Craigslist Personals, Some Subreddits Disappear After FOSTA Passage (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In the wake of this week's passage of the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) bill in both houses of Congress on Wednesday, Craigslist has removed its "Personals" section entirely, and Reddit has removed some related subreddits, likely out of fear of future lawsuits. FOSTA, which awaits the signature of President Donald Trump before becoming law, removes some portions of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The landmark 1996 law shields website operators that host third-party content (such as commenters, for example) from civil liability. The new bill is aimed squarely at Backpage, a notorious website that continues to allow prostitution advertisements and has been under federal scrutiny for years. In a bizarre turn of events, the Department of Justice also warned the House in February 2018 that the bill "raises a serious constitutional concern," as it would apply retroactively -- a seeming violation of the Constitution's ex post facto clause. Congress passed it anyway. The Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote in a blog post: "It's easy to see the impact that this ramp-up in liability will have on online speech: facing the risk of ruinous litigation, online platforms will have little choice but to become much more restrictive in what sorts of discussion -- and what sorts of users -- they allow, censoring innocent people in the process."

Comments

Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

If they really wanted to reduce traficking, they just made it harder. It wasn't terribly difficult to suss out potentially bad CL ads. Guys looking for you to be "generous", and for the DEA guys, "let's go skiiing"... in Florida. By getting rid of this stuff, they just shut down a source where people were providing them with leads. Or maybe they were just embarrassed that they couldn't follow up on all that stuff.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[b0s0z0ku]

Exactly -- the ideal situation would be legalization between consenting adults so the industry is in the open and can be monitored for offerings that don't involve consenting adults. Harm reduction, same as with drug legalization -- let the people have their fun while rooting out the real bad actors.

But American Puritanism (from both parties!) won't let such a rational policy be enacted.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[b0s0z0ku]

Or religious/Puritan zealotry, which amounts to the same thing.

Re: Government shooting itself in the foot

[SmaryJerry]

I totally agreee. The people thinking this will change things are the same people who thought removing piracy search results from google would stop piracy. No, it only hides these places from the good guys even better and keeps more online.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

When the effect of a bill differs greatly from what the bill's proponents are saying, that leaves us with only one conclusion: the bill's proponents are lying about their intent. It is popular to think of congressmen as stupid. They are NOT FUCKING STUPID. They know exactly what this bill will accomplish, and that is exactly what they want. Everything else is bullshit to win hearts and minds.

They want to reduce Internet filth. There are too many websites with this kind of content all over them, and that garbage needs to be taken down!

The potential harm to legitimate content that wouldn't qualify as filth is worth it, in their minds.

Fairness and what-not are not considerations here. It's all about "cleaning up" then Internet, and that's it.

Re: Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Trafficking of who by whom?

The answer is the same in all Western nations- by legal or illegal recent immigrants of teen girls, many of whom are illegal aliens themselves.

A classic example of liberals will gnaw away at the basis of our Constitution and civilization itself rather than face a hard realityn you can't permit unfettered movement of just random people from just anywhere into your country if you want to maintain your rights, your civilization and your values.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[GrumpySteen]

Stopping trafficking isn't the goal.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[jeff4747]

But then Congresspeople can't make speeches about how they're protecting poor, exploited children and thus deserve your vote in November.

Instead it actually protects poor, exploited children.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

How dare you support the exploitation of Womyn! Womyn's bodies belong to them, and it is purest misogyny to think that a Man can control that with money.

captcha: cringe

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

That is terrible advice. The corrupt and powerful are more than happy to convince the masses that they are just stupid. You get fewer lawsuits that way.

They aren't stupid. They are corrupt. Your quote is exactly backwards.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[MachineShedFred]

Plus, if it's in the open, it can be regulated and taxed. And then the "vendors" could form guilds / unions to collectively pool for health insurance making the entire enterprise that much safer.

But all of those things (sex, taxes, unions, health insurance) are things this Republican Party are against.... so good luck with that.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[techno-vampire]

Guys looking for you to be "generous"

Back in the '70s and '80s, This type of ad was the mainstay of numerous local tabloid "newspapers," that had just enough articles to qualify for the term. Almost all of them were for women, and many of them were looking for "generous men." There was a special section of personals for men, and I'd presume that at least some of them used the same wording, but I never bothered looking at them because that kind of thing never interested me. Back then, you could tell which ones were from services because they all had the same phone number. I'd presume that the current websites are similar, but I've never bothered looking to find out.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[ArtemaOne]

are things this Republican Party are against.....

Republican and Democrat Parties, you mean. Only person who voted against this is a Republican.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[thecombatwombat]

There's more than one they. The DOJ specifically protested this law for the reasons you mention.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Democrats want to protect people from themselves. Women clearly cannot think on their own or be responsible for themselves so the Democrats want to do the thinking for them. Can't let them possibly sell sex, that's exploitation. Forget that every single company exploits the labor of their workers, sex is special.

Republicans are of course sex-stupid. Clearly by banning sex and drugs, people won't do that. That's as effective as Democrats banning guns to prevent gun violence. Neither works but both keep pushing for prohibition on both.

Ideally the sex industry would be regulated and the workers unionized. All workers would get access to healthcare and retirement like any other profession. They would also pay all the same taxes as any other work has to pay. Would be a net gain for everyone. You could setup websites for people to schedule appointments for workers to meet with clients. No different then getting your nails done or your oil changed.

Not in this society though. We would rather lie to ourselves and everyone around us and swear we aren't having sex or doing drugs. Honest is to adult for a large part of the USA. Very sad.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

And the only way to have that, is for both parties to be verified online. Which also justifies further monitoring of EVERYONE and complete loss of any anonymity.

Dear America, go fuck yourselves. This IS straight out of China and Islam.

Capatch: temple.

Re: Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

You've just volunteered to be the first to move back to wherever your ancestors came from. Start packing, paleface!

Re: Government shooting itself in the foot

[Bing Tsher E]

Who said anything about ancestors? Only you.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Aighearach]

That's exactly where this leads; the return of the local weekly printed newspaper!

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[umghhh]

Why is this marked as troll? Are we already pass the stage when we were allowed to laugh? Man 1984 is coming closed every day.

Re: Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol these women do this on their own. Blaming others for their actions. No one stopped these hoes from going to school, in fact the smart hoes do this to pay for school. Ur nurses and doctors stripped and sucked to make it. Can't change history

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

I never understood that either. If LBGTQ is acceptable and all sorts of crazy @ss porn and other things, why isn't prostitution legal? If a gal, guy, or other wants to sell themselves sexually for money what's the problem with that so long as it's consensual? I personally don't believe in paying for sex, but that doesn't mean others shouldn't have that choice.

Re: Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. Its about control. Here's an analogy for ya.if the"people" have enough of being led around by a ring through our collective noses, then we will come together and demand to live how we want to live and not be hood winked by a small minority compard to the masses.

Re:Government shooting itself in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Now of we can only weed out corruption in high political offices ..

MOAR litigation!

[tripleevenfall]

You don't even need to censor people anymore, just ramp up the legal risk and they'll do it themselves.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

Suppressing First Amendment rights by whatever means IS censorship.

Re:MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

They've happily done it before this bill. The big Internet companies love censorship. And as liberals (who mostly run these companies) are getting more and more puritanical, they welcome getting rid of all that icky stuff, and whatever else they object to (e.g. the gun-purge on Youtube and Reddit).

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

Suppressing First Amendment rights by whatever means IS censorship.

And suppressing second amendment rights by whatever means necessary IS ok by blue people

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

Please give an argument how the first amendment protects your willfully allowing your property to be used in a criminal enterprise?

"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; ..."

This law does not remove any freedom of speech, it merely allows prosecution for abetting a crime.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[dreamchaser]

Suppressing First Amendment rights by whatever means IS censorship.

And suppressing second amendment rights by whatever means necessary IS ok by blue people

It is funny how liberals pick and choose which Amendments they think are goodthink and which are badthink.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

and black people.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you saying that without this bill, I can start a website, tell people to post warez in the comments, and be immune from any sort of legal recourse? It's already possible to charge website operators of abetting criminal enterprises.
Not a car analogy: if you own a hotel, and knowingly use it as a safehouse for criminals on the run, you can be legally liable. With this bill, if you rent a room to a criminal, without any knowledge or intent, you can be legally liable. It's insane.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[MachineShedFred]

This is not limited to the liberals. There's plenty of "conservatives" that have issues with parts of the Bill of Rights as well.

Re:MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

99.999% of white people complaining about censorship online are racists that are mad about being called out.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Grunschev]

The 2nd Amendment being about the well-regulated militia and all...

Re: MOAR litigation!

[BlueStrat]

The 2nd Amendment being about the well-regulated militia and all...

"Well regulated" meant "in good working order" when the Amendment was written.

"Organized militia -- consisting of State militia forces; notably, the National Guard and Naval Militia.[9] (Note: the National Guard is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States.)

Unorganized militia -- composing the Reserve Militia: every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age, not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Redefining words is straight out of the dystopian novel "1984".

Strat

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not really. The CDA significantly protected website operators. If you didn't quite say that this was a place for illegal activity, then you were protected. Now, You may be held lake for abetting sexual assault.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[dryeo]

Best thing would be to invalidate every law that infringes on the 1st and 2nd. Wouldn't take long for a push to repeal them. No laws limiting speech, not even for national security or child porn. No laws restricting owning weapons, not for certain classes of people, not for certain government buildings such as courts or airports, not for weapons of mass destruction.
The 1st and 2nd are very simple, yet the American Supreme Court has totally twisted them. Only some types of speech are protected and only some types of arms are allowed by certain types of people.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Aighearach]

Keep in mind, #1 and #2 don't say the same type of thing about two subjects. In the case of freedom of the press it says "congress shall make no law," and "the press" basically meant small businesses printing fake news and offensive opinions. In the case of the right to bear arms, it says a bunch of stuff about the right to be in a well-regulated militia, and that the right to bear arms shall not be "infringed." But "making no law" is much more strict than simply not infringing on a right. The second amendment leaves Congress with the power to make laws regulating guns, and regulating the bearing of arms, as long as after the executive branch implements the law your right to bear arms is still intact.

The Constitution says that Congress can't tell you what type of press to buy, but they can tell you what type of arms constitute those appropriate for para-military use, as long as in practice they don't "take yer guns away."

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Aighearach]

"Well regulated" meant "in good working order" in other trades, but in the military it meant that they can march as a unit.

It means your unit can pass a basic parade drill given by the military in the event that your State calls your unit up for military service. That's why the stuff about being necessary for the security of a State is in there.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[BlueStrat]

"Well regulated" meant "in good working order" in other trades, but in the military it meant that they can march as a unit.

It means your unit can pass a basic parade drill given by the military in the event that your State calls your unit up for military service. That's why the stuff about being necessary for the security of a State is in there.

Interesting interpretation, but I think we're splitting hairs here. It definitely does not mean the militia were part of the the Federal or State army or National Guard as the poster I replied to implied.

I'd be interested in seeing any citations/data you have about requirements for Revolutionary War-era civilian militias to be trained as marching units. Seeing as much of the fighting against the British was more guerrilla in nature, ambushing from cover, sniping officers, etc, I'm not certain that parade marching and order of arms drills and the like were required of volunteer ad-hoc civilian militias. To my knowledge they did not typically march together with regular army units but maneuvered and operated separately, coordinating by liaison officers and messengers.

Strat

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Aighearach]

Nobody said militias were part of the military.

I assumed people who are joining this conversation would know this stuff, or else they should really be doing 101-level history readings on their own instead.

A militia is a group of volunteers who practice on their own, and in times of war are called up by the State or Federal authorities to fight. They're then placed under the command of some military leader. If they haven't been called up by their State to fight, they're only supposed to be training. They're not a private army that is allowed to self-deploy. The only scenario where they would be fighting without being called up is if their community was under foreign invasion and the military hadn't had time to organize a response; something possible back then, but not really relevant now. But even in that case, they have no special powers and it is their common-law right of self defense that lets them fight, not any militia powers.

That's what it was for. If you're in a militia, then instead of getting conscripted into some army you get to fight with your unit. But your unit has to be able to pass a parade drill. If you can't pass a parade drill, then you're not well regulated and you're all going to have to put on government uniforms and go off to boot camp with everybody else.

Nobody said that militias fought the British using European battle formations, it is simply that the parade drill was given as a proxy for if you had been trained. The point isn't about what type of combat you're experienced in or preparing for, the point is are you practiced in following arbitrary orders from your leader, and does that include the ability of your leader to direct your body physically to certain part of a formation? If you don't think that is important because the word "guerilla" is next to your tactics, you probably haven't even read descriptions of the battles. Yes, they used trees and things for cover more often than the British. Yes, they tried to surprise the enemy. Those things are a lot more effective when your commanders can choose which trees you hide behind, instead of having every Homer just guess what to do all the time. How are you going to ambush anybody if you can't move as a unit?! Almost the whole value of a militia is that even though they don't have full training, they can move together because they've at least practiced that much together, and they know each other so they're less likely to scatter.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you are wrong. #2 grants you no right. It recognizes a right that is not given by the constitution. It has also been found by the Supreme Court to be a personal right and not a collective right to have an army or militia. #2 is more powerful than #1

Re: MOAR litigation!

[BlueStrat]

If you can't pass a parade drill, then you're not well regulated and you're all going to have to put on government uniforms and go off to boot camp with everybody else.

You keep saying that but I can find nothing that corroborates this.

Strat

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Aighearach]

Try historical sources and not political ones. You'll know you're in the right place when they're telling you what happened instead of telling you how you think and feel about it.

Also, any legal history of the 2nd amendment that isn't political will tell you that right at the start, with references. If they left it out, they probably also expressed opinions, and if they did that, they're not a source of information they're propaganda.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[BlueStrat]

Try historical sources and not political ones.

Then you must have a gistorical source to cite. I've asked several times for a source and you have failed to provide one, only repeating your assertion without evidence

Without a historical citation I'll have to call BS.

Strat

Re: MOAR litigation!

[tripleevenfall]

The supreme court just recently decided that the 2nd protects private ownership, not just militia ownership.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Aighearach]

You added nothing to the conversation other than implying that you paid so little attention, you didn't even notice if your comment was going to add anything.

In 250 years, there is one SCOTUS ruling that talks about the individual right to gun ownership, and they did nothing to establish the boundaries at either end. So talking about it is just blah-blah. They didn't change anything with that ruling. Nothing at all, not even a small detail on the edges.

You were told by political propaganda to repeat the words you repeated, but you didn't comprehend why or what the meaning is or when it is relevant. Does having an individual right to gun ownership suddenly convert "shall not be infringed" into "shall make no law?" No, no it doesn't, and no, it doesn't change those words in any way at all. It still leaves it at, Congress cannot regulate what press you buy, but they can regulate which guns you buy as long as you still get to buy some.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Aighearach]

You're just wallowing in your desire to have me argue from authority to you, but your cries will not result in me doing the basic research for you.

Listen to ideas, and go and research them to find out if they are well-supported or not.

Asking for citations is a privilege you'd get if you were an expert, and had already read all the normal supporting documents you'd need to understand a citation, and if in fact the context of our conversation was such that I would expect you to go and read the whole study and consider it in detail. But that isn't this context, this is a non-professional conversation; researching the claims should be done using your own research abilities and resources, it should not be conducted by being credulous of links people provide. That is not knowledge, that is rumor. There is no need to cite rumor in support of ideas that were already themselves explained. An idea under consideration is right or wrong independently of your ability, or lack of ability, to research if it is also well-supported.

Re: MOAR litigation!

[BlueStrat]

Yup, bullshit.

Thanks for playing.

Strat

Re: MOAR litigation!

[Aighearach]

Knowledge is for people who can think and read, not for people who whine and play a game of seeking approval.

Approval can't be substituted for knowledge in actual situations, only in your game.

Rants & Raves

[registrations_suck]

The good news is they FINALLY took Rants & Raves out of "personals" and put it under Community / Local News.

I never did understand why it was under "personals" to begin with. I mean, most of the insults there were pretty personal - but even so - it did not seem to fit with all the other "personals" categories.

Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

He's very Christian, and Christians seem to have a lot of problems with people that have sex.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[greenwow]

Don't blame the Republicans for this. More of them voted against this than we did.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't blame the Republicans for this. More of them voted against this than we did.

Democrats are trying to get Slick Willy under control for Hillary's next run.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[ooloorie]

He's very Christian, and Christians seem to have a lot of problems with people that have sex.

I'm a gay atheist. You can have sex with whoever you want to. Just don't try to force me to pay for the consequences of your sexual escapades (single motherhood, abortions, family courts, STDs, divorce, sexual harassment, etc.).

Re:Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

Congress, with few honorable exceptions, are a bunch of bought and paid for whores, dancing to the tune of whoever throws them most money and receptive to the most outrageous demands.

"Congress passed it anyway."

Re:Jeff Sessions

[MachineShedFred]

If they're smart, Democrats nominate Barney the purple dinosaur before they give Hillary another go. I mean, she couldn't even win against Trump...

Re:Jeff Sessions

[DamnOregonian]

388 - 25 and 97 - 2... I think we can safely say this was entirely bipartisan. After all- sex trafficking bad. You don't wanna be the guy who voted to legalize sex trafficking.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[DamnOregonian]

Sure thing, just don't make me pay for your AIDS medicine.

See how offensive that is?

Re:Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Sessions' DoJ raised objections to the bill, which Congress ignored: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4390045-DOJ-FOSTA-Letter.html

Re:Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, she couldn't even win against Trump and all the resources of the GRU...

TFTFY.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[ooloorie]

Why would it be offensive to me? I just said the same thing. Growing up, I knew HIV medication wouldn't be covered by my medical system and catching HIV would likely be a death sentence. Later, my insurance covered the cheap, less-effective medications but wouldn't have covered the latest treatments from the US; if I wanted those, it would have been expensive. All of this was a strong incentive to practice safe sex. Shielding people from the consequences of their choices is not doing them a favor, whether you are talking about young women or gay men.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[DamnOregonian]

My mistake was assuming you're from the US.
I am from the US.
My medical insurance covers some high dollar AIDS treatment, which means I help cover some high cost AIDS treatment. Something I'm virtually guaranteed never to contract.
And frankly, I'd rather it did than see a good person die from an unfortunate mistake.
Shielding people from the consequences of their choices when the consequence is an unproductive, short, and expensive rest of their life is doing *society* a favor.

Educational improvement works. Letting them die is stupid.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit, they have a majority in the house and senate, so who do you think voted to have this pass.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[ooloorie]

My medical insurance covers some high dollar AIDS treatment, which means I help cover some high cost AIDS treatment. Something I'm virtually guaranteed never to contract. And frankly, I'd rather it did than see a good person die from an unfortunate mistake. Educational improvement works. Letting them die is stupid.

First, you talk about this as if it were an individual choice, but it's not: under ACA, everybody is forced to do this. Now, you personally may be so wealthy that you may not mind spending $1000/month for something that ought to cost $200/month out of charity, but for other people, the $800 difference is enormous. Second, effective HIV treatment costs a few hundred dollars per year, something that falls within deductibles anyway; the extra spending is for crony capitalism on excessively expensive treatments. Third, we're not usually talking about "an unfortunate mistake": HIV is pretty hard to transmit and most people with HIV got infected after many acts of unprotected sex with many partners.

This thread started with someone mocking Christians for "having a problem with people having sex". It is sensible to have a problem with people having sex outside committed relationships because it is harmful to the individual and it is very costly to society. And it is sensible to have a problem with a system of medical care that completely separates personal responsibility from consequences while forcibly transferring vast amounts of money from tax payers to the private sector in a massive crony capitalist scheme. Not only are your beliefs not helping people, they are causing harm to millions of people. Teaching people about safe sex is far less effective than teaching people to control their base impulses and desires in the first place.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't give a shit about constitutional rights. To them, it's just a piece of toilet paper.

Re: Jeff Sessions

[Anonymous Coward]

All of this. *tear* beautiful.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[DamnOregonian]

Second, effective HIV treatment costs a few hundred dollars per year

They sure as hell don't here. I'm going to assume you mean "there", or you pulled the number right out of your ass.

First, you talk about this as if it were an individual choice, but it's not: under ACA, everybody is forced to do this.

Nice soap box. Everyone was forced to do this before hand with their FICA taxes, or if they were like the majority of the country with private insurance- insured through their employer- they were doing it that way. What the fuck was your point again?

the extra spending is for crony capitalism on excessively expensive treatments

The extra spending is definitely related to capitalism run amok, but it's not cronyism. The pharmaceutical industry has realized the power it has without any government help whatsoever, short of patent and trademark enforcement.

Third, we're not usually talking about "an unfortunate mistake": HIV is pretty hard to transmit and most people with HIV got infected after many acts of unprotected sex with many partners.

That's still an unfortunate mistake. Everyone is reckless a few times in their life. Sometimes you scrape a knee. Sometime you get in a minor car accident. Sometimes you catch fucking AIDS. You're a callous piece of shit.

Re:Jeff Sessions

[ooloorie]

Second, effective HIV treatment costs a few hundred dollars per year

They sure as hell don't here. I'm going to assume you mean "there"

Correct: effective HIV treatments abroad cost a few hundred dollars, whereas people pay ruinous amounts for it in the US because of America's broken health care system.

Everyone was forced to do this before hand with their FICA taxes, or if they were like the majority of the country with private insurance- insured through their employer- they were doing it that way. What the fuck was your point again?

Correct: people didn't have a choice about this before either. My point is that you misrepresent something as a personal choice and charity when, in fact, it is coercion.

The extra spending is definitely related to capitalism run amok, but it's not cronyism. The pharmaceutical industry has realized the power it has without any government help whatsoever, short of patent and trademark enforcement.

The pharmaceutical industry and medical providers in the US can charge very high prices because government forces Americans to pay whatever the industry charges. That isn't capitalism, it's a fascist economic model.

That's still an unfortunate mistake.

No, it is reckless behavior.

You're a callous piece of shit.

No, I'm afraid it's you who is a "callous piece of shit", because your kind of choices condemn millions to a slow, agonizing death from HIV and other preventable diseases. You're self-righteous, selfish, ignorant, and evil.

Idiotic scum run the government.

[Anonymous Coward]

And laws like FOSTA are what we get as a result.

Only Ron Wyden and Rand Paul voted against it.

Every last one of the pieces of trash who voted for it need to be voted out of office.

Re:Idiotic scum run the government.

[Anonymous Coward]

You single issue voters are so cute when they get angry.

Re:Idiotic scum run the government.

[Anonymous Coward]

You single issue voters are so cute when they get angry.

You uneducated idiots who cannot even write correct English are not cute at all.

Fuck you, you cock-gobbling retard.

Re:Idiotic scum run the government.

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot the comma after "idiots" and "English," you ball-gargling moron.

Re: Idiotic scum run the government.

[Reverend Green]

Your recommended punctuation is clumsy and unstylish.

Re: Idiotic scum run the government.

[Anonymous Coward]

You know you're illiterate when a Russian corrects your English.

all over and I wonder

[jmccue]

With craiglist personals gone, I suppose the will loose revenue and eye balls. I wonder if this will be a boon to newspaper print since classified adds were a big money maker for them. IIRC newspapers are protected from these kind of lawsuits.

Re:all over and I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

Corporations hate it when their revenue isn't tight. But seriously, what does that mean?

The death of Web 2.0 is here

[Anonymous Coward]

The transition of the Web from "Wild West" to "cable TV" continues.

Re:The death of Web 2.0 is here

[bobstreo]

The transition of the Web from "Wild West" to "cable TV" continues.

Does anyone remember when the allure of cable was "No Commercials?"

Get off my lawn!

Re:The death of Web 2.0 is here

[Anonymous Coward]

I kind of saw the whole web 2.0 thing as the start of all this.

Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Miser]

Fire up those terminal emulators, folks!

(or the real thing (vt320, vt220, vt525, wy60, etc) if you've got them)

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[iprayfatcashewd]

I use my VIC-20 as a terminal emulator. :P

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Anonymous Coward]

POKE 36879, !

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Anonymous Coward]

There you are shitposting with yet another fake account, you revenue stream hogging disgusting fat sexist tube of lard, Christopher Dale Reimer!

You can be sure I will be watching this fake account too. I know this is you because you told me you were working on your freepass 11 file server and you are so dumb that you can't even masquerade yourself properly.

Now, I told you I was out of meds last week and you didn't even care to contact me you lazy fucker.

How many times do I have to express the emergency of the situation??????

The python click script you wrote for my pheromone revenue stream web site suddenly stopped to work!!!!!!

You fucking incompetent python script writer!!!

When it works, I get 4000+ clicks a day on my pheromone revenue stream web site but only 5 or 6 without it!!!!

Now, it seems like you dont care and that you have abandoned me you heartless fucking pig!

Bonus:
Here is a story that creimer told me when convincing me what a hard life he had:

The tree was him and the tree knot was his butt hole!

So, his uncle packed his fat ass with lard and with his cock! Not that it makes much of a difference but anyway, there it is!

Signed:
Ethell, The girl that used to love you and now hates you, burn in hell where you belong you sexist pig!

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahaha creimer!

creimer has moved the talking with himself to youtube! He created the "King Slayer69" sock puppet on youtube and now argues with himself on youtube! He is more like a "King Dumpty" but anyway.

CROFLOL!

Anyway, I already filed on complaint with youtube at:
https://www.youtube.com/create...

I included links to creimer post on slashdot including his sock puppet posts so youtube sees where I am coming from.

Please complain as well, youtube is far from being "as permissive" as Slashdot!

Chris' case is getting worse, he spends all day replying to himself as AC on /.

The tests we ran on Chris have shown that Chris has the intelligence of an ameba:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

So, technically, he is able to conceive some kind of agenda but it will be silly or impossible to follow on a human scale.

For example, Chris had an agenda to post anything he felt like on Slashdot which did not work well because it was based on his false beliefs that he had an infinite number of karma points as he wrote here several times.

Several people here explained to Chris that karma maxed out at some level like 50 or so but Chris kept on insisting that his python script had confirmed that he had millions of karma points!

Oh well, as I wrote before: "It isn't Chris' fault if he is the way he is. We do the best we can do with him and he is partially integrated into society. We try to cure his abnormal need for attention but he is kind of stubborn and won't listen to anybody."

For the valuable /. users that might already have read the following, please note that there is an important update.

IMPORTANT UPDATE:
Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education has invested money to buy Chris a new chair:
http://www.keynamics.com/image...

Information about Christopher Dale Reimer and autistic people:

Autistic people have obsessions about things normal people don't care. For example, one of our autistic patient went haywire when he realized that there was a penny missing in his pocket change.

To calm him down, one of our educator pretended to have found it on the floor and gave a penny to him.

The autistic patient condition went even worse because he realized it wasn't the same penny!

Chris has an obsession with budgeting every penny. He doesn't understand that most people do not budget to the penny and have a flexible amount they allow for miscellaneous items.

I am Nancy Guerrero and I am Director of Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education. We use Chris' (a.k.a. creimer,cdreimer) picture in our document because he is the hardest case we have ever had to handle:
http://www.sccoe.org/depts/stu...

Our artists were inspired by the low carb diet that Christopher follows scrupulously for the small lunch box and by the picture linked below for the rest. I am sure that you will notice the similarities such as the bump on the side of his chest and more:
https://ibb.co/gVad65

Please be easy on Christopher although, I am aware that some of our staff handling Chris post joke comments here and obvoiusly, the Santa Clara County Office of Education disapprove that behavior vehemently:
http://ibb.co/mRVSaG

But it isn't Chris' fault if he is the way he is. We do the best we can do with him and he is partially integrated into society. We try to cure his abnormal need for attention but he is kind of stubborn and won't listen to anybody.

Thank You dear users,
---
Nancy Guerrero

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Anonymous Coward]

I use my VIC-20 as a terminal emulator. :P

I am sure do Chris. That's what you use to find child brides on some dark Usenet forums, isn't it?

Here are some posts from creimer's old accounts. I'll start with his love of child brides.

If all my assets were liquidated, I would still have enough cash to buy a new car and head off to Mexico to find a chica to marry.
https://slashdot.org/comments....

You're aware that are some states in the U.S. that allow underage marriage as young as 14 years old?
https://slashdot.org/comments....
As for my comment, I've heard stories of engineers retiring at 50, moving to Mexico and marrying underage girls. Since I work with ex-military, the Philippines is a popular retirement spot for marrying underage girls as well. It's all about getting the most bang for your retirement dollars.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
That only works if you retire to Mexico, build a mansion (by local standards), marry an underage sweet thing and bequeath all your possessions to the village.
https://slashdot.org/comments....

You need to be more specific. I wrote 3,000+ comments this year.
https://slashdot.org/comments....

Nah... I just do it to piss off my trolls and make coffee money off of them.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
We have different priorities. You want to climb the corporate ladder. I want to own the corporate ladder.
https://slashdot.org/comments....

Your bitch licks your balls. Most people don't brag about practicing bestiality. Is there a reason why you married a dog and not a goat?
https://slashdot.org/comments....

My employers don't care about what my Slashdot trolls think. Now go off and lick your balls somewhere else.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
iPhone 6s and reduce my monthly bill from $80 to $50. As a phone and a video camera, the iPhone 6s isn't obsolete. As a Sprint customer for 20+ years, Sprint will always offer me a new iPhone if I decide to stop using the 6s as a phone in the next several years.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
Miracle workers are never afraid to ask for a second opinion. Supervisor gave me his opinion ? and a mess to clean up. Lesson learned from this incident: if something isn't quite broken, break it.
https://slashdot.org/comments....

So you can turn around call me a liar again? People have been playing that game with me for years.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
Based on what I've read about Uber, he need to tell the boys to clean up their locker room behavior, zip up their pants, and attend sensitivity training until everyone agrees that women are not sexual objects.
https://slashdot.org/comments....

Which doesn't violate the Slashdot TOS. If you got a problem with that, take it up with management.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
This year I've posted ~4,000 comments.

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow Chris you're so witty and funny! Why don't you join us? We accept you in our group now. You're no longer an unwanted weirdo outcast!

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Anonymous Coward]

Creimer left Slashdot for YouTube. I know that hurts, Ivan. Lashing out on Slashdot isn't going to bring him back.

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Bing Tsher E]

I used Procomm 2.4.2. Procomm Plus was a commercial turd.

When 2.4.2 became obsolete, we all switched to Telemate, which rocked.

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh of course. There just happen to be these completely different people with the exact same phrasing and interests as Christopher Dale Reimer, autistic virgin.

How very coincidental.

Re:Time to go back to Usenet/other decentralized

[Aighearach]

I beamed this in from the other story.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Whelp

[PopeRatzo]

There goes my weekend plan.

No craigslist personals?

[Rakarra]

Then where else am I going to find the best 100% heterosexual, no gay stuff, Manhood Camping where guys get around a fire to J/O?

Re:No craigslist personals?

[Anonymous Coward]

LOLOLOLOL

This still good?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://sendvid.com/usc56itb

Looks fine to me and I am an expert in such videos being a HARD core Katy Perry fanantic.

Trump's Twitter Feed

[Mistlefoot]

Going forward I'll need to post all my personal ads on Trump's Twitter Feed. If everyone joined me he'd need to face liability, block us all, or shut it down. If only it were that easy.

Re:Trump's Twitter Feed

[Anonymous Coward]

Did trump write these laws?

Nope.

Your democrat and republican reps shit this out and seem to want it. they sponsored it, wrote it, voted for it.

Trumps fault.

Re:Trump's Twitter Feed

[Anonymous Coward]

That actually seems like a plausible reason for all of this.

They make a law which states that the owner/leader/whatever is responsible for what the users/subjects/whatever do, thereforce making Trump guilty of what, say, a hoard of antifa nutcases and migrants do?

Seems like something like that would never actually stand against him, but I really wouldn't put that kind of absurd idea past the absurd people on the far left.

Get outta town.

[WolfgangVL]

Over the past few years it really seems like our government is hell bent on pushing internet facing companies out of the country.(USA)
Why?

Re:Get outta town.

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are they going to go? Europe? China? Any suggestions?

Re:Get outta town.

[jcr]

One idea just occurred to me: an American service provider might demand a warrant before complying with a demand to provide information to a government agency, and might sue if their data is taken without a warrant. The NSA can break into any foreign computer with no repercussions at all.

-jcr

Re:Get outta town.

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you looked at the B&O taxes in places like Seattle? The state charges us over 3 times more since we moved from manufacturing in about 1998 to completely Internet-based by 2005. Seattle's tax is almost twice as much for service companies versus manufacturing. Also, both the state and city's taxes are on gross so even if you lose money, you still have to pay a lot in taxes. Seattle is pushing hard to get rid of Internet companies.

Re:Get outta town.

[BlueStrat]

Seattle is pushing hard to get rid of Internet companies.

Nah, they'll just pass a law that businesses cannot leave Seattle if they have Seattle taxes due, and will make sure there's always a tax balance due on the ones they haven't bankrupted yet.

Strat

Re:Get outta town.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? Maybe this, they've been behind many other tricks to stifle the internet. They don't like the competition.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180318/00493539444/hollywoods-behind-the-scenes-support-sesta-is-all-about-filtering-internet.shtml

Re:Get outta town.

[Bing Tsher E]

Seattle does not have a standing army, nor is it feasible to block any and all moving vans from leaving city limits.

Re:Get outta town.

[Anonymous Coward]

Too late! They're all in Ireland now.

Re:Get outta town.

[Aighearach]

The NSA can break into any foreign computer with no repercussions at all.

-jcr

That's not true, their repercussion is in the form of continued funding.

Re:Get outta town.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just send a squad of police into the HQ and facilities, seize the property, and arrest company officers if any present and issue warrants for the remainder.

Just ask Gibson Guitars what kind of mischief the government can do to any business when it has a mind to.

Re:Get outta town.

[John.Banister]

$$$se.cx

Re:Get outta town.

[Bing Tsher E]

Those were Federal Environmentalist police, engaged in a Just Cause (tm) during the Obama Administration.

Reddit becoming less useful everyday

[Anonymous Coward]

Reddit needs to grow a spine and stop closing subreddits over little issues. Bring back fatpeoplehate, coontown, darknetmarkets, creepshots, jailbait and all the other good stuff. There's voat but it's community is too small too matter.

Re:Reddit becoming less useful everyday

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't someone write a script to scrape reddit and repost on voat to kick start it? That's how all the big social media sites started out with fake accounts. For the image subs it seems like you could get people to switch almost instantly. And porn is what the internet is really based on.

Oh Goody

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Go to poorly moderated site, e.g., Slashshit
2. Pimp myself out in the comments section
3. ???
4. Profit!

lulz land of the "free"

[Anonymous Coward]

lulz land of the "free". hahaha hohohoho hehhehe hahaha
the drumpfenfuhrer dictatorship is coming along nicely!

Hooker ads going offshore?

[jcr]

What's that going to take, about an hour?

-jcr

Re: Hooker ads going offshore?

[Type44Q]

Next step: banning VPN's, connections to foreign IP's (to "protect the sexworkers"), etc.

You know it's coming.

Re: Hooker ads going offshore?

[thinkwaitfast]

I can still reach the craigslist personal's section for Canada.

The problem with retarded bill names.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that idiot simple minded politicians will use typically use this excuse against each other: "Well, you voted against helping trafficked human beings, you are a MONSTER!!!"

That's our law system in a nutshell at this point. If you don't agree with these abortions of laws being passed just by the title name, then "you should never hold public office!"

"I voted for FOSTA, while killing everyone else's freedom for the 1% problem" (transgender rights lately anyone?)

Focus on the 1% problem to take away the rights of all.

given his fondness for adult services...

[ooloorie]

There is still a chance that Trump won't sign it. After all, this legislation hits home for him.

Re: given his fondness for adult services...

[Type44Q]

He's a pompous, moneyhungry misogynist... the exact opposite of the kind of man this nation needs for its president - a calm, smooth-talker who's into little boys more than money.

Re: given his fondness for adult services...

[UnknownSoldier]

> a calm, smooth-talker who's into little boys more than money.

/sarcasm Wait are we talking about a priest or a president? :-)

*rimshot*

Re: given his fondness for adult services...

[ooloorie]

Perhaps we're talking about President Reginald J. Priest.

Hello Slashdot...

[Anonymous Coward]

We'll be watching you very closely. If you're gonna cave, just shut the doors and turn off the lights. Up until now you have been the most censorship free site around. If you lose that distinction, there is no reason for you to exist.

To the rest of you assholes, YOU voted for this, if you don't sweep all the incumbents out of the house and reverse this crap, fuck you sideways!

To the technical talent, please bring back USENET, and make it unblockable, and tell the whiners crying about spam to learn how to write a filter.

I'd like to see UBI too

[rsilvergun]

it would be a lot harder to press men and women into that kind of 'service' if they had their basic living expenses taken care of.

Re:I'd like to see UBI too

[alvinrod]

You're free to pay for the basic living expenses of as many of them as you care to help.

And even if you could be as virtuous as you'd like with everyone else's money, it wouldn't ultimately matter anyway. There are going to be enough men that want sex who are willing to pay for it that some women will engage in prostitution not out of necessity or for their survival, but because it allows them to earn extra money. This may surprise you, but some women like sex as much as most men, especially if they can be discerning in who they're hopping into bed with. If they can get paid for doing what they enjoy, who the hell are you to tell them what they're allowed to do with their bodies?

Legalizing prostitution will do a lot of prevent the kinds of horrible conditions and abuse that many women find themselves in just as repealing prohibition meant that no one had to get shot or poisoned over bootleg liquor.

Re:I'd like to see UBI too

[BlueStrat]

If they can get paid for doing what they enjoy, who the hell are you to tell them what they're allowed to do with their bodies?

We're politicians that aren't getting the lion's share of the money changing hands, that's who!

Now shut the fuck up and pay your taxes like a good slave! /s

Strat

Re:I'd like to see UBI too

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly you have no concept of human needs. I guarantee you that even if you covered everyone's living expenses there would still be huge amounts of people engaging in prostitution WILLINGLY. Seriously dude, not all women (or men) are forced in to prostitution due to living expenses or by physical force. The goal isn't about paying people to not be prostitutes but to remove the physical force angel and allowing freely consulting adults to engage in whatever private practice they want & if money changes hands that's none of the governments business.

Whatever age you are you seriously need to grow up & get out in the world.

Re:I'd like to see UBI too

[Anonymous Coward]

What's really funny of course is if these politician's legalized prostitution then guess what? They could actually tax it and nobody would grumble about that any more than anyone grumble's about paying taxes. So they would get their 'lions share of the money changing hands'.

Frankly I don't think that's the problem at all. As someone above noted, this is all about both sides of the fence thinking that someone selling 'sex for money' just isn't 'right'. In other words none of them actually embrace the US Constitution for what it is, an expression of 'individual rights' where all the rights are 'reserved to the people' and only those things the people wanted government to stick their nose in to was written down...regulating prostitution or banning speech was never a power given to any government by the Constitution...but hey we let them take it anyway.

Re:I'd like to see UBI too

[dryeo]

A lot easier to tax a legal business. It's also one of the arguments for legalizing marijuana, of course the right up here are just screaming about the children without stopping to consider we already have one of the highest amounts of usage by children. Same with sex, when our Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional to ban prostitution, they just made it illegal to buy sex and put in regulations like no selling sex within a ridiculous distance from schools. They scream about free speech and being allowed to vent their hatred while doing their best to illegalize other types of speech such as talking about sex and especially pictures.

Re:I'd like to see UBI too

[umghhh]

While this is true there are of course people forced to prostitution by poverty or coercion. There is probably a better way of allowing free people selling whatever they have including temporary access to their private parts while preventing that minors and grownups are forced to do that when they do not want to. Sadly none of the asshats in the parliament (actually any of the Western ones I had a chance to look at closer) is bothered enough to do something in the proper direction.

Don't Worry...

[Thelasko]

Tinder is still working!

"Human Trafficking"

[gatfirls]

The fundies really did some good PR work to make human trafficking a synonym to prostitution.

creimer sock puppet post MOD Down!

[Anonymous Coward]

creimer sock puppet post to build up his karma!

CREIMER' SUBMISSIONS UPDATE:
Note also that creimer is trying to regain karma by getting his submissions published as articles on /. so make sure to go to:
https://slashdot.org/~_sharp'r...
https://slashdot.org/~crreimer
https://slashdot.org/~cdreimer
https://slashdot.org/~criss69
https://slashdot.org/~Anonymou...
https://slashdot.org/~FatCashe...
https://slashdot.org/~ILoveFat...
https://slashdot.org/~IHateFat...
https://slashdot.org/~IAteFatC...
https://slashdot.org/~ITapeFat...
https://slashdot.org/~IApeFatC...
https://slashdot.org/~IPrayFat...
https://slashdot.org/~FatCashe...
and mod down his submissions as well. The great thing is that you don't even need mod points to mod down a submission, just click on the "minus" icon!

Yes, believe it or not, creimer owns all the above sock puppet accounts. It is a mystery why Slashdot management tolerates it!

creimer wrote:

I don't bother with mod points. I'm doing something much more sinister. It took ten story submissions ? I'll have to double check the number ? to move cdreimer's karma from neutral to excellent without ever being exposed to the capricious mods. Mmmmmwwwwahahahahahahaha!

https://slashdot.org/comments....

Danger, Will Robinson, Danger! Creimy is posting more than 2 posts a day. Hurry! mod down otherwise /. will go to hell again!

Note: you can mod down even if already at -1 to lower karma and to prevent lost /. users to accidentally mod up.

creimer wrote:

All you need to do is find a website with a permissive TOS, say, Slashdot, create a Python script to scrape your own comments, sprinkle Amazon affiliate links in various posts, and then re-post past links whenever possible. Won't be long before you start making "coffee money" each month.

https://slashdot.org/comments....

C.D. Reimer is a renowned Slashdot collaborator, as he puts it himself; "Because of the quality of my posts and my article submissions, I'm a highly rated commentator and moderator."

But does anybody ever wondered what "C.D." stands for? Well, it stands for Creimy Dumpty of course!

Creimy Dumpty sat on the wall,
Creimy Dumpty had a great fall.
All the king's horses
And all the king's men
Couldn't put Creimy Dumpty
Together again.

Creimy's siblings video and theme song, very realistic, especially the pants, just like Creimy's:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

With "Vice President Pence Vowing US Astronauts Will Return To the Moon", we are sure they will need miracle workers up there, here is what it would look like. Note that Creimy takes care of bringing a lot of food to the moon as depicted below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Creimy's real pictures:
Before the sex change:
https://ibb.co/cc7Ddw
After the sex change:
https://ibb.co/gVad65

Creimy's "enterprise-level" chair, he ta

Clearly unconstitutional

[K. S. Van Horn]

"it would apply retroactively -- a seeming violation of the Constitution's ex post facto clause"

Seeming? That's a clear, unambiguous violation of the Constitution's prohibition against ex post facto laws: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." There's no wiggle room there.

Re:Clearly unconstitutional

[Anonymous Coward]

"the Department of Justice also warned the House in February 2018 that the bill "raises a serious constitutional concern," as it would apply retroactively -- a seeming violation of the Constitution's ex post facto clause. Congress passed it anyway."

They were told what they were doing was stupid and unconstitutional. They did it anyway. The problem is, that someone has to be willing to face it in court. They have to host an ad they know is against the law and pre-dates the passage of the bill and have the time and money to go to jail and put up a likely costly and lengthy legal defense.

The REALLY significant thing here is that now that they have done it once and gotten away with it, there is nothing stopping them from doing it again with some other thing. Its like "Obamacare", regardless of how you feel about its, is the government compelled purchase of a service. In this case, the service is "health insurance" and if you plan to exist, you have to have it (barring some fringe exceptions). Now what's to say that they cant compel you to purchase some other service, regardless of how worthwhile you think it is? They have done it before and they have won every case about it in court.

Its a scary situation. We saw something very similar when municipalities began raising the age to purchase tobacco to 21. For instance, my municipality made it illegal for anyone under 21 to posses or purchase cigarettes, while NOT grandfathering in those people who were already 18. That means if you were 19, you legally purchased and became addicted to a product that the government now made illegal for you to purchase or possess. Thats fucked up.

Deliberately misleading terminology

[K. S. Van Horn]

I've noticed that the term "prostitution" has been replaced by the term "sex trafficking" lately. This strikes me as deliberately misleading terminology, aimed at making people think that human trafficking -- that is, slavery -- is what is being targeted, when in reality it is certain voluntary transactions that are being targeted.

Re: Deliberately misleading terminology

[Anonymous Coward]

No, sex trafficking is a modern sex slavery. Independent contractors not included.

Re: Deliberately misleading terminology

[Anonymous Coward]

#FakeNews

This is glorious.

[Anonymous Coward]

Every braindead conservative on the Internet is now crawling out of the woodwork to complain that YouTube and reddit are affecting MUH FREEDOMS by violating the First Amendment. It's almost like they have no idea what their own government is doing, or how their own Constitution works, or what rights private companies (that they love to defend against regulation) have.

Re:This is glorious.

[Anonymous Coward]

you of course cherish censorship when it supports silencing your political opponents, but are so hypocritical that you can't see that the votes against this were all conservative republicans.

Immoral to buy a movie ticket - screw MPAA

[FeelGood314]

It has now reached the point were I feel guilty paying for a ticket knowing that some of that money goes to the MPAA. I know democracy is weak in the USA but I'm still saddened when I see a new exploit of the corrupt system they have.

Good thing + Easy Civil Disobedience

[Anonymous Coward]

Bear with me here.

This is a good thing because the current makeup of the Supreme Court as mainly 'strict constitutionalists' (I won't say 'conservative' because that's a loaded term) means that most if not all of this bill will likely be struck down if/when any case gets to the Supreme Court and there's no doubt that someone with deep pockets will take it to the Supreme Court level as there's no way to meet the obligations of this bill with 100% accuracy. Further to that though while such a case may be about this bill alone Supreme Court judgments act as precedents for similar laws e.g. they place boundaries on what the government can & cannot pass a law about. Personally I think all laws should REQUIRE a Supreme Court challenge before become law where affected parties would act as the 'plaintiff' just as if they'd run afoul of th law, not just a 'judicial review'.

Secondly, we can conduct a bit of easy Civil Disobedience. We can all gang up and start posting material prohibited by this law to any government website, federal, state, county etc., any website of a sitting politician or candidate that allows positing of material. Let's see how these politicians really act when they are the ones potentially being sued and/or sent to jail for allow 'kiddy porn' on their websites.

Dating sites next?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like thats the next step right???

Destroying the internet

[BlueCoder]

I remember when CL revolved the escorts section. I said then that they would move to casual encounters- the did; all be it slowing over a couple years. Now this... which only means they are either going to adopt another forum or just spam all the forums. I can't wait for this to reach the supreme court to be struck down for being overreaching and and an overburden.

All forums all over the internet are going to be setup with bogus adds by unscrupulous attorneys. I can see many companies coming together showing all the money spent to censor this stuff but it only becoming more prevalent because attorneys can profit from inflating the problem. You are absolutely going to see adds all over big companies forums.

Hey politicians in congress.... you just screwed over big business and speech at the same time.

Re:Destroying the internet

[Anonymous Coward]

For rent: temporary usage of female genitals. Rest of body included for FREE!

Craigslist has themselves to blame

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been on the personals there. It is littered with ads for prostitution. And another half of the ones that don't say they are prostitution ads then tell you that they are prostitutes after you email them.

And day after day the exact same people repost even after having their ads taken down.

This is just like someone running a prostitution ring in the parking lot of the convenience store by your house. If the convenience store wouldn't make them leave then the cops would show up and arrest the convenience store owner for basically running a whore house.

Craigslist wouldn't be full of whore-ads if all the whores and customers didn't know that Craigslist allows the whores to do business there. If it was one sided then there would be no reason to post there or look there. If Craigslist didn't allow those posts then johns wouldn't look there. If johns didn't know to look there then prostitutes wouldn't post there.

Even though I half blame congress for stupid laws instead of enforcing laws that already exist, I really really really have to blame places like Craigslist for letting something like this go on until we get to the point that we are looking at government cracking down on websites.

Ilegal ads posted by law enforcement

[Anonymous Coward]

What about victims of entrapment when local lawenforcement post fake ads and pretends to be under age to lure people to commit crimes and lie under otah and put inocent people in prison in ga