations on, stuff that may or may not be true?

      So they can find out if it's true or not! DUH!!!

    7. Re:Patrolling, or Trolling by 4D6963 · · Score: 1
      If you confess to a crime in a public place, then yes, the cops have every right to open a case against you.

      If so, how come gangster rappers who often relate their drug businesses in songs don't get busted more often than that? cops don't listen to gangster rap?

      --
      You just got troll'd!
  38. dumb crooks are online too by wadiwood · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://dumbcrooks.com/

    You don't have to fork out for the book if you don't want to.

    And I got the ref from
    http://www.darwinawards.com/

    But people who get a darwin award are unlikely to blog about it.

    --

    -- it must be true, it's on the internet.
    1. Re:dumb crooks are online too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But people who get a Darwin Award are unlikely to blog about it.
      Unlikely, but not impossible. Remember that you can still achieve a Darwin Award by simply removing your ability to contribute to the gene pool (as long as their are no pre-existing progeny). Accidental castrations seem to be the preferred method, so women in general have a more difficult time achieving the award in this way, though it's not impossible there either, I suppose!
    2. Re:dumb crooks are online too by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Well if winning the award itself didn't stop them, there's always the fact that they don't exist.

  39. Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by Baseball_Fan · · Score: 1
    According to Wikipedia, Facebook has been used in numerous investigations

    Facebook is a closed system, not just anyone can look. They require a valid college email address to join, and then limit whos profile you can see. How do the police get around those limits, and see ALL the profiles?

    What good is facebook if a police officer graduated from Western Michigan University, but the profile with the incrimination evidence is posted under the profile of someone who went to Michigan State University?

    Does Facebook sell accounts that the police and employers can purchase to view all profiles?

    1. Re:Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by EvanED · · Score: 1

      They can get people who DO have accounts to share it probably. Also, no doubt if they had reasonable suspicion of incriminating stuff online they could serve them with a subpoena.

    2. Re:Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well... I know at my school (Purdue University), the campus cops all have @purdue.edu email addresses. So they can view most everyone's (depending on how their privacy settings is configured) profile on campus.

      On a completely different note, I'm also seeing different professors on there. Spaf's on there, for instance.

    3. Re:Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Like, wow, I can't such delusions still exist. Campus police have valid .edu addresses. Through most of my adult life I have had valid college addresses, off and on. My mom still has a valid college email address. It is not like these are hard to come by.

      Hiding behind technicalities will not keep you safe, and playing the fool will not protect you from the motivated cop.

      And just a side note, while the information is stored in a somewhat closed way, it is presumable transmitted through school servers, which are owned by the school, and therefore all email, all web browsers, all activity, is suject to review my campus adminstration, police, and other staff. They at least have you username, which means they can link all criminal activity to you. After all, you probably have read email from your dorm room, or through the VPN loged in with the account assigned to you.

      On a more serious note, ISP are increasingly just giving all data to homeland security. Though they have a three year backlog, and probably don't care about the stupid college student tricks, it is still far from private.

      So, to summerize, at the very least the dean of students the campus police has access to everything on facebook. Either can give a email to the city police. In all probability, the dorks who work IT have you username and password, and can hack your account any time they wish. They probably spend sll their time perusing all the allegedly 'private phots'.

    4. Re:Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by patio11 · · Score: 1

      At least one officer at my university, and I assume all of them, had a @university.edu email address. The things are given out like candy on most campuses. Failing that, there is always the "call up Facebook, identify yourself as a police officer, ask for their cooperation" option, which is even easier than asking for the subpoena. Or, if you want to make it reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally easy on yourself, call up the university IT department, tell them evidence of a crime has been passed over their network, and you'ld be oh-so-obliged if they'd give you a university email address so you can investigate it.

    5. Re:Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      i never got why it is so hard to figure out, do people honestly believe it is illegal for private citizens or organizations to cooperatew with police investigators without demanding warrants?

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    6. Re:Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      They can get people who DO have accounts to share it

      But, but, but that's not fair! It's taking advantage of the Facebook system! I'm outraged!

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    7. Re:Can the police use Facebook to bust people? by presidentbeef · · Score: 1

      Facebook actually provides accounts to university administrators, so they can keep an eye on things.

      There have been plenty of cases where people get busted (even for minor things) because they post it on Faceboook, thinking it is private or limited to other students.

      --
      Everything I need to know about copyrights I learned from Slashdot.
  40. Myspace and Facebook investigations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a police officer (Just a regular patrol officer, not a detective) I have made great use of facebook and myspace to help solve crimes. I don't know that I would ever base an entire case just on what I read on someone's profile or blog, but it gives me a great place to start an investigation where I have few or no leads.

    It never ceases to amaze me, though...the videos, outright confessions, explanations, and methods that people will post online about crimes they committed.

    It's all public information. Some people say that it's a violation of privacy, but as far as I'm concerned, it's no different than writing an article in the local or national paper detailing the elements of the crime that you thought you got away with. Everyone has access to what you've written so just be weary of your audience. In this day in age, law enforcement would be just plain ignorant to overlook this wealth of information.

    I have a few cases pending trial in the courts that use a small amount of evidence from facebook. I also have a recent case which uses a lot of evidence from various blogs. I'm very interested to see how the courts respond to this evidence.

    1. Re:Myspace and Facebook investigations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would the kind of "crimes" you talk about include victimless crimes such as 18 year olds getting drunk or smoking pot?

      If so, I would reccomend that you as a police officer get a life and think about solving some of the real crimes that go largely unchecked because of the screwed up priorities of police departments, especially at universities.

  41. This is good stuff by frostoftheblack · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do not feel the least bit threatened by this at all.

    This is just yet another reason why I refuse to get a MySpace account. People need to learn their lesson that whatever they post on the Internet is public. Even if it's labelled "private", it's still public. MySpacers have the "look at my page now" attitude whenever it comes to their friends, but when it's someone they don't like, it's a "get away from me, you're trespassing on my privacy" attitude.

    As for police investigations, I'm all for it. Personally I'm sick of people posting illegal material on their MySpace, glorifying it, and getting the respect of every other junkie who is lucky enough to see it. Illegal things should be investigated and prosecuted.

    As for the legality of searching on MySpace, I pull up this quote from my government textbook (Government By The People, by Burns). I hope it's relevant: "Police may make warrantless searches in public places if the offers have probable cause, or at least a reasonable suspicion, that the persons in question have committed or are about to committ crimes. No later than two days after making such an arrest the police must take the arrested person to a magistrate so that the magistrate, not just the police, can decide whether probable cause existed to justify the warrantless arrest. Probable cause however does not except in extreme emergencies justify a warrantless arrest of people in their own homes...Not every time the police stop a person to ask questions or to seek that person's consent to search is there seizure or detention requiring probable cause or warrant. If the police just ask questions or even seek consent to search an individuals person or possessions in a noncoercive atmoshpere, there is no detention".

    Once the average person realizes that everyone watches everything on the Internet, then we won't have problems like this. The amount of information one can glean on someone or about a certain event through MySpace and through various search engines is astounding. But most people don't have the common sense to know that.

    --
    Do not mark in this space. For official office use only.
    1. Re:This is good stuff by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      I agree! Let's all prosecute people who are known to have illegal things like libdvdcss! mplayer! VLC!

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  42. I'm going to need proof... by Baseball_Fan · · Score: 1
    Teaching kids what not to do on the internet is not what I am concerned about here. Teaching kids not to go out firebombing old buildings is concern.

    Show me the profiles of people that might be later used to screw them out of a job or used by over zelous prosecutors.

    Lets see all those profiles with crime and pictures from spring break.

  43. I love that.... by ShyGuy91284 · · Score: 1

    There's a certain special thing about people getting caught for openly bragging about what they did.... Has prevented a lot of school shootings probably....

    --
    In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
    1. Re:I love that.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ha thats how i got cought. there's nothing special in it, it just fucking sux. but im glad i was cought, it taught me a lesson... but only a little bit :)

  44. Hubris by fm6 · · Score: 0, Troll
    Most of the nabbed wrongdoers have been victims of their own hubris, like the two boys who uploaded video of themselves firebombing an abandoned airplane hangar.
    "Hubris" is kind of pretentious for this kind of fuckup. The Bush White House thinking it can architect the political future of the Middle East is "hubris". Distributing evidence of your own criminal activity on the web is just plain stupid.
  45. runfatboy Jim by eweaver · · Score: 1


    Ok, so does Jim have a personal team of moderators who always give him +5? What gives? Every other article I have to read his .sig advertisement because someone modded his one-sentence statement of (to me) the obvious "+5 insightful". Can we have some down-mods please?

    Ethan http://www.dont/ advertise in your sig its annoying.info/

  46. Re:5-0! 5-0! by Compholio · · Score: 1

    What's the usual sentence for third-degree yoinking and aggravated shenanigans?

    IANAL but I think that would probably fall under "Criminal Mischief", which is probably different depending on the state you're in.

  47. P2P owners "busted" for copyright violations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "it has been my personal experience that few people take responsibility for their actions and many are infuriated when someone catches them doing something wrong, instead of being ashamed."

    Like being caught by the RIAA/MPAA/BSA engaging in illegal copyright violations using a P2P client and the story being posted here?

  48. Re:Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    I think the real crime is that car manufacturers are even allowed to offer non-warranty after sales service. I know that must sound kinda crazy. I mean, who knows better how to fix the car than the manufacturer right? But if car owners are willing to allow them to charge for after sales service, I hardly think they can complain when the manufacturers diliberately hide flaws in the vehicle and information that can be use by third party repairers. Think about it, if car owners were to refuse all non-warranty after sales service from the manufacturer, the manufacturers would be forced to release as much information about their vehicles as possible. They would have to work with third party repairers to ensure they offer good service to owners of the cars made by that manufacturer. Fair Trade laws should ensure that the manufacturer has to give all third parties the same information, not just favour particular third parties, ensuring competition and driving down the price of third party repairs.

    Similarly, open source does the same thing for software. Sure, we don't need "repairs" but we all have our own special needs for software, and third party customization should be a much bigger market than it is now.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  49. I can imagine how this was started by General+Lee+Cynical · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Hey, you're supposed to be working, what are you doing browsing profiles of 16 year old girls on MySpace?"

    "I...er...I'm...um...I'm looking into possible crimes that these teenagers may have committed. Right. That's what I'm doing."

    1. Re:I can imagine how this was started by zen-theorist · · Score: 1
      "Hey, you're supposed to be working, what are you doing browsing profiles of 16 year old girls on MySpace?" "I...er...I'm...um...I'm looking into possible crimes that these teenagers may have committed. Right. That's what I'm doing."
      hehheh funny, now dont go post that on your myspace.
  50. Dude... by DarkNemesis618 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I'll keep this short & simple.

    If you're going to do something illegal, don't tape it, don't take pictures of it, don't write about it, and most of all...don't post it on the internet. Does common sense even exist anymore?

    --
    What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?
    1. Re:Dude... by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Don't post it on the internet? You mean like the police ALREADY FUCKING DO? http://www.shelbywarrants.org/ - there's my local county warrant database. Yup, picture, (if available) name, residential address, height, weight, race, crimes charged, etc.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:Dude... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Has 'common sense' ever existed? The fact there there is a word for it is discouraging proof that it hasn't; If it were common, you would never have to explain it to anyone.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Dude... by Wescotte · · Score: 1

      I'll keep this short & simple.
      If you're going to do something illegal, don't tape it, don't take pictures of it, don't write about it, and most of all...don't post it on the internet. Does common sense even exist anymore?


      But how else am I going to share my antics with the world? How else will MTV discover the new cast of Jackass?

  51. Dude...Uncommon "/." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Does common sense even exist anymore?"

    And you're asking this forum?

  52. 60 hours a week!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No wonder cops are such assholes (not always, of course, by a long shot).

  53. Cops Should Patrol myRedbook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    The cops should patrol myRedbook. You have not seen anything until you have seen the web page of myRedbook. Pimps, prostitutes (of a wide range of ages), etc. use myRedbook to advertise prostitution for sale. The customers actually brag about their adventures on myRedbook.

    The time has come to shutdown myRedbook and to arrest the people running its web site. The cops need to do their job.

  54. Exactly, myspace is just an informer to the police by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    This is very very old police practice. When you get word of some "pub talk" you follow up on it.

    It is not unusual for criminals to brag about their crimes to their friends. Suprise suprise for various reasons these friends may be inclined to then spread the info. Some even directly to the police because they are fucking disgusted with it. Others because they use the info to get away with their own lesser crime. Get picked up for a theft? Tell the arresting officer about that guy you heard bragging about a rape.

    Off course nowadays people are so amazingly stupid they even record their own evidence and then make it publicly available. Kinda like walking into a police station and then confessing. Should there be some privacy law to protect the truly stupid?

    Offcourse not.

    As for people claiming that you shouldn't post personal information on the net if you don't want to get caught. Geez, get a clue. If you don't want to get caught. Don't commit the crime!

    These kids are not "normal" teenagers doing stupid teenage things. When you start filming your "happy slappings" you have long since crossed the border into "insane criminal who needs to be locked up for life" territory.

    Many people seem to see privacy laws as being there to protect you against getting caught. That is not what it is about. All those laws restricting the police are there to protect you against being falsly convicted FOR A CRIME YOU DID NOT COMMIT. It was never the idea to give you protection to get away with stuff. That is considered an unfortunate side-effect, not the goal itself.

    IF there was a way to get perfect privacy with no people being able to get away with a crime THAT would be the holy grail of privacy laws.

    to many times you see people trying to invoke pricacy laws to supress evidence off crimes they committed. "Yes yes, the evidence clearly shows I did it but you it is not fair you got that evidence". That is not a good thing.

    Privacy freaks would get a lot more respect if they spend slightly more time defending the innocent vs the guilty. The average joe doesn't exactly give a damn that some criminals rights were violated. Just ask how many think that jail rape is a good thing.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  55. Myspace users by johnny+cashed · · Score: 1

    Can restrict blogs to those on a friends list. Can the cops get access to those easily? Or do they need a subpeona or warrant? Does Myspace let cops browse everyone's blogs?

  56. You make a statement that says a lot about you by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    If you're dumb enough to post incriminating material on the internets you deserve to get caught.

    This statement is ecchoed by a lot of people nowadays. It says a lot about our society and why some think it is going down the crapper.

    If your a programmer you will understand what the problem with it is.

    if intellegence == false {
    deserve_to_get_caught = true;}

    THEREFORE

    if intellegence == false
    deserve_to_get_caught = true;
    else
    deserve_to_get_caught = false;

    So basically your saying that intelligent people do not deserve to be caught.

    Funny, I always thought that a really could legal system would work like this.

    if guilty == true
    deserve_to_get_caught = true;
    else
    deserve_to_get_caught = false;

    It is the reason I am wary of privacy freaks. To many of them seem to think privacy laws are there to protect criminals from getting caught. Sometimes that may be an unfortunate side-effect of protecting the innocent BUT ultimatly the goal must be to get a system that protects the innocent and ONLY the innocent. As long as we can't have a perfect system I think we should balance the need of protecting the innocent from wrongfull conviction VS the need to be able to convict the guilty.

    The whole "it is better to let 10 guilty people go free then have 1 innocent man convicted" is a lot of crap. The current system sure succeeds in letting the 10 guilty go free but we still got innocent men (and women) in jail.

    I don't have "the answer" but your crap about framing innocent kids sure as hell isn't it either. If the police finds a video with some kids committing a crime then they should be fully able to use it. Oh and as for forging it. Yeah right. Hang out on image boards for a second. It is filled with people who can tell you every photoshop trick. Shops never last long as evidence.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  57. Re:Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ridiculous part of the story is that a claim on an online forum could ever be used to potentially cost a customer a great deal of money by voiding a warranty. How did ACR verify the identites of the persons claiming to have "tricked dealers"? The story is outright ridiculous; although, the posters were surely asking for trouble by publicly posting admissions of committing fraud. Another observation: ACR was asking for as many lawsuits as the warranties they voided. Every suit would likely be won by the owners as long as their cars did not still have signs of them voiding their warranties.

  58. with big brother is writing a diary any different? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    at least on my myspace account diary pages don't dissapear...

    plus there's a chance someone I know or would want to know would read it, not just girlfriends or my mom or cops who don't like what I wrote about them.

    there's something in not being public or drawing attention to yourself, as who knows what psycho's could be watching out there, but if every little detail of your life is under scrutiny anyway why not make everything public?

  59. MySpace by Terminus32 · · Score: 1

    Yes, i'm a Linux-using geek, but I also use MySpace - that's because most of my REAL LIFE friends are on there too! :-)

    --
    http://nathanlindsell.blogspot.com/
  60. That may be the heritage... by Elemenope · · Score: 1

    And that heritage has been repeatedly invoked here in Southern Rhode Island, where the local communities are looking to restore the 'Brothel Laws' in order to make students' lives miserable. While one-hundred-and-fifty years ago this may have been the reason for these laws, their current incarnation has nothing to do with such a purpose (though the anachronistic name has unfortunately stuck).

    --
    All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    1. Re:That may be the heritage... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      If it's going to outlaw or limit the eating of brothel sprouts, I'm in favor.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. Re:That may be the heritage... by drsquare · · Score: 1

      And that heritage has been repeatedly invoked here in Southern Rhode Island, where the local communities are looking to restore the 'Brothel Laws' in order to make students' lives miserable.

      That's ironic, considering that students have made it their raison d'etre to make other peoples lives miserable.

  61. seems only fair by penguin-collective · · Score: 1

    Given the prices that Audi charges for their cars and their repairs, and given how poorly their cars do on reliability measures, replacing an engine or two should covered by the warranty even if people choose to fill up with battery acid. (Disgruntled ex-owner.)

  62. Re:Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Excellent post, man.

    It was a no brainer for audi to surf the enthusiast boards. The money saved vs time invested is excellent. Let alone the fact that it IS dishonest to blatently rip off the dealer in that instance... To give equal time, dealers regularly screw car owners by denying warranty when all the owner has is an aftermarket exhaust and the failure is legitimately unrelated to that mod.

    Just like the cops in the "myspace" thing - the crimes solved vs time invested is very efficient. Yeah it seems like a waste for a highly trained cop to spend the day surfing - but if he/she can, say, solve 5 crimes in a week, vs the normal 3 - without getting shot at - then fine. Welcome to the 21st century.

  63. We never thought we'd find a place where we belong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cops hanging around MySpace?

    Are they part of a special squad of undercover cops who look too young to be taken seriously on the streets? (and have bad hair)

    See at the 'Chapel!

  64. Absolutely nothing new. by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    Ask any detective, most criminals got caught because of their own hubris (or stupidity) LONG before myspace or facebook. This technology only makes it easier because of the assumption of anonymity.

    I was talking to a police detective from AZ when some juveniles escaped from a nearby detention facility - we specifically discussed how hard they'd be to (re)capture. He was utterly unconcerned.

    His opinion was that they would be caught very, very quickly. Only a tiny percentage of criminals actually escape and are not reapprehended....because they're criminals. It's not like a hat you choose not to wear; these are dysfunctional personalities that simply cannot comprehend that society does not accept that taking money at gunpoint or raping somone to get your sexual satisfaction is not acceptable. It's absolutely inevitable that they will recommit a crime and be caught again. His concern (and why they work so hard to catch fugitives) was mainly that they didn't hurt anyone in that subsequent crime. The fact of their eventual recapture was almost a dead-on certainty, in itself.

    He pointed out that if they DID escape and somehow 'vanish' into the population, becoming a law-abiding citizen for the rest of their lives, then GREAT: that's in a sense what they are trying to accomplish with rehabilitory prison systems.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Absolutely nothing new. by nezroy · · Score: 1

      or raping somone to get your sexual satisfaction

      Seriously, I can't believe this misconception still exists. You would think 30 years of sex-ed and women's lib literature would have clued you all in by now. Rape is about power, anger, and violence. It has nothing to do with sex.

    2. Re:Absolutely nothing new. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

      He pointed out that if they DID escape and somehow 'vanish' into the population, becoming a law-abiding citizen for the rest of their lives, then GREAT: that's in a sense what they are trying to accomplish with rehabilitory prison systems.

      Not quite true.. technically they'd be committing a new crime every time they used whatever fake ID materials one would need to remain at large in society.

  65. What about fiction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see how anything posted online (unless it's child porn) could be evidence for anything. People post fiction as fact all the time. I used to post semi-true diiaries on K5, some of these involved illegal activities.

    True or false? Nobody could take them as admission of guilt. If there had been pictures posted, again, photoshop can produce really good fakes.

    I could set up a "frostoftheblack" (or something close) account on myspace with photoshopped pictures of "you" firebombing a church. In fact, were I to firebomb a church, I'd post a myspace profile using somebody else's name, "proving" that they, not I, did it.

    I sure hope the cops are also doing offline detective work before they throw someone in jail. But considering how many death row inmates were freed in Illinois because they were proven innocent by DNA tests, I'm not too comfortable thinking that would be the case.

    1. Re:What about fiction? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      I don't see how anything posted online (unless it's child porn) could be evidence for anything.

      I'll be so bold and say even child porn isn't evidence for anything. But due to this kind of attitude it's a so much better tool to frame somebody, if you ever need it. But then, fortunately, it's also a dangerous weapon that may easily blow up in your own face, if ever it's found on your own computers in preparation to plant it to its final destination...

      If there had been pictures posted, again, photoshop can produce really good fakes.

      Exactly. Or just adult women who happen to look much younger than they are.

      with photoshopped pictures of "you" firebombing a church.

      ... or "you" horsing around with a very young girl.

      I sure hope the cops are also doing offline detective work before they throw someone in jail.

      I sure hope so too. And that they don't disengage their brains when they hear the magic words "child pornography".

  66. not just kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shit, I set fire to the microwave about half an hour ago, and I'm 25 :(

  67. I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still don't get the idea that you want to post your most intimate secrets on a blog. You say things in public that you wouldn't say to your closest friend. It's beyond weird.

  68. Best use of time and tax payer money by bobcote · · Score: 1

    I have read several articles lately about local cops surfing web sites and catching pedophiles and other criminals. While I commend getting any criminal off the street I wonder if local police cruising the Internet is the best use of their time or tax payer money, since much of what they do is hit or miss anyway.

    And as we all know, most parents don't have the knowledge or, in some cases, the backbone to set limits on the use of these sites bu their children.I would suggest that sites like Facebook and myspace create a corp of volunteers to cruise their sites and look for potential problems (criminal activity, risky behavior, etc). They could then report this to the web masters and then they could contact the appropriate law enforcement or social services agency. (I am aware of an employee of such a service trying to solicit a teenager for immoral activity, that's why intervention of real cops and feds should happen)

    I know these sites are supposed to be safe places where teens and preteens can relate to each other safely, but so are playgrounds and teen centers. Evil elements find their way in.

  69. Wow by punkr0x · · Score: 1

    How is writing a news story about this a good idea? Kids are stupid, when they pull pranks they sometimes post the info online... why would the cops tell anyone they watch these sites? Unless the theory is that putting their stunts online is motivation for the vandals to commit the crimes in the first place.. but it seems to me kids got into trouble long before myspace came around. I'm also surprised at all the backlash about lack of privacy on myspace. I guess all of you have a lot more to hide than I do. I mean yeah if you're out breaking the law on a nightly basis... probably don't put that info on myspace... but gee I'm 24 I play guitar, if some idiot who doesn't know me has tons of free time to browse myspace finding that out, more power to you.

  70. Re:Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by Black-Man · · Score: 1

    Those aftermarket chips are so popular - Audi had to have been clued in. I remember reading an article about the 1.8T - that Audio just made the changes to their chip that the aftermarket chip had made - getting a 10-20 HP boost for basically nothing.

  71. ah, but... by jd · · Score: 1

    ...an infinite number of dumbasses replying to each other will eventually produce the complete works of USENET.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  72. Re:Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by Vellmont · · Score: 1

    This seems like going overboard a bit. Most companies rely on people feeling they're a good company. As soon as the customer can't trust a company, that company is going to have problems.

    What really surprises me is that Audi is willing to go after a few people that've "fooled the dealer" and in the process generate a lot of bad press for themselves. Who wants to think their car company are a bunch of cops, roaming around public websites just to try to find out if you may have done something to void your warranty? I'm sure Audi will lose a lot more in lost sales than it will with the few people that they caught. It won't stop people from replacing the chip in their car and bringing it in for service either, it'll only stop people from talking about it on audiworld.

    --
    AccountKiller
  73. Uh, white power? by j.a.mcguire · · Score: 1

    Whats firebombing a desserted hangar got to do with white power, neo-nazism or racism in general, or am I missing something?

  74. Re:Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by SuperMog2002 · · Score: 1

    Or they could just not give the information to anyone, and when your car broke down due to some undocumented part failing, you'd have to buy a new one.

    --
    Sunwalker Dezco for Warchief in 2016
  75. Yes, let's blame the parents. by NRAdude · · Score: 0

    Two parents pay for their kids to be sent to a school full of people hired to parent them. And just as good kids will obey their parents, none put to thought that their fellow students are just as capable at parenting as the one in front of the class trying to teach.

    Let this be a lesson: blame the parents, not the good parents doing the best they can with what time that have remaining after their day of slavery to make ends meat.

    Love works no ill will: good parenting.

    --
    without prejudice
  76. There you go. by NRAdude · · Score: 0

    That post is a prime example of someone giving purpose for MYSPACE. Here, I thought MYSPACE was just another buglight attracting all the flies from our favorite pile of crap known as SLASHDOT.

    --
    without prejudice
  77. And The Catch Is... by Aristophrenia · · Score: 1

    Bobcote: I would suggest that sites like Facebook and myspace create a corp of volunteers to cruise their sites and look for potential problems (criminal activity, risky behavior, etc).

    Who determines what is a risky behavior? Each person has a different standard that is influenced by their past, their religion, their culture, and their society.

    Real Life Example: I see no problem in exploring and learning about religions; I've researched Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Taoism, Satanism, and Wicca, just to name a few. I personally know some hardline extremist christians(They exist) who would call that risky behavior.

    So who gets to say what is or is not a risky behavior? Is risk always a bad thing?

    Perhaps there is a solution to this situation, but it most certianly will not be a simple one.

    --
    "Yeah, but by we know yo mama gives EVERYBODY root privilege..." -jpetts (208163)
  78. Re:Audi owners "busted" for ECU mods by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    Well, that just leads to things like the reputation that import cars used to have for being impossible to find parts for. It used to be true, and so the foreign manufacturers went out of their way to make parts available, and now nobody worries about it.

    Would you buy a car that nobody was willing to service?

  79. I own a forum by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    I own and operate GM-Diesel.com

    From the name of it you can figure out what it is about. On the old Ford-Diesel.com (now thedieselstop.com) they had the exact same incident you were describing.

    Some people had modded their Powerstroke Diesels and destroyed something. They promptly removed the aftermarket product, took it into the dealer with stock components, and claimed ignorance.

    And of course they were discussing their mods on the forums. Some of the dealers wised up and began reading the site on a regular basis and allegedly several warranty claims were denied because of this.

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  80. Good lord by lorcha · · Score: 1
    I think macing someone rushing the field is warranted.
    I think you are out of your fucking mind.

    When you've got a mob of people going one way, the last thing you want to do is use mace/pepper spray/whatever to force the people in front back. That's just begging for people in the middle to get crushed or trampled. It's also begging for people in the pepper sprayed areas to get crushed or trampled in the meyhem.

    It's much better to just get out of the way.

    Let's remember we're talking about kids at a football game and not a mob of revolutionaries here. There's no reason for cops to take a harmless situation and make it dangerous. At my alma mater, kids got trampled when the cops tried to prevent the inevitable. One girl was nearly killed.

    To protect and to serve, indeed.

    --
    "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent