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."

Comments

And Then What Will You Do With It?

[eldavojohn]

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?

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Chrisq]

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?

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[drinkypoo]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[clone53421]

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).

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[ZeroExistenZ]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[gazbo]

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?

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[sunking2]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[YrWrstNtmr]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Nadaka]

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

Unintentional violation of the law is still violation.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Richard_at_work]

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?

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[TaoPhoenix]

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".

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Vectormatic]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Drakkenmensch]

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!!!

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[egcagrac0]

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. "

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[clone53421]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[duguk]

"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...

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[mea37]

"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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[magarity]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Sethumme]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[mea37]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[aradnik]

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)

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Hoi Polloi]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[noidentity]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[hldn]

the internet is for porn.

expect to see penises around every corner.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[egcagrac0]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[bickerdyke]

she couldn't.....

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[bsDaemon]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[ElectricTurtle]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[hairyfeet]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[kevinNCSU]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[stonewallred]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[mysidia]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

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".

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[interkin3tic]

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...

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[pushf popf]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[mysidia]

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)

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[egcagrac0]

And 7proxies, too.

Well played.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Paspanique]

... 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!

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Chih]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[GreatBunzinni]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[kwbauer]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Lythrdskynrd]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[TimSSG]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[twidarkling]

there are over 9000 penises being broadcast.

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

Here? Probably a gross underestimate.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[mea37]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[gargeug]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[clone53421]

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).

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[roman_mir]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Chowderbags]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[shentino]

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

Oh wait...

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[shentino]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Dishevel]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[clone53421]

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

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Dhalka226]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Culture20]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[mikechant]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[inanet]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Aphoxema]

"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."

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[slick7]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[slick7]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[Golddess]

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.

Re:And Then What Will You Do With It?

[RockDoctor]

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.

Too many dudes...

[AmazinglySmooth]

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

Re:Too many dudes...

[elrous0]

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

Re:Too many dudes...

[bickerdyke]

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/

Re:Too many dudes...

[ElectricTurtle]

Go look up manroullette. It does exist.

Re:Too many dudes...

[bickerdyke]

I foolish I was to have thought otherwise.

pr0n

[Speare]

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.

Re:pr0n

[Reilaos]

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.

Re:pr0n

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

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

Re:pr0n

[clone53421]

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

Re:pr0n

[JSombra]

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

Re:pr0n

[Syberz]

What happens when the flasher is a minor?

They release the Pedobear.

Re:pr0n

[Discrete_infinity]

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?

Re:pr0n

[Threni]

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

yeah right...

[aradnik]

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...

I misread part of the summary ...

[Alain Williams]

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

9 proxies

[jDeepbeep]

I went through them. Good luck.

Re:9 proxies

[aradnik]

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

Re:9 proxies

[ae1294]

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

No but he added 8 more...

Re:9 proxies

[Khyber]

"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.

The internet has RULES?

[whoda]

How come nobody told me this 15 years ago.

Re:The internet has RULES?

[NevarMore]

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/

Re:The internet has RULES?

[kalirion]

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

Unintended consequences

[DNS-and-BIND]

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.

Re:Unintended consequences

[Vectormatic]

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

Re:Unintended consequences

[InsertWittyNameHere]

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

Re:Unintended consequences

[Anne_Nonymous]

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

Flawed business model = creepy users

[adosch]

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.

Re:Flawed business model = creepy users

[clone53421]

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.

Re:Flawed business model = creepy users

[cosm]

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.

Re:Flawed business model = creepy users

[bickerdyke]

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.

Re:Flawed business model = creepy users

[Ksevio]

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.

Re:Flawed business model = creepy users

[amn108]

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.

Good snapshot

[RenHoek]

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?

You dun goofed

[MikeyO]

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

Re:You dun goofed

[beanluc]

Consequences will never be the same!

Cease to exist

[SuperStretchy]

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

Uh oh

[Wh15per]

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

Re:Uh oh

[mea37]

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?

Re:Yeah, great idea

[duguk]

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.

parent link contains NSFW banner ads

[kalirion]

Oops, forgot to mention NSFW banner ads.

Re:parent link contains NSFW banner ads

[mcgrew]

You broke an internet rule. Go to internet jail!

Seems like a business plan to me

[Exitar]

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

CP

[Lehk228]

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

UN laws?

[Wonko the Sane]

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.

Re:UN laws?

[JasterBobaMereel]

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?

Re:UN laws?

[BobMcD]

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.

Re:UN laws?

[Wonko the Sane]

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.

Re:UN laws?

[BobMcD]

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.

Re:UN laws?

[Wonko the Sane]

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.

Re:UN laws?

[BobMcD]

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.

Chatroulette

[interval1066]

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.

Re:Chatroulette

[Aphoxema]

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.

Now it's just a matter of time ...

[damn_registrars]

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

well...

[thelonious]

There goes my Friday nights.

Re:master-bait and switch

[iamnobody2]

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.

Can someone explain the psychological...

[pongo000]

...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...

Re:Can someone explain the psychological...

[kalirion]

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

Re:Can someone explain the psychological...

[Aphoxema]

...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.

Re:Can someone explain the psychological...

[amn108]

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.

Re:Can someone explain the psychological...

[amn108]

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.

Re:Can someone explain the psychological...

[amn108]

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

chatroulette espionage

[magro]

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.

Re:chatroulette espionage

[clone53421]

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.

Re:chatroulette espionage

[magro]

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.

But if they throw out the penis-showers...

[fishexe]

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

More like

[fishexe]

...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.

Re:More like

[interval1066]

"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?

Re:master-bait and switch

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

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.

The site then-

[MintOreo]

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.

Hey! >:-(

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

"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!!?!?!? >:-(

Silly response

[vanyel]

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

Re:Silly response

[axl917]

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.

Re:Silly response

[nicenemo]

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 ;)

Re:Yeah, great idea

[twidarkling]

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

Tragedy

[Pseudonymus Bosch]

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

ok so in using the screenshot....

[boniggy]

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

Really?

[myrmidon666]

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.

Good luck with that.

[Aphoxema]

"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.

How about 14-19

[way2trivial]

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."

Re:Did they actually spy on couples?

[amn108]

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.

One word

[freaker_TuC]

Exhibitionism

And that exists for way longer than chatroulette!