Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Hackers Take Down Child Porn Websites
chrb writes "According to Security News Daily, Anonymous has taken down more than 40 darknet-based child porn websites over the last week. Details of some of the hacks have been released via pastebin #OpDarknet, including personal details of some users of a site named 'Lolita City,' and DDoS tools that target Hidden Wiki and Freedom Hosting — alleged to be two of the biggest darknet sites hosting child porn."
So vigilance actions are ok now?
I don't support them, but I sure as well don't support people who take it to their own hands to commit crimes like viruses and DDOS just because other people did wrong. They all should be taken to jail.
Wow- maybe they can do something good, afterall! Hmm... wait, my brain is going to explode now. Moral........compass...........is............frelled . . . .
Losers trolling losers. It's like a battle of retards, except.. Well, it's just a battle of retards.
I mean, who wouldn't use false credentials if they were into that sorta thing? Someone is gonna get wrapped up in a lynching who doesn't have the foggiest idea as to why, watch. It's a PR stunt to try to make Anon look like more than a group of petty thugs, as if their ideals deserved attention or merit. Frankly, they can all DIAF.
Now the next step is to use their members' emails to find their facebook accounts and out them there. Could be a fun couple of weeks.
Anonymous seem to have found their calling in life .. perfect fit really
The quality of the journalists for Tabloids will be tested with this one, how will they manage to spin this into saying it was an awful tragedy and no one thinks of the children? Assuming they don't just say hacking causes cancer, or something.
Well, so they took down those "porn" websites, but one has to ask, why the authorities have done nothing, preferring to sit on their backsides? Politicians or police using such sites and they want to cover it up?
Take Nobody's Word For It.
Normal rules don't apply, good on them I say.
It is likely that there are many more child pornography hidden services out there, that are not publicly listed. The hidden services architecture makes it difficult to say how many hidden services there are, and I doubt that the worst child porn websites are keen on being publicly listed.
Palm trees and 8
...to report that these child porn sites were taken down.
How are we even going to know whether or not this is true? Nobody in their right mind would try to verify whether those sites were taken down or not, and even if they did, they sure wouldn't talk about it publicly, what with the risk of the cops showing up just for visiting those sites. Anonymous can pretty much say whatever they want about this with impunity.
>I mean isn't anonymous pretty widely recognized as being associated with the child porn website 4chan?
Yes, in the same way that Princeton University is widely recognized as being associated with The Jersey Shore.
Get off my lawn.
Oh no. They hate the bastards. CP'ers DO use 4chan, but only to be met with a hailstorm of shit. They even got a guy a while ago, got his details and put the cops on his arse. So this I guess is a continuation on that theme of internet vigilante-ism. Hell, Pedo bear was created to MOCK CP'ers. 4chan and anon is responsible for a lot of things, good and bad, but CP is not one of them. I am not a channer by the way; I'm just sayin'.
I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
So they're tackling the only issue about which there is absolutely no debate, just like cable news anchors. Does Anonymous have a PR department now, improving their image?
Always someone has power over you. The thing to consider is this: Is the power good, or bad?
cp is now forbidden on 4chan and gets reported
And in other news today : Anonymous hack Anonymous into oblivion for their illegal hacking activities.
I mean isn't anonymous pretty widely recognized as being associated with the child porn website 4chan?
People are always laying blame on hackers for anything they disagree with. Don't believe everything you hear. Look only at what they DO, not rumours that are likely spread by people who want you to think all hackers are evil.
4chan is a anarchistic website with occasional posts from people who seem to be into CP...
i once posted my pamphlet on 4chan how we need to kill all Christians after the molestation cases in the christian church and was banned for an hour... so maybe there are many CP people on 4chan.. :O
http://www.vatican.va/
still up
Child porn people are one of those groups I just can't bring myself to feel sorry for. If Anonymous wants to lay the beat down on their ass I hope the cops let it slide. I know it's not just or legal, and it only encourages them, but this time I just don't care.
If someone told me a child molester died in a tragic car accident, you can bet I would dispute the word 'tragic'.
I've never killed a man, but I've read many an obituary with a great deal of satisfaction.
~Mark Twain
This tactic could work if it they relentlessly keep doing it and gets it publicized. Fighting pedophiles is tried and true way to win support for almost anything.
Next time some politician attack Anonymous:
- Oh you are attacking Anonymous?
- How come you, they are protecting our CHILDREN!
You know the vast majority of pedophiles were also abused as children, right?
That does not, and will never, excuse them doing the same, or taking delight or being aroused at it happening to others. Now go fuck yourself with barbed wire.
freakin champions !
Obvious troll is obvious.
Wah! The child-raper is a victim.
Fuck that. Child-rapers, while *perhaps* having been victimized as children, still had a choice as adults. They chose wrong.
"This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
I'm not sure why people are surprised. The general collective has always seemed to have a conscience. Their tactics may be illegal but they generally push forward a righteous agenda. Protesting rigged Iranian elections, exposing BofA corruption, defending WikiLeaks and in general defending free speech. I'm not saying they are saints or that they are justified in their actions, just that this fits their m.o.
I'm not sure how you justify the Sony attacks but I'm sure it had something to do with corporate greed and perceived threats to free speech.
So are you saying it is better to let the cycle continue and not stop the pedophile? I hope not.
Or maybe they're just not into advocating genocide.
Facebook is the new AOL
Well, I guess you could say in some mixed up way they are doing "some" good. I don't like the idea of it being taken down unless it is a lawful order, but these sites are just plain wrong.
So the solution is to abuse more children to make child porn to placate them? That's a pretty fuckin odd argument.
Facebook is the new AOL
Wow, calling the whole of Anonymous paedos whilst not posting as AC?
That could best be described as "unwise".
Like "poking a hornets' nest with a stick" levels of unwise.
It must be comforting to have such a limited mind as TechLA. The law is the law and it has to be obeyed at all costs (although I am willing to bet TechLA has a large number of traffic tickets and other stuff where he considered the law not to apply to him).
In the real world where there are many shades of gray the difference between hooliganism, vigilantism, rebellion and terrorism are often blurred. Many a freedom fighter has been called a terrorist. Often by the same side in their own life time.
Anonymous is upsetting the status quo, they are doing things others rather wish they didn't do. It depends on your own allegiance to those "others" what you think of Anonymous. OR on your desire to have the status quo continue uninterrupted because you don't want your boat rocked.
GODWIN ALERT.
Ich habe es nicht gewust (to any Germans wanting to complain about the spelling, remember, you lost) is not just uttered by Nazi's and their symphatizers who don't have the guts to stand up for what they believe. It is used by those that chose to look the other way. None so blind as those that don't want to see.
A while back there was a lot to do about a surveillance camera showing a toddler in China being hit by a car and left injured on the ground by an endless stream of passerby's and even driving over by another car. What kind of person could possible do that? Is it a chinese thing? No. All these people were people like TechLA. People that didn't want their little lives interrupted for even one second. It is not even that they are evil through actions, they probably comforting their empty souls with the thought, "Somebody else will fix it." I am not doing anything but surely someone else will so that is okay then.
All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing... TechLA is not a good man, he is a moral vacuum. While the real world has many greys that doesn't mean you can comfortable color yourself gray and say "Ich have es nicht gewust".
Anon has taken it upon itself to fight things it thinks it is wrong. Are they greenpeace? Slave liberators? Nazi-hunters? Or are they moral commitees? Witch-hunters? Free slave hunters? Are they jews fighting for their own homeland or palestinians fighting for their own? Is what they are fighting for good or bad? Depending on what you call it you make the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist.
Anon is in this instance fighting child porn producers (this is no "harmless" p2p users, the attacked forum users tend to exchange self made child porn). It is for me very hard to therefor not call Anonymous in this instance Freedom fighters.
TechLA either think childporn is good OR he just doesn't want to deal with the hassle of people fighting for a good cause. Either way, he is a morally reprehensible person. You can think differently but ask yourself WHY anon's action are really upsetting you so much.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
We need to control these people, but assuming their brains are physiologically capable of making that choice just makes people want to punish them pointlessly.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Most of the graduates from Princeton that I've met are just like the cast of Jersey Shore.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
4chan is hardly a child-porn website. Just that if you allow anonymous image postings, the child porn trolls soon follow. You might as well call Slashdot the GNAA hideout. Or a libertarian website.
Anontalk is a "splinter" group that does heavily favor free speech, totally unrestricted free speech... trouble is that there really isn't that much to speak about in the west except endless silly conspiracies. The only really censored type of speech is related to child porn. So... what do you? Either you have free speech and child porn is part of it, or you don't. Yahoo by the way hosts far more child porn, depending on what you call child porn? Does the art of David Hamilton qualify? It does for some.
Any posted child porn is quickly removed of 4chan but the nature of a public board is that the users really create the content. 4chan has a board for beautifull women. It USED to be mostly asian models because 4chan is a copy of the japanese 2chan board. But over time more and more people used it who had an almost insane hatred of anything non-white. Now the board is filled with "amateur" (read to ugly to be paid) western women. Users deciding content.
So is 4chan about porn then?
If you consider lolcats porn, then yes. 4chan is better known for endless lolcats then child porn which frankly in quite a few years of occasional use I have only seen in the form of deleted posts. Then again, I never ventured into /b/
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Then 1589 Anonymous Pedobears will go to jail.
Insane much? Child porn is now a right if you have been abused?
Even a UN human rights advocate wouldn't go that far... yet.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Call me what you will... but is this _really_ good news??
I mean, I'm all for dancing on child rapist's graves and stuff... but most people here are inteligent enough to see how Child Porn has (and still is, look at recent blackbox article) being used to pretty much justify anything normally unacceptable.
Here, we are seeing a group of hackers who may or may not have good intentions doing just the same... it's nothing short of social and political Karma whoring at its worst, sending messages suggesting that perhaps a vigilante society would be acceptable... or even good!
I am more than a little worried.
..., still had a choice as adults. They chose wrong.
I'm not sure if those people really have a choice.
It seems you can't choose your sexual urges.
At least I can't choose to not get a boner if a beautiful woman undresses in front of me.
Perhaps instead of demonizing those people we should offer them help to control their urges before they really produce more victims.
"we are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."
we use to do this back in the late 90s. no one ever calls the fuzz to say their child porn site was hacked so it provided a good testing ground for intrusion skills. we always made sure any membership data was sent to the feds and to cps.
What Anonymous does is wrong no matter who they are attacking. They are trying to gain support for their group by attacking something that is considered wrong by 99% of the people. Who appointed them to be the moral compass of the Internet? No one did! On the other hand why aren't the law enforcement organizations of the world not taking out these known exploiters of children?
Maybe we like punishing them because we're sadistic bastards ourselves and find child pornographers a conveniently defenseless target we can abuse freely.
After all, who would dare defend them?
Some say aggression is a basic need, and if it is why not go after creeps that nobody likes anyway?
The solution is to euthanize children who have been abused. That should eventually put a pretty big dent in the child abusing population.
It's important to remember that just because Anonymous takes responsibility for something, it in no way means it's the same collective of individuals responsible for some other action under the name. That's both the advantage and disadvantage to using that umbrella to cover your actions. There was just a news story the other day of Anonymous hacking another police station. Can people find justification for that nearly as easily as shutting down child porn? What stops a judge from charging an individual with every crime ever done under the Anonymous name even if they were only personally responsible for a petty one? And let's not forget that parts of Anonymous are involved in child porn themselves, whether that's 5-year-old girls or "jailbait."
Anyway, the question though is how do police deal with this information, and how does a lawyer prevent it from being thrown out of court due to its questionable origin?
They're not "supposed to be" anything. In fact, if you try and put them in a box, a certain subset will go out and do the opposite just to demonstrate that you can't, in fact, predict their actions.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
"Members of the Anonymous hacktivist movement are claiming responsibility for taking down more than 40 secret child-pornography websites and leaking the names of more than 1,500 members of one of the illegal sites."
Free Martian Whores!
Guy/s, Do you have any plans for Distributed Daycare online Services yet? . ...Also, I'm not insinuating anything here - but something about J. Bieber just doesn't seem right. You may want to look into that as well...just a hunch. I mean, it could be an innocent infant stuffed into a large plastic doll, and if so, it must be saved immediately. Sincerely, Anonymous
Laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made. - Otto von Bismarck
I think it is Booz Allen Hamilton, the defence contractor that they attacked. They will have co-opted 'anonymous' as part of their cyber war nonsense.
A DDOS, if properly executed, is the digital equivalent of a sit-in. If the machines used were hacked however, it's a lot harder to justify. But if you run a public server, and the public decides to all use the server at the same time, it's hard to classify that as vigilantism.
Really? Seriously? Dude...if it is illegal for a single person to take down a website, what kind of perverted logic makes it legal for a mob to take it down? Your sit-in analogy fails -- a sit-in is just another mob, in the eyes of the law. It is not legal for a mob to do anything that is not legal for an individual to do. More to the point, the organizers of a sit-in can be charged with conspiracy, incitement, mayhem, creating a public nuisance, vandalism, and in my great State of Arizona, even murder, if it turns violent and somebody dies -- even if they were nowhere near the actual event. A DDOS, or digital sit-in if you prefer, would be treated in the exact same way by the legal system here; I'm certain it would be no different in your jurisdiction. I suggest you keep that in mind if you are ever tempted to do something illegal simply because a bunch of other people are going to be doing it with you.
*sigh*
Mod me redundant and the parent -1, ignorant (overrated will do). They already released the names as an AC sitting at -1 already said.
Free Martian Whores!
Vigilante action is frowned upon for a reason, but frankly this grassroots approach is far preferrable to the filtering shit being discussed in politics.
It draws public interest rather than stifling it, and therefore is harder to abuse than a filtering tool in the hands of a corrupt bureaucracy ("hey, subversive political speech is basically the same thing child porn, isn't it?"). It is also more effective than filtering (which doesn't affect darknets at all). Finally, it actually goes after the people making money from this, instead of inconveniencing a segment of their customers and hoping their revenue is slightly reduced.
perverted-justice.com has been taking down pedophiles online for years, and doing it legally.
Advice: on VPS providers
So vigilance actions are ok now?
Absolutely not. We should find these vigilantes and subject them to a full measure of justice-- right after we toss all those wall street fucktards and bastard bankers in the clink for tanking our economy. Oh, and the same for Bush and his scummy neocon buddies for starting two wars, spending this country into oblivion, torturing people with impunity, tarnishing our nation's reputation and mispronouncing the word NUCLEAR! Oh, and toss out all those lazy do-nothing scumbags in Congress, and light a fire under our "Yes we can" (but maybe not today) President in the White House... Vigilantism should absolutely not be tolerated in our society, but neither should child-porn, greedy corporate assholes, who jeopardize all our livelihoods and savings for the future, crony capitalism, corrupt politicians-- oh, and throw in litterbugs, jaywalkers and people spitting on the sidewalk. After we've taken care of all of that stuff, preferably in that order, THEN we can go after the Anonymous vigilantes for taking down child porn web sites.
1. Did they download any of the pictures to their hard disks? If so then they might be expecting a jail term themselves. Time to scrub your hard disks guys, just in case.
2. Anonymous is a, hmm there is no better word, "child of *Chan". With the number of paedo, Yaoi, Hentai and anime boards there... they are going after their own kind.
Not really. I've seen CP threads there that lasted for HOURS.
Anonymous is that which is most primal. They may fap to the pictures, but they object to the abuse itself. Purveyors of those deepweb sites made NEW content, much of it HORRIFYING. Those people deserve the worst thing that can ever happen to a man, whatever that may be.
To be honest, the ban on CP doesn't really make much sense to me. It should be the PRODUCTION that is banned. Guro pictures aren't going to make people run out and slice people up, so why would CP make people run out and rape every midget in sight? It's like trying to deny the problem, and then locking up people for being what they are in a way that doesn't really hurt anyone. Indeed, Japan, with it's truly vast array of child erotica, which until fairly recently included legal CP, has among the lowest sexual assault rates on children (and in general, with most people with such tendencies keeping those urges under control with their respective forms of pornography).
Posting anonymous due to highly unpopular opinions in a country that no longer tolerates dissent.
...when I can counter you "attacking criminal companies' that law can't reach is evil!" idiots wanting to take down Anonymous (which is just as much nonsense as saying you want to take down "people that are angry") with: But think of the children!
Now what? ^^
Oh, and I've got another one for "libertarians":
100% free market = zero rules limiting the market
zero rules = no laws
no laws = law of the junge
law of the jungle = the strongest man wins
the strongest man wins | law of the jungle = opposite of democracy
HENCE: free market = opposite of democracy
BAM! QED, motherfuckers! :D
Your point is that whatever is popular will not be attacked ?
That's great and all, but we've all been on a high school playground, and we all know where "unpopular = bad" leads to. Let's NOT go there, shall we ?
The Hidden Wiki, one of "the biggest darknet sites hosting child porn"? Seriously? .onion site anyone using TOR visits, so probably a fat target with lots of views and some recognition value in the media. While it does sort of points towards some other sites that host less-than-legal content, I would have described it as one of the cleaner, more trustworthy sites in the darknet.
More like the first
How is looking at a picture abusing a child? You might want to start persecuting the users of sites like Ogrish.com for murder, douche.
So, the enemy of my enemy is my friend? If I had to choose between the hacker and someone that vile, I think the hacker would win every time.
---- Please be nice in case my Slashdot karma ~= my real life karma.
4chan, the home of child pornographers all over the world, has amassed a wing of itself that is all for taking down other child pornographers. I guess as long as it's not THEM being taken down that's okay then.
Seriously, Anon is not news. Anon is a bunch of whiny teens in their parent's basements that need to be locked up and taught a lesson. Period.,
Well, if a subset does the opposite thing said about them, well then their actions are pretty good to predicted beforehand !?
Oh they will release names alright. Only the names will come from a special preformed list of politicians and lobbyist. Try to fight off allegations of pedophilia to which no evidence was presented.
For pointing out the abilities of tor to every pedophile who hadn't known about it.
(now they all know)
It's the mark of a good troll I suppose, doing just enough to improve their 'karma' in the public's image so news about them stays fresh. The public isn't 100% decided on them if this hits the mainstream news, I guarantee it. Since really they seem to want attention--anonymously?
I think the idea is that making consumption illegal (not to mention highly stigmatized) increases the "barrier to entry." There are people who do not seek out CP, who would if it were legal (just like there are people who don't smoke weed, but would if it were legal).
Fewer people consuming means less money to be made. Less money means less incentive for production. This is of course assuming there is money to be made... I honestly don't know. It could be that the whole "CP system" runs on reputation or something, like the hacking scene, but either way the point remains the same: fewer eyeballs = less currency = less incentive for production.
Looking at it another way, consuming CP does indirectly cause CP to be produced, so people who download it are contributing to its creation. I'm not sure I entirely agree with this particular point being sufficient to make it illegal, but I'm also not a lawyer or a parent.
I look at the comments and I feel like I am at a NAMBLA convention
"think of the children" is just dumb useless hysteria, right?
you keep believing that
what i see is the reproductive imperative at work: not the social desire, but the biological need to produce healthy children. anything that is a threat to that basically means a threat to the continuation of your genes. therefore, yes, simple possession of pictures of children in sexually suggestive ways is pretty much an atavistic, primal declaration of war on the integrity of the reproduction of homo sapiens. sexual contact with children damages their psychological development in terms of self-image, identity, self-esteem, etc: weakening their ability to successfully pass on their parents' genes when they are adults
so wax and wane philosophical about free rights and liberties and fascism and hysteria, blah blah blah... zzz
your high and noble principles just ran into a buzzsaw: sexualizing children basically means going to war with the forces of evolution
the urge to protect children is primal, savage, rooted at a spot as deep as the need for food and shelter. there's a reason even in prison otherwise amoral impulse driven convicts will happily beat a pedophile to death: the opposition to the sexualization of children is something rooted so deeply in our biological makeup that no rationalization of yours will ever root around them
even just possession of pictures puts you at war with human society not on the grounds of abstract legal principles, but on the grounds of innate biological drive. and you're going to lose, either at the end of the parent's gun, in the courtroom, or at the end of a broom handle in prison
so any of you out there in possession of child porn and who thinks it harmless and everything is just hysteria: i strongly advise you to get rid of it, and do whatever the hell you can possibly do to get rid of this desire of yours to see children in a sexual manner
it will not end well for you otherwise. your compulsion is at war with the reproductive imperative, and you're not going to win
oh and ps: just possessing pictures of children (not teenagers who are physically mature) is indeed harmful: it gets produced somewhere. your possession and desire for that product is called demand. demand invokes supply. it is a simple economic formula, whether real money is involved or not. go ahead and try to argue around that all you want
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
so their bringing down 4chan after hours too?
After erasing their own names and adding a few of their enemies' to it?
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
What is not surprising at all but most entertaining, is that the CP kingpin says that many of the users of his sites are at the highest positions of government, the corporate world and the church. Including a quote about some Goldman Sachs exec who is willing to "hire some more thugs to bust up OWS" (anon seems to be aligning itself with OWS).
Also that the site allows payment in bitcoins.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
They are attacking the ONLY way that many people in places like China, Korea, Iran, Iraq, and other Totalitarian based governments can access the outside and get the information out. I see all of this as an attack on Freedom - yes, there are dark sides to such an endeavor and Dictators always try to put their actions in the best light. But there is always a dark side to everything - in their goal to remove one set of Vermin, they open a pathway of destruction to Freedom and open access...
These are just another example of "useful idiots" much like the OWS crowd who do not understand the ramifications of their actions...
> Details of some of the hacks have been released via pastebin #OpDarknet, including personal details of some users ... including such illustrious public figures as "Heywood J. Ablome" and "Mike Hunt".
WTF, though... seriously. The potential for someone's name (perhaps a boss' name) to go on to search engines forever as associated with child porn, because some perv used it for this website is scary.
They are vigilantes, attacking stuff they don't like. Sony, child porn, people putting cats in recycling bins... Due to the sites being on darknets these attacks are probably less risky for them than attacking a normal web site would be, and it isn't like the site owners can complain to the police.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Wait, I'm confused...
So are Anonymous good guys or bad guys then?
Or are they just playing those who are easy to deceive?
Not to mention one would be a complete dumbass to use their real name.
I wonder how many Barak.Obama99 and George.Bush99 (or your country leaders) are logins?
How many stolen credit cards are logins?
Hopefully they are not releasing the names of people victims of identity theft thereby adding more to their woes...
ObClassicSimpsons:
Bob: You wanted to be Krusty's sidekick since you were five! What
about the buffoon lessons, the four years at clown college?
Cecil: I'll thank you not to refer to Princeton that way.
-- "The Brother From Another Series"
Get off my lawn.
Looking at some of the comments, it seems that a few people don't seem to get Anonymous. Anonymous isn't a group, really - they don't have a common agenda, they don't have common opinions or necessarily common skills. Rather, Anonymous is a label people have claimed and since it seems to be a similar type of person each time (e.g. from a certain part of the Internet, hacks sites or brings them down, may be vigilantes or may well be trolling), people still hold the misconception that they are somehow a unified group. They're not. Anonymous are anonymous. That's the point. There is no link between anything they do except people copycatting each other, and using the label. Thus Anonymous is not a group - I would say it is more of a phenomenon that has arisen, with the help of the Internet.
Not really. I've seen CP threads there that lasted for HOURS.
Anonymous is that which is most primal. They may fap to the pictures, but they object to the abuse itself. Purveyors of those deepweb sites made NEW content, much of it HORRIFYING. Those people deserve the worst thing that can ever happen to a man, whatever that may be.
To be honest, the ban on CP doesn't really make much sense to me. It should be the PRODUCTION that is banned. Guro pictures aren't going to make people run out and slice people up, so why would CP make people run out and rape every midget in sight? It's like trying to deny the problem, and then locking up people for being what they are in a way that doesn't really hurt anyone. Indeed, Japan, with it's truly vast array of child erotica, which until fairly recently included legal CP, has among the lowest sexual assault rates on children (and in general, with most people with such tendencies keeping those urges under control with their respective forms of pornography).
Posting anonymous due to highly unpopular opinions in a country that no longer tolerates dissent.
There are smarter ways to go about this. Vigilantism is the dumbest way.
I think the idea is that making consumption illegal (not to mention highly stigmatized) increases the "barrier to entry." There are people who do not seek out CP, who would if it were legal (just like there are people who don't smoke weed, but would if it were legal).
Fewer people consuming means less money to be made. Less money means less incentive for production. This is of course assuming there is money to be made... I honestly don't know. It could be that the whole "CP system" runs on reputation or something, like the hacking scene, but either way the point remains the same: fewer eyeballs = less currency = less incentive for production.
Looking at it another way, consuming CP does indirectly cause CP to be produced, so people who download it are contributing to its creation. I'm not sure I entirely agree with this particular point being sufficient to make it illegal, but I'm also not a lawyer or a parent.
That is a complete line of BS. "There are people who don't seek out child porn who would if it were legal".
Here is the main question, why should we care what gets people off as long as they aren't hurting anyone?
Definitely take down the websites that make money from the content. Beyond that it becomes a pointless witch hunt which doesn't accomplish anything.
I created a piece of software that could find lots of previously un-found child porn on the Internet. I offered it to the group of FBI agents who allegedly stop child porn. My software would find the same image in many places, so boring cops could shut down the web sites. When it found a new image it would set off an alert and the real action started. I assumed the FBI would want to find kidnapped children who were being molested, and at least try to rescue them.
I was wrong. The FBI threatened to put me in jail for offering them my software. They raided my home, seized my computers, and only returned some of my PCs (minus my research) after I apologized and agreed never to try to write software that would help find missing kids.
The perverts you talk to when you come in with a tip about child porn sit around PCs all day surfing porn sites, rubbing their selves. They love that job, and don’t want to find any kiddy porn. They don’t want you telling them they are ineffective.
Alex Jones has claimed that the US government is behind child kidnapping rings that film some sick stuff using those kids: http://www.InfoWars.com I believe him, based on my personal experience.
I would not tell the feds anything if I were you. They are known to raid, frame, torture, and/or kill well-meaning idiots who don't know the US government is behind most child trafficking in this country. Have you ever wondered why so many people who reach out to kids are accused of child porn, then "hang themselves" in jail?
You might ask: Why did the government pass laws against child porn that are so restrictive, that one spam email (sent by the FBI) to your email box, downloaded by Outlook, that sits in your junk mail folder (unread) is a felony? The answer is: it’s a great way to frame political prisoners. Any time a government says they need overly restrictive laws so they can selectively enforce them, you should know the goal is to throw political opponents in jail for decades.
CP websites running today are all honeypots from the evidence repositories of prosecuted cases being used as trollpoints to cataloguing access.
That's why there is a difference between CP and loli, because COPS are the ones posting the CP as a lure to trump evidence to shutdown a website. Anon probably found out where the CP shitposts were coming from and found the repository, and so they coordinated to take down the COPS' network.
well it's high past time for some group like anonymous to take out sick websites like that. i wish they'd hit them all.
I looked at some of the pastebins. Looks like just usernames, "site credit" (whatever that is), and conversations of payments appear to be based in bitcoins.
That is a complete line of BS. "There are people who don't seek out child porn who would if it were legal".
Here is the main question, why should we care what gets people off as long as they aren't hurting anyone?
Definitely take down the websites that make money from the content. Beyond that it becomes a pointless witch hunt which doesn't accomplish anything.
Yeah that would be a good argument except that the child porn does hurt the children....
Attacking stuff you don't like isn't vigilantism. By that definition terrorists are vigilantes. Vigilantism is illegally enforcing the law. Like Batman.
While some of the stuff that Anon has done, like this anti-child porn stuff, is vigilantism; other stuff like attacking Sony and Paypal most definitely is not. Since the minority of Anon's actions qualify as vigilantism, I wouldn't label them as a vigilante group. They may be on their way toward becoming one, but at this point I think it's an inaccurate description.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
They just tell you where to get it
It remains virtually impossible for adult males to befriend children. (Friendships between adults and children used to be pretty common, even in the USA.)
As one example:
Neil Wilkes was a teacher in Manchester, England who had a close relationship with an eight year old girl he taught. He got on well with her and with her family.
But someone decided it was "inappropriate" for a man to befriend a girl, and launched a formal investigation into the relationship.
There was no evidence that Neil Wilkes had done anything wrong.
All the same, Neil lost his job and the girl's family was frightened into breaking off all contact.
On October 20th 2010, Neil Wilkes went to a quiet tourist spot, sent a text message to the girl telling her "I love you and I always will", doused himself with fuel, and set himself on fire.
http://www.thejournal.ie/teacher-sets-himself-alight-after-texting-i-love-you-to-girl-8-2011-03/
It is clear to me that the obsession with child pornography and child abuse is intended to break down the trust between generations, provide an excuse for controlling and monitoring all expression, and firmly cement the power of the ruling class. This panic also provides employment opportunities for a predatory class of therapists and an entire child abuse industry.
Thanks to the manipulation of the public consciousness and abusing the public's natural concern for the well-being of children, the prohibition of child pornography has provided a means for the ruling class to do whatever it wants. Want to eliminate a rival? Just claim they had child pornography on their computer. No one will investigate it, because investigating it would constitute a crime - so everyone must take their public servant overlords' word at face value - and the public accepts this without question.
We don't even have proof of what typical child pornography looks like. The claim is that it is all horrific images of rape and abuse, but ordinary citizens - even reporters - are not allowed to see for themselves. It seems more likely that it is mostly pictures of happy children wearing little or no clothing, because most guys don't get turned on by pictures of real abuse - but how could we find out? The public goes along with the farce, because they have been conditioned to hate pedophiles so much that they don't care whether their victims are even pedophiles, much less whether pedophiles or child pornographers are actually doing harm.
However, we do occasionally get a window into child pornography convictions. Here are a few young ladies speaking out against the conviction of the man who took their photographs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2xfzmcOPg0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3ogJhlOw9U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqKEybfBPAs
This case is illustrative of two points: First, that many of the models do not feel harmed, and secondly that much "child pornography" consists of pictures of clothed children. It certainly gives the lie to the traditional narrative.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2xfzmcOPg0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3ogJhlOw9U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqKEybfBPAs
Of course, the "child pornography" they were involved in featured them fully clothed, but the photographer is still in jail for it.
But it brings up several questions: What is child pornography? What are the dangers of not allowing the public to see the evidence? How do the models in real child pornography feel about it?
These ladies can stand up to social pressure because what they were modeling for was obviously not pornography, despite the convictions - but we rarely hear from other models unless they are found as children and their answers can be scripted for them. When they don't agree with the narrative of abuse, they are routinely silenced.
Why won't anyone listen to the children?
"The evil Internet group Anonymous stops people who THINK OF THE CHILDREN!"
and that just means they havent skipped a beat.
in this day in age do you really think the authorities dont know about any of these sites?
every sex offender is watched like a hawk
they KNOW !!!!
so now who is anonymous really going after still?
A DDoS attack ... removes accountability
That mistaken belief is exactly what gets script kiddies arrested.
Why do we no longer protect women and negroes from themselves?
We enslaved them for their own good, you know!
We should expand our protections to women, negroes, chinamen, and unpropertied whites. Immediately. For their own good.
Among the recovered usernames of Lolita City was one "TH3J3ST3R", aka the guy who doxed Topiary, and who has generally been a pain to anonymous, working with feds "for his country".
Have people been reading these chat logs?
"i have connections to the FSB and the my site is bankrolled by the Russian mob"
"i hired some thugs to cause some trouble for some of your little occupy events tommorow"
"some of the users of Lolita city are high level politicians, cardinals, and business men - we'll make sure your lives are ruined for messing with us"
"you won't be able to fuck around with people like me"
"i own two of the hottest night clubs in Paris and London"
"I am one of the most important business men in Dubai"
"you never will be able to touch people like me"
"we will show you that we are not your average people - i have connections to the top of governments - and CEO's of the world's largest companies"
"also one of the big investment bankers for Goldman Sachs is going to have to fucking bank roll more thugs to fuck around your little Occupy Wall Street movement"
"i am a fucking business man - you CANNOT touch me"
"as i said i am one of owner of the two hottest night clubs in Paris and London - and i have a fucking million dollar import/export business in Dubai "
"trust me - when you grow up - you will be one of my site's users"
"you have no fucking idea how many 17 and 18 lolitas want to be models - when I pull up with my G550 benz - they go fucking all over the shit"
"we have some 14-17 year olds right now in Paris - doing this routine - you have no fucking idea"
"oh - i have powerful friends - those thugs that roughed up your OWS - over the weekend - were hired by some big shot investment banker at Goldman Sachs - courtesy of me"
"it's 7:40 am in Stockholm - i have some models we going to feature on Lolita City"
It's hard to believe how comically evil this guy sounds.
is why i'm posting....
Looking at it another way, consuming CP does indirectly cause CP to be produced, so people who download it are contributing to its creation.
Exactly! Just as people who download the torrent of Transformers: Dark of the Moon are contributing to its creation!
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
They ARE supposed to! Don't tell me the media lied to me!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
there is an actual hacking group named "Anonymous"
it would seem their name has worked in fooling you
Is that they tipped off guilty and there was no real punishment. But delving into their minds I bet it puts the fear of god in the child porn traders that there may be from now on online hackers that don't necessarily follow laws (just like they don't) that are targeting them. It's a warning shot across the bow of a ship... change direction or be destroyed.
The porn traders will hunker down and become more secure but security is an illusion, it just takes one tiny crack... (nice pun) and you are compromised.
But I'm against targeting those that get their jollies from masturbating to wrong things or peeping at disgusting and wrong things. (It's a lot like people wanting to watch a donkey show, when in reality it's just a poor desperate woman being used that will really will do nearly anything to make money.)
It's people that pay to watch and hence promote the exploitation that are immoral along with those that produce the reprehensible content. File trading sites can serve law enforcement as a honeypot if they track people. You have the curious, then you have the collectors, then you have actual pedophiles. Monitoring the file trading sites allows you to investigate people further and put them on a watch list.
What really needs to happens is the laws change so that based on deep logs lasting for years law enforcement (a special state unit, nor ordinary cops) can get a warrant to quietly place spy cameras and in general bug a suspected pedophiles residence and life for a short period of time (a few months) to see if they are actually abusing children. In this day and age it's ridiculous that you would need to put a child on a court stand. Just record the actual crime. If the guy is just sick and likes watching.. finding out later that he was investigated and being watched while he masturbated will really scare him. So long as the guy is isn't publicly reveled or permanently put under surveillance then no harm no foul. If confronted properly it may be possible to motivate him to get the right physiological help to insure he never commits a crime.
But does looking at the photos hurt them further?
To put that backwardly, does not looking at the photos reverse any of the hurt that they endured?
1. You don't have to formally form, define, or organize to be a Group. Just like the people who all gather at the same bus-stop each day are an informal group, so are the people who regularly participate in the same types of Anon-related activities.
2. A group is not the same thing as an organization.
3. The term you are looking for is a "Loosely organized movement".
4. There is nothing really unique about Anonymous, it is not a new phenomenon at all.
Yeah, it seems more like a hacker message board where people chat and decide if they want to hack something. I know there was a split though -- over their reasons for hacking. One side wanted to hack because they thought it was funny (for the lulz), and the other wanted to hack for some political or moral reason (they called them "moralfags"). When they were having this argument was when Ryan Cleary launched a coup and took down their main servers. After that, two groups split off: LulzSec (for the lulz) and Project PM (moral guys). It seems now though that the lines are becoming less clear. Anonymous claimed to have a lot of values in the beginning, which they're beginning to break (like not hitting targets that would affect everyday people). The real irony in all this though is that Anonymous is helping secure the Web. Anyone remember the Deceptive Duo and the other patriot hackers? They were doing a lot of the same stuff Anonymous and LulzSec are doing, but they were trying to convince the companies to close their security holes. These new hacker groups are actually bringing attention to the terrible state of cybersecurity and are making companies and government close these holes, whether they mean to or not.
I get it now, Anonymous is just like Slashdot, because Slashdotters are slashdotters.
these were nothing but script kiddies...
i like 9-13 yr old boys. all my favorite sites remained up. i did not frequent stuff that was down although know it was not down long. it was back before any one noticed! nothing to see here.
most pedophiles don't rape little kids. hetro adults attracted to other adults usually do. yet we people looking at kiddy porn are blamed (mostly pedos go after non-nude / speedo / underwear / nude kids / very rarely do we save rape content-but that is readily available so every one has a little even if nothing comparatively speaking). police call child rape a crime of opportunity. for example a father starts using his daughter as a replacement for his departed wife. i never have and don't even want to have intercourse with a child (or any one). many do like sex with kids... but that does not mean most have sex with kids. it can be very much a world of fantasy.
we need to get rid of the religious nuts and puritanism. it brings with it homophobia or allows justification. i fear the homophobic attitude more than anything else. if a boy has sex with an older woman he is considered lucky. if a boy has sex with an older guy.... god forbid. fear of pedophiles comes down to the same thing. a child can be tried as an adult for murder but can't choose to have sex? actually until and even now age of consent is under 18... but don't dare take a picture. even mere nudity (cell phone pics-'sexting') is a crime. sad but true.
when claims of michael jackson sleeping with kids appeared it was probably true. i doubt he molested any though. it is more likely they were going to try and take advantage of the situation. think selling story not lawsuit. of oj can do it why not a supposed victim?
i have had a few boys interested in me who were very affectionate. one 13 yr old loved sitting on my lap. it was part of a game HE started. it took a lot of guts to let it continue. it WAS inappropriate. i was only a few years older in a position of slight authority. what made it a bit unerving were a few adults who were really the ones in charge frequently next to me when he did this.
another relationship i enjoyed when i was about 13-23 was with one of my younger cousins (7-17). *i still like him even if not in the same way any more*. i had many younger cousins. the one i really liked was very cute and he liked me back. he too was very affectionate with me. he was just that kind of kid. still. other than his mom i was the only one who did not reject his affection. if it would not possibly reveal me i would tell you what he said to me one. essentially it was equivalent in my mind to a hextro woman being told by a guy "i love you". to repeat i did NOT have sex with him. i did sleep quite a few times with him and snuggle.
i don't think i ever saw any boy i've been friends with naked. god forbid. this is not to say i have not had a boy in his underwear though on my lap (shorts without underwear on really). i have had a few encounters with boys in whitey tighties. once at a camp (shocked the hell out of me too! i was the only one around as it was between camp sessions. i was 14ish). another time i was 11 or 12 and camping with my dad and a group of boys. i hung out with a 10 year old and got messy. he changed in front of me (undies stayed on).
so... now. if you have a problem with pedophiles you are merely homophobic.
there is some stuff i would do with a 9-14ish boy sexually. sort of. not sex. not kissing. more physical foreplay (touching) and fetish stuff. not without his consent though. it would not necessarily be pleasant for most boys of this age range... though some like it (i did at 11). it is something every boy has been involved in a number of times and in most countries if you are not getting off to it as an adult is legal and socially acceptable provided the right context (in the legal acceptable context i morally object to it and think it is wrong- i would still enjoy it in this context if i ever do it. which i might... as the benefit to me wayyyy outweighs the harm i believe it causes).
I wasn;t commenting on the morality or legality of their actions, merely pointing out why they do it.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Thank you Anonymous for taking down those sites that hurt children. Someone has to care. I am not savvy on electronics, but I appreciate those who dedicate themselves to making bad things right.
After all the *miserable* news of nazi mentality tyrants eroding basic freedoms over that last few days it is good to *finally* read some 'feel good ' news.. now maybe the italian legislators realize this can be done better in the private field. As far as 'the general collective' having a conscience, well , yes, that's true, but when people get together in large groups, they act as thugs, combine that with the 'general collective', and you get oppressive laws meant for the 'common good'.
Think of it as the online version of Occupy Wall Street.
New Economic Perspectives
Thank you, Anonymous guys. who-ever you are.
I personally know too many damaged people to *ever be able to defend the child-porn people's addictions.
This really does lift my spirits.
I hope they can remain successful, there are an enormous number of such sites.
So, Anonymous are sort of like Al-Qaeda?
You've had groups of people specifically targeting and outing members of NAMBLA for years. I'd link but I'm at work and they frown on visiting those kinds of sites while you're on the clock. Frankly, more power to them.
Baseless self confidence kills more people each year than bathtubs.
Good for them.
And how are you going to verify those people are members of that site?