Slashdot Mirror
Why ISPs' "Stand" Against Child Porn Is Actually Not a Stand Against Child Porn
TechDirt has an insightful article on the recent push for ISPs to turn off Usenet access under the guise of fighting child pornography. Unfortunately, the "stand against child porn" isn't actually a stand at all, it seems — more like ignoring the issue while trying to snag some headlines and good will. "Taking a stand against child porn wouldn't be overly aggressively blocking access to internet destinations that may or may not have porn (and there's no review over the list to make sure that they're actually objectionable). Taking a stand against child porn would be hunting down those responsible for the child porn and making sure that they're dealt with appropriately... Also, this sets an awful precedent in that the ISPs can point out that it's ok for them to block "objectionable" content where they get to define what's objectionable without any review."
"Despite what the article says, I haven't seen any actual evidence that the "agreement" is to stop carrying Usenet newsgroups."
How about the fact that a 6 weeks ago, Roadrunner stopped serving Usenet altogether?
Palm trees and 8
The other funny thing is that while the summary cries "Usenet", TFA only mentions Usenet in passing, and the article to which it connects does not mention Usenet at all. That is basically a copy of the same article that was posted here a short while ago which didn't mention Usenet either.
From TFA:
All 18 cable companies have agreed to use NCMEC's list of active Web sites identified as containing child pornography, to ensure that no such site is hosted on servers owned or controlled by those companies.
(emphasis mine)
Why on earth are people screaming "They are turning of Usenet!"?
It appears all they're doing is not hosting in their local NNTP cache the listed newsgroups
That's what I've gathered also. Cuomo's (D., NY State AG) people have lists of groups and sites they've identified according to some criteria and those groups and sites will be blocked and dehosted.
You have to click through link in this Slashdot story and the link in the first TechDirt story to another TechDirt story before you discover that specific usenet groups are being targetted. Characterizing this as "turn off Usenet access" is a lie and the referrers, including Slashdot, are lying.
The related story linked earlier today by Slashdot makes it clear that the websites being targetted (as opposed to newsgroups) are those actually hosted by the ISPs involved; no "firewall for the children". They are dehosting sites they host, not filtering. Right or wrong this is an enforcement of their existing "acceptable use policies", which Cuomo claims they have neglected.
The ISPs are being browbeat by a politician that is threatening fines. Don't like it? Vote the Fuck out of office. ISPs aren't at fault here.
Slashdot editors: I decline to assume the intended level of apoplexy based on your lies. Sorry to disappoint.
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old