Slashdot Mirror


Chatroulette To Log IP Addresses, Take Screenshots

littlekorea writes "Chatroulette, the strangely addictive online game in which users are connected via webcam and microphone to random strangers at the click of a button, has had enough of users exposing themselves to the unsuspecting public, among other disgraces. The founder of Chatroulette has announced the company has hired developers to collect IP addresses and take screenshots of those users breaking the rules."

194 comments

  1. And Then What Will You Do With It? by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Chatroulette, the strangely addictive online game ...

    So you're strangely addicted to staring at male genetalia? I think we all just learned a little something about littlekorea.

    That is by far the most positive review of that web site I have ever encountered. Personally I've used the service precisely once. Discovering what happened during that usage is left as an exercise to the reader.

    The founder of Chatroulette has announced the company has hired developers to collect IP addresses and take screenshots of those users breaking the rules.

    And then what? Actually it sounds like they have already done this:

    "We've captured and saved thousands of IP addresses of alleged offenders, along with logs and screenshots which prove wrong behaviour.

    "We are initiating a conversation with enforcement agencies and we are willing to provide all the information we have."

    Are they going to press charges? Do you think that site created by a lone developer has the legal resources to do that against that many offenders? Do you really think any law enforcement agency has the resources to investigate thousands of complaints with little more than a screenshot of someone's junk and their IP address? It's the internet. Your effort is futile. What ever happened to the recognition software? Has that already fallen through? Too many false positives? Light problems?

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

      Do you really think any law enforcement agency has the resources to investigate thousands of complaints with little more than a screenshot of someone's junk and their IP address?

      Maybe if the IP address resolved to Whitehouse.gov. Don't you miss Bill Clinton?

    2. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is it even illegal to expose yourself to a stranger over the internet? It might be a violation of the AUP/ToS, but that doesn't necessarily make it illegal. It's hard to prove theft of services when you aren't charging a fee and you don't have to apply even a digital signature to gain access to the site. IIRC all you really have to do is verify an email address. Unless you're displaying yourself to a child (even unknowingly is probably enough to get you in trouble) it seems likely to go nowhere.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you really think any law enforcement agency has the resources to investigate thousands of complaints with little more than a screenshot of someone's junk and their IP address?

      Maybe if the IP address resolved to Whitehouse.gov. Don't you miss Bill Clinton?

      Number of my countrymen to be killed or wounded while Clinton nailed a fat secretary: 0. Number of my countrymen to be killed or wounded from the two wars started and unfinished during Bush's administration: 5,589 and rising.

      And which one did we try to impeach? Yeah, I kinda do miss Clinton.

    4. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, unless it is. For instance, if you’re displaying yourself to a child... and you’d probably have to be doing so knowingly, or at least without having taken any basic sort of steps to ensure that the person you’re talking to is over 18 (if they claim to be, that’s probably good enough unless it’s pretty obvious that they aren’t).

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    5. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you're strangely addicted to staring at male genetalia

      No, it's serendipity, not knowing what (experience) you'll get next, it might be something way out of your frame of reference, which gives a sense of something possibly entirely new by the click of a button.

      While for others it's a way to express themselves creatively, experiment and test the boundaries in a social setting without negative consequences.

      You were quasi annonymous, you could reinvent yourself over while knowing your chatpartner wont see or meet you again if you don't want to, while testing how to entertain, shock or interact with people.

      It's just normal that such a platform brings out also sexual fantasies and desires in people, but there's a whole lot more to such a platform imho.

      fe. see the piano dude, as there are many more of these type of people.

      --
      I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
    6. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by gazbo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Personally I've used the service precisely once. Discovering what happened during that usage is left as an exercise to the reader.

      You told a 13 year old girl to show boobs?

    7. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by sunking2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That just doesn't say a whole lot about Bill's stamina.

    8. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Informative

      Number of my countrymen to be killed or wounded while Clinton nailed a fat secretary: 0

      While not nearly approaching Bush's exploits, we had many military actions during the Clinton years.
      Somalia/Bosnia/Kosovo/Afghanistan/Sudan/Desert Fox in Iraq. And it was far more than '0' killed/wounded.

    9. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      "But she said she was 18" isn't a valid defense.

      Unintentional violation of the law is still violation.

    10. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In the UK we have a law called "Indecent Exposure", under which you can be prosecuted if you expose yourself to someone who had a reasonable expectation that you wouldn't (so it excludes your sexual partners, someone who walks in on you peeing, stripper nights etc) - why does the inclusion of the term "over the internet" change matters with regard to this law?

    11. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

      Are they going to press charges? Do you think that *if that site handed over everything to the media companies, the RIAA has the legal resources to do that* against that many offenders with little more than a screenshot of someone's junk and their IP address?

      Fixed that for you.

      Gives new meaning to "this dick is a pirate".

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    12. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Dishevel · · Score: 0, Troll

      Not only that but I give Clinton some credit for the 9/11 attacks as well with his do nothing stance on the first WTC bombings and the attack on the USS Cole. Lets just say that lately we have had some real fucking bad presidents in the US. Or you could pretend that one side has done good and the other is evil.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    13. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet "But she said she was 17" is a valid crime, if the said she is actually a middle aged FBI agent. How does that work then?

    14. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Vectormatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      after about a few days of chat-roulette, any person checking it out on the internet would have reasonably expected to see some wang, so by that logic it is now legal to show your wedding-tacle on chat-roulette

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    15. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

      I can already picture the naked penis police lineup to match the penis pictures to the correct IPs. Wait a minute, ChatRoulette does that already!!!

    16. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by egcagrac0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      What ever happened to the recognition software? Has that already fallen through? Too many false positives? Light problems?

      Junk recognition software?

      "...just because the pictures aren't of your faces doesn't mean we can't identify you. At this very moment those pictures are on their way to Washington where the FBI has experts in this type of identification. If you turn yourselves in now, you may escape a Federal charge. "

    17. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by clone53421 · · Score: 4, Informative

      That’s not necessarily true. It can be a valid defense, depending on the laws in your state. For instance...

      MO Revised Statutes, section 566.020:

      Mistake as to incapacity or age--consent not a defense, when.

      566.020. 1. Whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a victim's being incapacitated, no crime is committed if the actor reasonably believed that the victim was not incapacitated and reasonably believed that the victim consented to the act. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of belief as to capacity and consent.

      2. Whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a child being thirteen years of age or younger, it is no defense that the defendant believed the child to be older.

      3. Whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a child being under seventeen years of age, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant reasonably believed that the child was seventeen years of age or older.

      4. Consent is not an affirmative defense to any offense under chapter 566 if the alleged victim is less than twelve years of age.

      In short, if the person was under the age of thirteen / twelve (depending on the particular law being violated), you have no defense of “I thought he/she was old enough” (yeah... right). However, if the criminality of the act hinges on believing the person to be 17 (the age of consent is 17), and you reasonably believed that they were 17 and consented to the act, that is a valid defense against criminal charges.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    18. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by duguk · · Score: 1

      "But she said she was 18" isn't a valid defense.

      Unintentional violation of the law is still violation.

      You want Chatroulette users to ask to see a Passport or Drivers Licence first?

      I can see massive privacy violations and identity theft with that...

    19. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally I've used the service precisely once. Discovering what happened during that usage is left as an exercise to the reader.

      You told a 13 year old girl to show boobs?

      Interesting?! What is up with the moderation these days?

    20. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by mea37 · · Score: 1

      "Are they going to press charges? Do you think that site created by a lone developer has the legal resources to do that against that many offenders?"

      Based on their quotes about willingness to share information with "enforcement agencies", it rather sounds like they believe the offenders are violating criminal law and hoping the state will prosecute accordingly. If that's so, they don't really need legal resources. That would be more a question if they wanted to pursue civil litigation (such as claiming damages in the context of a ToS violation), but it doesn't sound like they want to do that (probably because they lack the legal resources).

      I don't know what criminal laws they suspect are being violated, and I don't know if they're right.

      But the point is, the concept of "pressing charges" as seen in TV and movies is bunk. You as an individual can pursue civil litigation, but the decision of whether to pursue criminal prosecution belongs to the authorities. You can tip them off, ask them to investigate, give them what information you have; and then they decide what to do, at the taxpayer's expense.

    21. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by magarity · · Score: 1

      Number of my countrymen to be killed or wounded while Clinton nailed a fat secretary: 0
       
      That means you're not from Kosovo.

    22. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Sethumme · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Intent to commit an act that is criminalized (whether you recognize that it is or not makes no difference) can be prosecuted if actual steps were taken to complete that act.
      Completing an act that is strictly outlawed by statute is a crime regardless of the intent. The risk is wholly upon the actor if they get too close to the line.

    23. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by mea37 · · Score: 1

      It seems the point you may be missing is, chatroulette doesn't want to be in that business in the first place; hence TFA.

    24. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by aradnik · · Score: 1

      and she didn't?

      seriously though, one site less doesn't solve much. it's a matter of a fucked up society and education system... (though a simple radio button asking for the chatters age might avoid some of the unpleasant meetings... in an ideal world)

    25. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      his do nothing stance

      Three words: "Wagging the dog". His stance was forced on him by Republicans who claimed he was trying to drive bad news about him out of the press every time he tried to do something about the Taliban. It IS his fault that he didn't stand up to those craven losers who put their political power plays above American security interests.

    26. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2, Funny

      So instead of a steady live stream of male genitalia pix they will be compiling an archive of genitalia pix?

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    27. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "and she didn't?"

      More like couldn't. You know, because 13 year olds don't really have boobs... get it? No? I'll just go hang myself in the closet now...

      "seriously though, one site less doesn't solve much. it's a matter of a fucked up society and education system... (though a simple radio button asking for the chatters age might avoid some of the unpleasant meetings... in an ideal world)"

      Yeah, because nobody under 18 would ever click the button that says "yes, I'm over 18." That would be lying, and kids are all totally honest about everything.

    28. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, did you just quote Grease on /.?

    29. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by noidentity · · Score: 1

      The founder of Chatroulette has announced the company has hired developers to collect IP addresses and take screenshots of those users breaking the rules.

      And then what?

      Then apparently they'll have no users. Would be simpler to just pull the plug, I think.

    30. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by hldn · · Score: 2, Funny

      the internet is for porn.

      expect to see penises around every corner.

      --
      http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    31. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      Just as I lose points for quoting it, you lose points for admitting you recognize it.

    32. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      she couldn't.....

      --
      bickerdyke
    33. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      or Oklahoma... or Waco, TX... or Ruby Ridge, ID...or that little Commie kid's closet in Florida.

    34. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      Of course, because there is no medical condition that might make that possible. (durrr)

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    35. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention it is only gonna take just one of those "offenders" to be but a single day under 18 and they are collecting CP! You know, just when you think you've reached the bottom of the barrel when it comes to stupidity, someone comes along and shows you that if you just lift up the barrel you can dig even deeper! Dumb dumb dumb.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    36. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      I'm sure all of the family and friends of the 19 men killed and 84 wounded in Mogadishu appreciate you telling them that now we don't even consider them our countrymen in addition to withdrawing and sweeping them under the rug after their mission failed.

    37. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      Must never seem US 13 year olds. My niece was considering breast reduction surgery at the ripe old age of 14. Finally got it when she was 20. They grow up quick now a days.

    38. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Thankfully, that is impossible for participants of chat roulette to do, the only thing anyone displays anything to is their computer, via webcam.

      Last I checked there was no law that you could not display yourself to a webcam, or even post it online.

      It's not your responsibility to prevent children from reaching your website or chat roulette's website, that's their parents' responsibility..

      I've yet to hear of anyone being sued for failing to prevent underage access to their porn site.

    39. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      In short, if the person was under the age of thirteen / twelve (depending on the particular law being violated), you have no defense of "I thought he/she was old enough" (yeah... right).

      Unless you're in Ireland, where this is actually a defense as criminal law assumes criminal intent. But it only works if you're a nice young man, not a dirty old codger, as confirmed by the Irish supreme court. I'm not making this up; google the "Mr. A Case".

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    40. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      And which one did we try to impeach?

      They actually impeached Clinton, there was no try.

      I -tried- to impeach Bush, but no one took me seriously. Maybe if I hadn't been drunk...

    41. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by pushf+popf · · Score: 1

      Number of my countrymen to be killed or wounded while Clinton nailed a fat secretary: 0. Number of my countrymen to be killed or wounded from the two wars started and unfinished during Bush's administration: 5,589 and rising. And which one did we try to impeach? Yeah, I kinda do miss Clinton.

      No shit.

      In any case, I think one of the perks of being president is that you should be able have all the girls you want, legally. And for some reason, I don't think there would be a shortage of volunteers willing to do the president.

      A happy president is a president who isn't wandering around the world waving his dick at foreign leaders.

      In any case, the penalty for attacking the US should be death. Not widespread war; just kill the specific assholes who attacked us. The idea of invading an entire country and expecting a good outcome is both ludicrous and outdated. We need more "ninja assassin" types and much better intelligence. Not more guns and bigger bombs

    42. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      And then what? Actually it sounds like they have already done this:

      Kind of funny... this is like trying to open up a Wiki and handing down an edict from on high about how people can write and what they can put up on the Wiki. You know.... stupid and contrary to the whole point of a medium.

      Once they have a good picture of the perpetrator, they can incorporate pictures of the person into their ass-recognition software.

      Well, i'd say ban based on face recognition; however, people never need to show their face (really) to do what the chatroulette dev doesn't want people to do

      Which is interact like they would naturally when they have anonymity and no law enforcement to bust them (as the sick person they are)

    43. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but I managed to find the Post Anonymously checkbox.

      Tongue firmly in cheek.

    44. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      And 7proxies, too.

      Well played.

    45. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Paspanique · · Score: 1

      ... What ever happened to the recognition software? Has that already fallen through? Too many false positives?

      My guess is too many people look like dicks...makes it hard to decipher!

      --
      I don't have an intelligent phone, so I need to be.
    46. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      eldavojohn, you get on my nerves a lot.

    47. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Chih · · Score: 1

      This is troll, but still funny as hell. I'd mod it underrated if I had a point :3

      --
      For best results, avoid doing stupid things.
    48. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is if you're in Arkansas or other parts of the South or Mid-west where the age of consent is as low as 14 years old ... http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm

    49. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not an american nor I ever set foot on US soil but from where I'm standing, a treacherous attack on a docked frigate doesn't negate the legacy of a president which not only managed to get the country's accounting in order but also generated a surplus in the state's budget. Speaking from a country which contracted massive dept and which has to live with a deficit that comes close to 10%, I have to say that a presidency like that sounds pretty good in my book.

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    50. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      Unless you are a popular actor (at the time) in a bar in Florida with the teenage "victims" mother also being involved.

      Then you get in trouble and mom and daughter get money.

    51. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Lythrdskynrd · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to risk being the one 'set of junk' that gets publicly outed?

    52. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i wonder when they started to do the legal action stuff....

    53. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite. There are effectively two types of laws (more actually, but this will do for our purposes). You got your strict liability laws and your other laws.

      Strict liability laws are like you just said - they cover things you're liable for, regardless of your intent. If you're acting like an idiot while you drive and screw with your radio instead of watching the road, yeah, you didn't mean to hit little Billy, but you were being reckless. You're liable.

      Generally, most other criminal offenses require two parts: mens rea and actus rea. That is, you intended to do what you did, and you actually did it. I can say I want to kill someone all I want, I can even plan it, but when I try to put it into action, that becomes a crime. Generally, you need both components. So it isn't murder when you run over Billy because you played with your radio - it isn't murder because while the actus rea was there, the mens rea was not - you did not intend to kill him. Same thing with most other offenses, and this is why generally there is an affirmative defense to these type of things - you want people who didn't intentionally do something to not get convicted, otherwise it becomes very easy to do some really horrible things to people for no good reason (like it isn't already?).

      Also, it's important to note a lot of the most obvious laws (killing, injuring, etc...) have two components: a strict liability and another law. Ie: Murder versus Manslaughter, etc. The reason for this is some of these crimes are so horrible, we want to punish them even when you didn't intend to do them but are somehow liable for them.

      It's more complex than this of course, there are liability levels, etc, etc, etc.

    54. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by TimSSG · · Score: 1

      You do remember Bill being disbarred because he lied in a sexual harassment hearing. She will likely not agree with you post. Tim S.

    55. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, here's the more important question. Is it legal for them to capture these pictures and offer them up to law enforcement?

    56. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The piano dude is the exception to the rule. For everyone doing something clever or creative on Chatroulette, there are over 9000 penises being broadcast.

    57. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And to his additional credit, he came quite closer to middle-east peace than anybody else.

    58. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      there are over 9000 penises being broadcast.

      In any other context, a grave use of a tired meme.

      Here? Probably a gross underestimate.

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    59. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by mea37 · · Score: 1

      I've noticed quite often of late, that the only people using the phrase "by that logic" are people busily engaged in twisting anothers' words to try to "prove" a nonsense point.

      Just because a lot of people do something does not necessarily mean that you cannot reasonably expect them not to. People expose themselves at St. Louis Mardis Gras all the time; yet it's still technically indecent exposure and (depending on the authorities' mood any given year) there are usually a few arrests.

      I'm not familiar enough with the wording of appilcable laws to know why they would, or wouldn't, apply to an Internet chat session. If they would, beware: in the U.S. indecent exposure can land you on the sex offender registry.

    60. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by gargeug · · Score: 1

      We could put up WANTED posters... "Have you seen this prick? Report immediately to Beulah Balbricker. Do not attempt to apprehend this prick, as it is armed and dangerous. It was last seen hanging out in the girls' locker room at Angel Beach High School." I love Porky's.

    61. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      The lowest age of consent anywhere in the US is 16, with some states providing close-age exemptions... for example, if both individuals are at least 14 and within 2 years of age to each other – e.g. 14 and 16 – it may not be a crime, or the crime may be reduced, e.g. from a felony to a misdemeanor.

      However this does not mean that the age of consent is 14 in that case because a 14-year-old still cannot legally have sex with anyone outside that strict close-age exemption, e.g. with a 17-year-old. The age of consent is the age at which a person can legally have sex with an adult (i.e. any other person who is of the age of consent).

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    62. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the two wars started during Bush's administration and still unfinished during Obama's

      FTFY. Although now that someone has cleverly leaked thousands of sensitive classified documents on wikileaks, it is entirely possible that Obama can spin his way out of the war - which he knows full well that simply packing up and leaving would be a disaster - and do it anyway claiming that there's too much risk from the leaked documents and we have to get out now (consequences be damned... but blame it on the anonymous tipster, not Obama!).

    63. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by sexconker · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      his do nothing stance

      Three words: "Wagging the dog". His stance was forced on him by Republicans who claimed he was trying to drive bad news about him out of the press every time he tried to do something about the Taliban. It IS his fault that he didn't stand up to those craven losers who put their political power plays above American security interests.

      So the President of the United States wanted to "do something about the Taliban", but was unwilling to stand up to do so for fear of political mud slinging.
      And it is the potential mudslingers that are "craven losers who put their political power plays above American security interests", and not the President?

      It seems to me the President recognized the security issues and the threat the Taliban posed.
      It seems to me the President could have done something to act in favor of our security interests.
      It seems to me the one putting political power plays above American security interests was in fact the President, who did nothing because he feared mud slinging.

      This is simply a logical reading of the "facts" you have laid out with regards to Clinton wanting to do something about the Taliban and the Republicans slinging mud whenever he tried.

    64. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      she took off her sweater, then the mask, and it was a male FBI agent. The GP post was actually written from a state penitentiary.

    65. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was no surplus. They borrowed from SS instead of issuing treasuries. It has to be paid back either way. This all while a titanic stock bubble drove massive tax receipts. We know how the stock bubble end up, yes?

    66. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by alSeen · · Score: 0, Troll

      Then you don't quite understand our system of government. The Republican congress had to ram the balanced budget down his throat.

    67. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, to be fair it must be noted that any opportunity to actually have sex - and with someone OTHER THAN HILLARY! - has to be quite a releasing moment for him. If I was married to Hillary I'd probably fire early given a chance to screw someone else, too...

    68. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nonsense. As widely reported in the press and talk radio, it was a national nightmare!

    69. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      If you're on Chatroulette, can you claim to have a reasonable expectation that you won't be exposed to?

    70. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by shentino · · Score: 1

      If he pissed off Congress badly enough they can always impeach him.

      Oh wait...

    71. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by shentino · · Score: 1

      Getting into a fight with a group of people with the power to impeach you isn't exactly a smart move.

    72. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      The right move is always the smart move. Even if it hurts.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    73. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Lying to a grand jury isn’t exactly a smart move, either.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    74. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Dishevel · · Score: 0, Troll
      First it was Clintons response to WTC that and embassy bombings that I believe encouraged the Cole attack.

      Second believe me when I tell you that I have more than enough things to slam Bush with about the shitty fucking way he ran our country.

      Third know it already.

      As for your sig. I can readily Bash Clinton, Bush and Obama for all the fucked up shit they did / are doing. I hear what is going on around me. I do not need to filter my information in order to put the blame on on side or another. You do. It is why you post anon and why you sir are a fucking idiot.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    75. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that but I give Clinton some credit for the 9/11 attacks as well with his do nothing stance on the first WTC bombings and the attack on the USS Cole.

      We are way off topic here, but you need to read Richard Clarke's book Against All Enemies. The people behind the first WTC bombing are in jail. The Cole attack happened during election season in 2000 and he waited to hand off the option to respond to the next administration.

    76. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say it changes things, but it does greatly complicate them.

      Person A is in Germany. Exposes himself to Person B in the UK over Chatroulette, hosted in the US*. Where was the crime committed? Who prosecutes? Even if it were unequivical whose jurisdiction it is, indecent exposure is typically a misdemeanor. Is anybody really going to go through the hassle and expense of charging this person? Are they going to try to extradite for it? Because I'm not sure it's even legally possible, much less likely or worthwhile.

      Person A is in South Carolina, exposes himself to Person B in Idaho over US-hosted service located in California. Woohoo! It's a US problem! Except... erp. It went over state lines, is it a federal problem? I don't think there is a federal indecency law that applies here (unless one party is a minor or something), so even if that were the case I don't think it gets anything done. Is it South Carolina's problem? Idaho's? California's?

      The simplest but rarest case: Person A exposes to B over the service. All are in California. Sweet. So now it goes to court in... shit, what county? Okay, okay, they consult their laws and decide. You're back to step one: Is it really worth the time and expense to investigate, hash out the legal issues, try and convict this person? And what do you do when there just happens to be two men living in the house the IP + ISP logs point you to, since that's as close as you can get? "Excuse me sir. I'm going to need you to pop an erection and whip out your junk so we can compare to the video."

      What happens when it does not actually constitute a crime in one of the jurisdictions? Are we really going to try to prosecute somebody for something that isn't illegal according to what they know?

      Like I said, it doesn't change things -- it's a crime (or not) either way. But it greatly complicates the procedure, possibly beyond the point where it is worth pursuing.

      * I don't know where it is actually hosted and it doesn't matter to the point I'm trying to make.

    77. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Then you don't quite understand our system of government. The Republican congress had to ram the balanced budget down his throat.

      Then you don't quite understand our system of government. The people had to ram the balanced budget down their congresscritters throats.

    78. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by mikechant · · Score: 1

      You as an individual can pursue civil litigation, but the decision of whether to pursue criminal prosecution belongs to the authorities.

      In some jurisdictions (such as the UK) individuals can bring private prosecutions, although the UK case the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) can take it over and discontinue it.

    79. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by inanet · · Score: 1

      In chatroulettes defence, I had some pretty good experiences with chatroulette, sure there are plenty of log-floggers, but a group of us sat around having a few drinks and chatting with people from all around the world and we had some great times, the biggest problem is however, the log-floggers who get in the way, to be fair we did stop using chatroulette after it became a terrible ratio, 1 penis for every 10 hits was ok, but once it got to a 50% ratio it was time to call it quits. which was a shame as it was an entertaining evening the first couple of times we used it to chat to people around the world.

      --
      "This is my Sig. there are many like it but this one is mine."
    80. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      "We've captured and saved thousands of IP addresses of alleged offenders, along with logs and screenshots which prove wrong behaviour.

      "We are initiating a conversation with enforcement agencies and we are willing to provide all the information we have."

      Are they going to press charges? Do you think that site created by a lone developer has the legal resources to do that against that many offenders? Do you really think any law enforcement agency has the resources to investigate thousands of complaints with little more than a screenshot of someone's junk and their IP address? It's the internet. Your effort is futile. What ever happened to the recognition software? Has that already fallen through? Too many false positives? Light problems?

      You missed the best part, where the presupposed that this is all "wrong behavior".

      Andrey has judged chatroulette's users and is attempting to control them through social engineering. This is like putting up a sign that says "Anonymous, please destroy me in every way conceivable."

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    81. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny thing is, the things you credit herr clinton with actually falls under the REPUBLICAN congress of the time.

    82. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, but if they expose themselves to a blind person, that's mopery.

      +10 bonus captcha: grossest

    83. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by slick7 · · Score: 1

      If he pissed off Congress badly enough they can always impeach him.

      Oh wait...

      It doesn't matter, the Pope and the head of the 13 black families have the last word, so there.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    84. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Then you don't quite understand our system of government. The Republican congress had to ram the balanced budget down his throat.

      Then you don't quite understand our system of government. The people had to ram the balanced budget down their congresscritters throats.

      Besides "beyond your grasp", your point being?
      To think that the career criminal politicians are making policy, is the most inane thing to believe. The wheeler dealers, movers and shakers, the powers behind the power direct the influence which makes governmental policy. The politicians are nothing more than the scapegoats when this whole mess comes to a grinding halt. The true power isn't even in the shadows because it's too bright. You need to look in the gutters, the deepest caverns, the really blind alleys, and it is there you will find the faintest hint of what you don't know.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    85. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've yet to log a single .gov or .mil user on CR, atleast on our end

      -Chatroulettemap

    86. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I’d prefer having a balanced budget (oh the humanity) “rammed down someone’s throat” than have a inconceivably massive debt burden rammed down all of our throats.

    87. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by Golddess · · Score: 1

      It IS his fault that he didn't stand up to those craven losers who put their political power plays above American security interests.

      I think you missed that part of GP's post.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    88. Re:And Then What Will You Do With It? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Actually it sounds like they have already done this:

      "We've captured and saved thousands of IP addresses of alleged offenders, along with logs and screenshots which prove wrong behaviour.
      "We are initiating a conversation with enforcement agencies and we are willing to provide all the information we have."

      Are they going to press charges? Do you think that site created by a lone developer has the legal resources to do that against that many offenders? Do you really think any law enforcement agency has the resources to investigate thousands of complaints with little more than a screenshot of someone's junk and their IP address?

      One case, one single solitary case, of an under-age-of-consent person signing on in $LOCALE , and then waving their dangly bits around to be captured by (I've already forgotten the service's name - SlashRoulette, or something like that?) SlashRoulette's servers, is going to have the owners, administrators etc hauled up on the old pyre of public opinion and burned at the stake as child pornographers.
      "And quite rightly," I should say as I feel our unthinking-knee-jerk-reacting overlords focus their baleful glare upon me, like the Eye of Sauron.

      Hang on - is this what was being copied in that stupid, irritating piece of shit that SlashDolt had going a few months ago. That is a staggeringly stupid idea. I mean, that is industrial grade stupidity. Who built the Beowulf cluster of lobotomised hydrocephalous abortions that thought up that one? That (the dumbBeowulf) was an idea impressive in it's technical achievement, but practically a complete waste of money, b rains (OK, not brains) and time.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. Too many dudes... by AmazinglySmooth · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    There are just too many dudes even if they have clothes on, so I stopped "playing".

    1. Re:Too many dudes... by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe if there were a lot *less* guys flashing their dicks, there would be a lot *more* women on the service.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Too many dudes... by bickerdyke · · Score: 4, Interesting

      shouldn't there simply be some kind of dickroulette for people who want to show/see them?

      Come on.... there's EVERYTHING on the internet!

      Proof: http://xkcd.com/305/

      --
      bickerdyke
    3. Re:Too many dudes... by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 3, Informative

      Go look up manroullette. It does exist.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    4. Re:Too many dudes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They actually have that already. it's called www.chatroulette.com

    5. Re:Too many dudes... by bickerdyke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I foolish I was to have thought otherwise.

      --
      bickerdyke
  3. pr0n by Speare · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So they're trying to rid the problem of flashers on Chatroulette, by capturing images? What happens when the flasher is a minor? Or even hint that some flashers are minors? Boom, easy way to get rid of Chatroulette.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:pr0n by Reilaos · · Score: 2, Funny

      Worse yet, a screenshot of one of those child-flashers winds up used in one of those "grow your penis 4 inches in a week" ads.

    2. Re:pr0n by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 1

      Well, now we all know what sites YOU've been frequenting lately.

    3. Re:pr0n by clone53421 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As long as they send it straight to the feds they’re just gathering evidence.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    4. Re:pr0n by aradnik · · Score: 0, Redundant

      is that what you call it these days?

    5. Re:pr0n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any page with AdSense?

    6. Re:pr0n by JSombra · · Score: 1

      Actually, as certain cases with teachers finding kids "sexting" have shown, the authorities don't just consider it ‘gathering evidence’ The laws are so badly written being in possession of child porn for any reason is illegal

    7. Re:pr0n by Syberz · · Score: 1

      What happens when the flasher is a minor?

      They release the Pedobear.

      --
      ~Syberz
    8. Re:pr0n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is what I do with all of the cocaine and marijuana in my trunk of my car. I'm gathering evidence.

    9. Re:pr0n by Discrete_infinity · · Score: 1

      That's where you went wrong. I always test the evidence first. I certaintly would not want to waste the time/resources of Law Enforcement with flawed evidence. Right?

      --
      Windows Haiku Chaos reigns within. Reflect, repent, and reboot. Order shall return.
    10. Re:pr0n by Threni · · Score: 1

      Lets hope it doesn't start taking screenshots when I'm logging onto my $SSL_SITE account.

  4. yeah right... by aradnik · · Score: 1

    sounds kinda odd for a site like that to do this, are they trying to scare people away? sounds like a lie to quite down complaints to me...

    1. Re:yeah right... by Dunbal · · Score: 0

      sounds kinda odd for a site like that to do this, are they trying to scare people away?

            They're probably trying to stay out of jail. Everyone knows that Chatroulette's "anonymity" is exploited to convince young girls to reveal their breasts, among other things.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:yeah right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds kinda odd for a site like that to do this, are they trying to scare people away?

            They're probably trying to stay out of jail. Everyone knows that Chatroulette's "anonymity" is exploited to convince young girls to reveal their breasts, among other things.

      So they'll just go back to stickam, which hasn't gotten shut down even though they've been allowing the same thing for years. Their moderation garbage is a joke.

  5. I misread part of the summary ... by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    as ''at the dick of a button'' -- which seems more in keeping with the story anyway!

  6. 9 proxies by jDeepbeep · · Score: 4, Funny

    I went through them. Good luck.

    --
    Reply to That ||
    1. Re:9 proxies by aradnik · · Score: 1

      but did you remove that id tag from your shirt yet? ...

    2. Re:9 proxies by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      but did you remove that id tag from your shirt yet? ...

      No but he added 8 more...

    3. Re:9 proxies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because streaming realtime video through 9 proxies works oh so well. And yes, I get the reference, it just doesn't make any sense.

    4. Re:9 proxies by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "because streaming realtime video through 9 proxies works oh so well"

      Yep, it does, considering the moment you try to connect from your computer to chatroulette you have to hop across likely 7-9 different nodes before your data gets there anyways.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  7. master-bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well this is a pretty stupid idea. Whats going to happen when they haul away billy's dad for whipping out his dick on cam, the whole while it was 13 year old billy.

    If they do end up going after these people they are going to open themselves up for slander lawsuits, which might not be a bad thing considering how out of touch the creater of the site is.

    1. Re:master-bait and switch by iamnobody2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      i thought the creator of this site was Mr Wong from Wong Burger, and it seemed like he knew what he was doing. It does take a lot of dicks to make a dickship.

      --
      nobody's perfect
    2. Re:master-bait and switch by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 1

      Whats going to happen when they haul away billy's dad for whipping out his dick on cam, the whole while it was 13 year old billy.

      Laugh at Billy's daddy's willy, that's what, and speculation on who's Billy's true biological father.

  8. Yeah, great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A little tip if you are naming a website or service, DON'T PUT ROULETTE IN THE NAME IF IT HAS RULES.

    Hypocrite.

    1. Re:Yeah, great idea by duguk · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't put roulette in the name if it has rules.

      Seriously? I've got some people to inform then...

      BRB - Gone to Las Vegas...

      Idiot.

    2. Re:Yeah, great idea by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      ... I'm actually honestly curious what the thought process behind this is.

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  9. The internet has RULES? by whoda · · Score: 1, Funny

    How come nobody told me this 15 years ago.

    1. Re:The internet has RULES? by NevarMore · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yep, and if you violate them you can be sent to cyber jail.

      http://failblog.org/2010/07/16/epic-fail-video-understanding-of-the-internet-fail-2/

    2. Re:The internet has RULES? by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Of course the internet has rules!. At least one of them is rather famous too.

    3. Re:The internet has RULES? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You done goofed.

  10. Unintended consequences by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, the law of unintended consequences sure bit them hard? I mean, who would have guessed that combining anonymity with video cameras resulted in distasteful or illegal images? You would have had to be Al Gore to see that one coming. No ordinary person would have predicted this outcome.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Unintended consequences by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      who would have guessed that combining anonymity with video cameras resulted in distasteful or illegal images? You would have had to be Al Gore to see that one coming. No ordinary person would have predicted this outcome.

      Yeah, who could have seen that one comming

      ahem... http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2005/20050314h.jpg

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    2. Re:Unintended consequences by InsertWittyNameHere · · Score: 1

      And all this time I thought the point of Chatroulette was to dick around...

    3. Re:Unintended consequences by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      They should have just named it ChatRussianRoulette, since that's what you're playing each time you connect.

  11. Flawed business model = creepy users by adosch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What did Chatroulette think was going to happen when they thought diving into the realms of social networking and adding the element of live video feed of everyone who is on there to anyone wanting to look? It's, of course, easier for an exposer or behaviorally creepy basement dweller to crawl out of their cave online than it is in public.

    ...but enough of the social network rant. I'm glad to see Chatroulette policing up their mess and trying to enforce some sort of civil 'net etiquette, but someone is going to throw the privacy flag up on this one. Let's be real here: it's a bird's eye view directly into A LOT of homes. Regardless of the intention to track IP addresses and gather screenshots, I can easily seeing this getting abused if it isn't controlled or greed doesn't rear it's ugly head into this.

    1. Re:Flawed business model = creepy users by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What did Chatroulette think was going to happen when they thought diving into the realms of social networking and adding the element of live video feed of everyone who is on there to anyone wanting to look? It's, of course, easier for an exposer or behaviorally creepy basement dweller to crawl out of their cave online than it is in public.

      Throw in the whole concept of being anonymous and you have a service that is inevitably doomed for exactly what they’ve become.

      ...but enough of the social network rant. I'm glad to see Chatroulette policing up their mess and trying to enforce some sort of civil 'net etiquette

      Utterly futile. As DNS-and-BIND sarcastically pointed out, internet anonymity combined with video cameras is a recipe for ... this. Chatroulette is not simply flawed; it is fatally flawed. It cannot be anything but what it is.

      The only way that they could even attempt to stop the crapflood is by having a large moderator group issuing IP and cookie bans immediately to offensive users... and that would be largely ineffective because most of those users probably know how to delete their cookies and reset their IP address or use a proxy while surfing.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    2. Re:Flawed business model = creepy users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wait till they annouce google has bought chatroulette. google knows what my house looks like,what i search and that appendix operation scar i had when i was 12

    3. Re:Flawed business model = creepy users by cosm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but someone is going to throw the privacy flag up on this one. Let's be real here: it's a bird's eye view directly into A LOT of homes.

      Are you kidding me? Its a bird's eye view into your home if and only if you do not control the happenings in your home. It is not Chat-roulettes responsibility to nanny everybody so that somebody doesn't see the wrong thing and become psychologically damaged. I am not condoning that, I am just saying place responsibility where it belongs. If you go to chat roulette and see some guy doing the naked-dance, well, congratulations, welcome to the internet. If your kids get on your computer and see some guys junk, does that make that guy a sex offender? Or are you responsibility for not securing your computer from accessing 'illicit' sites in the first place, and properly administering your network.

      The internet provides access to the vast majority of mankind's output, be it good, bad, illegal, disturbing, morally reprehensible, strange, intelligent, pointless, or just plain sexual. It is everything. It is information. Content. Everything. It is our modern day 'tree-of-knowledge', exposing you to the good and bad in the world. Some folks can't handle the power of the tree, and decide to monitor, filter, and penalize anything of questionable content.

      So the folks out there who want the guy flopping his junk around sued for [insert frivo suit here], nobody is forcing you to sit down on your computer, browse to chatroulette, and click that damn next button. People who trade personal responsibility for bitching and moaning will have, well, will slowly deteriorate many of the sweet things we enjoy today, all to be traded in for a nanny-net.

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    4. Re:Flawed business model = creepy users by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Utterly futile. As DNS-and-BIND sarcastically pointed out, internet anonymity combined with video cameras is a recipe for ... this. Chatroulette is not simply flawed; it is fatally flawed. It cannot be anything but what it is.

      Yes. And it's so obvious, that I wouldn't even dare call it a 'flaw'. It is SO obvious, that it might be the whole point of starting something like chatroulette.

      --
      bickerdyke
    5. Re:Flawed business model = creepy users by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Personally I think they should use their penis recognition software to just match them all together. If that's what people want to do, they can do it together without bothering the legitimate (?) users of the site.

    6. Re:Flawed business model = creepy users by amn108 · · Score: 1

      Well, a HTTP proxy anonymizer will not work with a Flash Player client (which is what CR essentially is). This is because of the Flash Media Server streaming service denying connections to any SWF (Flash Player client application file) not originating from a particular domain, most likely the domain the SWF is intended to be hosted at - chatroulette.com.

      Simpler put, it will not work at all - you will not find anybody on chatroulette.com if you use a HTTP proxy.

      SOCKS proxies will work however.

  12. Good snapshot by RenHoek · · Score: 1

    So they'll have snapshots of Kirk Johnson (aka Goatse.cx guy) showing his wares to the world? I mean why would I dangle my own privates on Chatroulette when Manycam makes it so easy to put much more interesting vista's on the screen?

    Do they still enforce their bans with easily deleted flash cookies?

  13. You dun goofed by MikeyO · · Score: 1

    Because they backtraced it. And they called the cyber police.

    1. Re:You dun goofed by beanluc · · Score: 1

      Consequences will never be the same!

      --
      Say it right: "Nuc-le-ah Powah".
  14. Cease to exist by SuperStretchy · · Score: 1

    Now I know that chatroulette is already irrelevant, but doesn't this nix 99% of its userbase?

  15. Uh oh by Wh15per · · Score: 1

    .. in othernews, the Tor network has seen a five fold increase in bandwidth traffic...

    1. Re:Uh oh by mea37 · · Score: 1

      You plan to rely on Tor to access a service that wants to know your IP address?

      I guess maybe I'm not familiar enough with Tor, but why wouldn't chatroulette just refuse traffic from the Tor exit nodes?

  16. Just rename it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to GloryHoleRoulette and then you're good to go.

  17. parent link contains NSFW banner ads by kalirion · · Score: 1

    Oops, forgot to mention NSFW banner ads.

    1. Re:parent link contains NSFW banner ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, just the banner ads are NSFW on that site (sarc mark)

    2. Re:parent link contains NSFW banner ads by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You broke an internet rule. Go to internet jail!

  18. Seems like a business plan to me by Exitar · · Score: 1

    Take screenshots & IP of people jerking on a cam, then blackmail them.

  19. CP by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    so they are going to start by collecting what is technically child pornography and do what with it?

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  20. UN laws? by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1

    We've started collecting information, such as IP addresses, logs and screen captures of offenders who actually break US/UN laws

    Really? The UN wishes that it had jurisdiction over individual behavior but that doesn't make it true.

    1. Re:UN laws? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      UN Laws as far as I can tell seem to only apply to countries, unless you are a pirate (Real, not copyright violator) or a war criminal?

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    2. Re:UN laws? by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Which is your disquiet? The UN can pass 'laws', can it not? Are you chafing at chatroulette's willful compliance, or what? I'm not seeing the panty-wrinkling here.

    3. Re:UN laws? by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1

      Which is your disquiet?

      I'm pointing out the absurdity of claiming to prosecute individuals under "UN law". Appealing to US law makes sense if the servers are located in the US or the users to be prosecuted are under US jurisdiction.

      Appealing to "UN law" makes as much sense as appealing to Nigerian law or Martian law.

    4. Re:UN laws? by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Which is your disquiet?

      I'm pointing out the absurdity of claiming to prosecute individuals under "UN law". Appealing to US law makes sense if the servers are located in the US or the users to be prosecuted are under US jurisdiction.

      Appealing to "UN law" makes as much sense as appealing to Nigerian law or Martian law.

      Indeed it does, but is it not the website's right to decide which laws they wish to respect? I mean so long as the UN, Nigeria, Mars, etc, are passing laws, who are you to say which websites follow which laws?

      It is just odd.

    5. Re:UN laws? by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1

      I mean so long as the UN, Nigeria, Mars, etc, are passing laws, who are you to say which websites follow which laws?

      That website can say whatever it wants but if someone tries to convince me that I have any obligation to follow Martian law that person will promptly told to go fuck himself.

    6. Re:UN laws? by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      I mean so long as the UN, Nigeria, Mars, etc, are passing laws, who are you to say which websites follow which laws?

      That website can say whatever it wants but if someone tries to convince me that I have any obligation to follow Martian law that person will promptly told to go fuck himself.

      But you have that backwards. If you want to use their site, you'll abide by their policies. Otherwise you're the one doing the masturbation.

  21. Chatroulette by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    A good idea crippled by human failings. Too bad. I have a hard time believing that the founders didn't think that it would serve as a platform for ugly old men to masturbate to each other though.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    1. Re:Chatroulette by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      A good idea crippled by human failings. Too bad. I have a hard time believing that the founders didn't think that it would serve as a platform for ugly old men to masturbate to each other though.

      I'm personally not offended by reproductive organs and I am quite capable of hitting "next".

      This does, however, give me the idea to set a webcam up on a planter of petunias and a desk fan.

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  22. Now it's just a matter of time ... by damn_registrars · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... until someone in a country where that doesn't matter launches an identical service and the game starts all over again.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  23. Did they actually spy on couples? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did they grab the ip-adresses and the screenshots? Have they been spying on all the users all this time, and taken screenshots of all the nastiest stuff? I mean, isn't that illegal in itself, or did they warn people that their session would be recorded and watched? For how long did they keep the screenshots of CP, before announcing that they would go to the authorities?

    I think i'll install cameras in our public restrooms to ensure no unlawful conduct or masturbation takes place, and if it does, I'll record it (and maybe go to the authorities at a later time).

    1. Re:Did they actually spy on couples? by amn108 · · Score: 1

      Flash Player initially shows a small (and ugly) dialog telling you that if you allow it to use your camera or microphone, you may be recorded.

  24. well... by thelonious · · Score: 1

    There goes my Friday nights.

  25. Can someone explain the psychological... by pongo000 · · Score: 1

    ...underpinnings that would drive a male to show his genitalia? Seriously...WTF is going through these people's minds? Do they think they're funny? Are they true predators? Are they incredibly proud of their package? I'm just trying to understand here...

    1. Re:Can someone explain the psychological... by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Obviously they just wanna see how they measure up to other males. Doing that with regular porn ain't good for your self esteem.

    2. Re:Can someone explain the psychological... by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      ...underpinnings that would drive a male to show his genitalia? Seriously...WTF is going through these people's minds? Do they think they're funny? Are they true predators? Are they incredibly proud of their package? I'm just trying to understand here...

      8====)

      I hope that clears things up for you.

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    3. Re:Can someone explain the psychological... by amn108 · · Score: 1

      I don't really know the answer to your inquiry, but I had a funny encounter once where I saw a dude in his thirties sitting in an office chair in front of his desk at home, completely naked, and of course masturbating. I then proceeded to show him the middle finger as part of the common gesture, to which he replied with a somewhat to me troubling gest - he extended his left hand (continuing his masturbation session with his right) and did an "no-no-no" with his index finger. I freaked out, partly from his apparent self-control and partly from the absurdity and boldness of this behavior. Had I met, I would probably have punched his face in, but when it was just on camera, I admit it was really freaky. The dude had some balls, pun intended. I am guessing a lot of these people aren't stupid and neither are they victims, many of them may be aggressive, territorial, offensive, brilliant, and what would amount to being "brave", albeit in a very pervert subjective way.

    4. Re:Can someone explain the psychological... by amn108 · · Score: 1

      Forgot some details - it was on chatroulette.com, the dude was seen in profile, from his left side, and after he did the "no-no-no" gesture (the kind the T-1000 did to Sarah Connor in the "Terminator: Judgement Day" film), he simply "nexted" me.

    5. Re:Can someone explain the psychological... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be very easily trolled.

    6. Re:Can someone explain the psychological... by amn108 · · Score: 1

      If you assume that the story is true, then yes that would appear so. But it doesn't have to be true...

  26. chatroulette espionage by magro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You might not be aware of this but any user can collect IP addresses and record ENTIRE video footage from random chatroulette users. I explained how in my blog http://fernandomagro.com/security/chatroulette-espionage/ . Anyway the concept is really simple because an attacker can open an even number of connections to chatroulette (2,4,6,etc) and then redirect the streams to each other. Say, I open connection1 and connection2 then I capture stream from connection2 and dump it as my primary webcam to connection1 and I capture connection1 and dump it as my secondary webcam to connection2. Only a tiny bit of linux hacking is needed.

    1. Re:chatroulette espionage by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      It’s already trivially easy to use a screen recorder to capture video from those sort of sites. Plus, cam-to-cam has typically come with the caveat that your IP address can be known to your chat partner... I think it was MSN or AIM that used to warn of this when enabling your webcam? Unless they’re streaming everyone’s feed through their servers – which they don’t want to do – your computers will connect directly, and you can see the IP address of the other person listed in your active connections using netstat in the Windows command prompt.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    2. Re:chatroulette espionage by magro · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that too! The problem is not capturing the streams because that can be done like you said with screen recording or even webcam recording, the most difficult part is injecting a stream as if it were your webcam and then synchronizing the streams so that when you're "nexted" you immediately find another chatroulette user so it seems transparent to the users being eavesdropped. Anyway, you're absolutely right, chatroulette is not private at all.

  27. But if they throw out the penis-showers... by fishexe · · Score: 1

    ...aren't they ridding themselves of their core audience? At this point, who else is left?

    --
    "I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
  28. More like by fishexe · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...terrible idea made hilarious by human failings. Who really wants to sit around talking to strangers knowing they will probably just hit Next right when you're starting to get interested? It's like it was made for the hopelessly desperate. The inclusion of penises is what makes the whole thing worthwhile, because now the rest of us get to hear about how the optimistic early-adopters got punked by the horndogs.

    --
    "I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
    1. Re:More like by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      "Who really wants to sit around talking to strangers knowing they will probably just hit Next right when you're starting to get interested?"

      Another satisfied Chatroulette user?

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  29. The site then- by MintOreo · · Score: 1

    The site then automatically uploads the photos (with just the bare minimum blur to not get a takedown) to facebook and tags you, and then tags your genitals. And then friends your friends.

  30. Irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is irrelevant and stupid. Chatroulette just added sex.chatroulette.com. It's the most popular channel, followed by one with a title that I forget, but it's something along the lines of "dicks.chatroulette.com" They are the two most popular channels. In fact, regular chatroulette went down to something like 30-something users, while these two both had hundreds. The only reason that I can't look it up at the moment is because they took the channel listing down.

    So much for mainstream, chatroulette. The only reason that you were interesting is because you're quirky. That doesn't work in the mainstream. You will never, ever, ever build a userbase by scaring your users. It would be better to just retain the current timeout system and prompt them with a link to sex.chatroulette.com.

    1. Re:Irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually channels were/are user created (other than the location channels) and I'd never seen a case where chatroulette 'prime' had less users than all the channels put together, let alone any individual channel, but good points otherwise...

  31. Hey! >:-( by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    "Chatroulette, the strangely addictive online game in which users are connected via webcam and microphone to random strangers at the click of a button, has had enough of users exposing themselves to the unsuspecting public"

    WTF! Why did nobody tell me this thing existed!!?!?!? >:-(

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  32. developers to collect screenshots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't know that was in the developer job description

  33. Silly response by vanyel · · Score: 1

    If the people who got offended would laugh at the idiots who pull stunts like that, the problem would probably be self correcting...

    1. Re:Silly response by axl917 · · Score: 1

      I laugh at the dick-wavers all the time, or hold up my thumb and index finger to the webcam about a half-inch apart, indicating that the size of their package is a bit lacking. When they stop masturbating for a moment and fumble around for the mouse or keyboard, it's time to "next". But it got em out of their, er, rhythm, so mission accomplished.

    2. Re:Silly response by nicenemo · · Score: 1

      Just recently discovered this and Omegle with video. I do something similar by showing a collage of photos of Condoleza Rice, George Bush and Leonardo di Caprio making a similar gesture. Besides that I have a big nose. Putting the camera under it, showing inside my nose also makes them stop and gives "normal" people something to laugh at. At least it is interesting to see facial expresssions on both visual stimuli ;)

  34. Tragedy by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 1

    So the tragedy of the commons. It's good if you do it. It's bad if everybody does it. :)

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu
  35. ok so in using the screenshot.... by boniggy · · Score: 1

    are they going to show up at the guys house and ask to compare junk's? lol knock knock knock... "sir you were screen-snapped for showing your crank on the net... we need you to drop trou so we can compare your crank to the offenders crank." Hate to have that job

  36. Really? by myrmidon666 · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many people know of Chatroulette just because of the random genitalia flashing? Personally, I had no clue something with this much potential to be funny existed until I saw it on failblog. They should pay the penis-flashers for their beneficial service to the site.

    --
    *Process is Irrelevant, Progress is Paramount*
  37. Good luck with that. by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

    "The founder of Chatroulette has announced the company has hired developers to collect IP addresses and take screenshots of those users breaking the rules."
     
    ... And? What? Have their ISP forward a letter to them asking them to please censor themselves? It's not a public display, users know full well what they may be stepping into before they choose to connect. Sorry, Chatroulette, tough titty. You've opened Pandora's box, don't start blaming the supposed problem on what comes out of it.

    --
    "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  38. How about 14-19 by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    http://blog.laborlawtalk.com/2006/11/09/hawaii-age-of-consent-laws/

    one example
    "The age of consent is the age at which an individual may legally consent to sexual acts, of either a heterosexual or a homosexual nature. The age of consent for heterosexual sex in Hawaii is 16 for both men and women. Someone who is 14 may consent to sex in Hawaii with an individual who is no more than 19. There is no age of consent for sex between two women or two men, since the U.S. Supreme court has overturned the Hawaiian law."

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  39. Just what the internet needs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more pictures of dicks.

    I'm surprised apple didn't invent this because this... will. change. everything.

  40. One word by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    Exhibitionism

    And that exists for way longer than chatroulette!

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..