Slashdot Mirror
Cloudflare: FOSTA Was a 'Very Bad Bill' That's Left the Internet's Infrastructure Hanging (vice.com)
Last week, President Donald Trump signed the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) into law. It's a bill that penalizes any platform found "facilitating prostitution," and has caused many advocacy groups to come out against the bill, saying that it undermines essential internet freedoms. The most recent entity to decry FOSTA is Cloudflare, which recently decided to terminate its content delivery network services for an alternative, decentralized social media platform called Switter. Motherboard talked to Cloudflare's general counsel, Doug Kramer, about the bill and he said that FOSTA was an ill-consider bill that's now become a dangerous law: "[Terminating service to Switter] is related to our attempts to understand FOSTA, which is a very bad law and a very dangerous precedent," he told me in a phone conversation. "We have been traditionally very open about what we do and our roles as an internet infrastructure company, and the steps we take to both comply with the law and our legal obligations -- but also provide security and protection, let the internet flourish and support our goals of building a better internet." Cloudflare lobbied against FOSTA, Kramer said, urging lawmakers to be more specific about how infrastructure companies like internet service providers, registrars and hosting and security companies like Cloudflare would be impacted. Now, he said, they're trying to figure out how customers like Switter will be affected, and how Cloudflare will be held accountable for them.
"We don't deny at all that we have an obligation to comply with the law," he said. "We tried in this circumstance to get a law that would make sense for infrastructure companies... Congress didn't do the hard work of understanding how the internet works and how this law should be crafted to pursue its goals without unintended consequences. We talked to them about this. A lot of groups did. And it was hard work that they decided not do." He said the company hopes, going forward, that there will be more clarity from lawmakers on how FOSTA is applied to internet infrastructure. But until then, he and others there are having to figure it out along with law enforcement and customers. "Listen, we've been saying this all along and I think people are saying now, this is a very bad law," Kramer said. "We think, for now, it makes the internet a different place and a little less free today as a result. And there's a real-world implication of this that people are just starting to grapple with."
"We don't deny at all that we have an obligation to comply with the law," he said. "We tried in this circumstance to get a law that would make sense for infrastructure companies... Congress didn't do the hard work of understanding how the internet works and how this law should be crafted to pursue its goals without unintended consequences. We talked to them about this. A lot of groups did. And it was hard work that they decided not do." He said the company hopes, going forward, that there will be more clarity from lawmakers on how FOSTA is applied to internet infrastructure. But until then, he and others there are having to figure it out along with law enforcement and customers. "Listen, we've been saying this all along and I think people are saying now, this is a very bad law," Kramer said. "We think, for now, it makes the internet a different place and a little less free today as a result. And there's a real-world implication of this that people are just starting to grapple with."
When the majority of Democrats in the House and Senate voted for this?
There is no doubt that trafficking occurs on all the subject services or that the services and carriers knowingly continue to allow it. Carriers need to shut them down so that we can get this law changed. Zero tolerance for ALL law breakers usually results in new laws. Don't wait to let law enforcement figure out how they WANT to use it. Make them use it 100% against all who violate the letter of it.
Okay, maybe it is indeed the selling of ass, but not far behind is the often uncompensated occupation of righteous indignation... undoubtedly founded by a special interest group previously in charge of a monopoly on the delivery of ass... not entirely an objective political action committee.
Clearly legalized prostitution is a deterrent to sexual assault. If I hear one more person claim rape isn't a sex crime, I think I might run outside with my hands over my ears and complete those fucking chores I've been putting off... or have another whiskey. I can't be certain.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Dear Internet services companies, here's the plan. You move offshore. We'll get VPNs. Citizen idiots will continue to vote in idiot politicians who will continue to make idiotic laws.
Heaven forbid two consenting adults do whatever the fuck they want, causing no injury to anyone, except for moral busybodies.
"Any platform" should include hotels. I wonder why it doesn't.... Corrupt real estate developer politicians maybe? Trump has been in politics since he ran for President in what, 1988? He just failed at campaigning the first twenty five years. Now he has graduated to failing at governance.
Hypocrisy is straight A's tho.
You are a nation that is fundamentally happy with the idea of people shooting children when they are at school, but the barest glimpse of a nipple and its national indignation. Very strange priorities ...
And lock you all up and your little dog toto too yeeeeeeeeehahahahahahahaha! yeeeeeehahahahaha!
Brilliant master play against a free and open source of communication that posses a direct threat to the billionaire wealth presently in power or mass incompetence?
Does it even matter?
You'd better start standing up and doing something. So far the States are only acting against the FCC, the FOSTA act got strong support across the aisles with only 2 votes, one from each side dissenting
Cloudflare claims "Congress didn’t do the hard work of understanding how the internet works and how this law should be crafted to pursue its goals without unintended consequences. We talked to them about this. A lot of groups did. And it was hard work that they decided not do.”
This is a load of crap. What Cloudflare really wanted was a way that they could continue doing business without having to doing any of the work required for taking on clients. What they wanted was a "get out of jail free" card that gave them a eternal pass to shirk any and all responsibility.
Regardless of how you feel about the bill itself, you shouldn't be bothered by the crocodile tears coming from Cloudflare.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
yikes. yikes. understatement.
How have we come to this point???
I wonder why the summary mentions Switter in passing and yet doesn't bother to mention what it is. All part of the typical "victim building" narrative. People might get the idea that some virtuous service was unfairly targeted. Switter is a Mastodon instance that was meant from the outset to facilitate the prostitution of people. The lovely irony here is that the sex traffickers feared being banned by Twitter so they set up their own service. Cloudflare, the site that banned the Daily Stormer, has now banned Switter as well.
The basic thing that the outrage machine either does not realize or is deliberately ignoring is that one of Trump's signature policies is attacking human trafficking. It gets very little press for obvious reasons: it paints him as a good person, and we all know that Trump is nothing less than Adolf Hitler. Didn't Hitler disrupt public spaces and ban things he didn't like the sound of? Oh the irony. This attack inevitably harms the "good" prostitutes right along with the evil human traffickers. The problem is, you can't tell them apart and "legitimate" prostitution platforms are used for evil means. The howl seems to be, "you're hurting all the good ones just to get a few bad apples!"
Luckily, the precedent has already been set: it's acceptable to get rid of 10 if only 2 are guilty. FOSTA is just following in the footsteps of proud people that have blazed the trail.
Likewise this Switter prostitution service isn't being deprived of life and liberty, they're being transferred to another internet provider. It's not a big deal. What's that I hear, it is a big deal? So it's not OK to do it to an organization specifically set up to facilitate the prostitution of human beings, but it's OK to do it to humans falsely accused of rape?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
>"Any platform" should include hotels. I wonder why it doesn't....
duhhh, maybe cause hotels don't advertise online that they got whores? The "O" in FOSTA stands for online, dipshit.
FOSTA & the GDPR are going to make operating on the internet interesting soon.
Yes, we just call it "having my mouthpiece dole out some hush money" now.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
The same platforms that are used by "legitimate" prostitutes are also used by human traffickers. Since we can't tell them apart, all of them have to go. "If there are ten people who have been accused, and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, it seems better to get rid of all ten people."
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Agreed, but in the case of human trafficking, these are not consenting adults but rather a victim of some truly horrendous crimes, and open platforms enable the marketplace. Now, if you want to license prostitutes and have them post an ID number on a site ensuring it is legit, then go for it.
Great, now that the media and every other person has been screaming n shouting that trump will do something stupid(tank economy, make ww3 etc), that he sucks(hang him, impeach him etc) and other nonsensical stuff(small hands, orange hair)... When we need our voice to matter most, we are just todays latest outrage, lost among the various noise that everyone everywhere everyday throws at him.
Good job.
#notusacitizen #usagrad
That quote is about not allowing male students to enroll at a college where there were any accusations of rape levied against them. This is about stopping many peoples naughty, legal interactions with force of law.
What makes "online" different that "brick-and-mortar", dipshit ? (beside the level of political contribution)
It's about stopping evil activity by throwing out the evil with the good, and saying it's OK if good is harmed. Since these prostitution platforms are used for illegal human trafficking, they must be thrown out even if it harms "legitimate" prostitutes. It must be a wonderful feeling to lay down one's closely held values for the sake of freeing slaves. The sensation of sacrifice must be thrilling.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
And both are wrong as both harm people who've done nothing wrong. Isn't the point of law supposed to be to protect the innocent? When law harms the innocent, the law has gone awry.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
nothing, ...anymore ..... and that was kinda the point of this law? lol, imagine running a hotel without paying taxes .....
Hell no. If you can’t tell them apart, all of them will have to be left alone, and you will have to find some other way to combat human trafficking. That is a core element of a free society under the rule of law.
In practice it’s more of a consideration than a hard principle, but it’s an important one. It means that with any law that harms innocents for the sake of fighting a certain crime, the rights of these innocents must weigh very, very heavily against the purported goals. And where the impact on innocent bystanders is large, it becomes important to ensure and verify that those goals are actually met. In that light, this law falls seriously short. It’s “think of the children” legislation.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
And Donald never used prossies ???
Did he just take them on as apprentices
and teach them about boring missionary sex
Go well
>It should not be, at all, trying to decide whether or not a customer's data or business practices are unacceptable in various regions around the world, especially at a level where Cloudflare itself is supposedly criminal liable.
And yet, its TOS says it can do exactly that https://www.cloudflare.com/terms/
SECTION 11: INVESTIGATION Cloudflare reserves the right to investigate you, your business, and/or your owners, officers, directors, managers, and other principals, your sites, and the materials comprising the sites at any time. These investigations will be conducted solely for Cloudflare’s benefit, and not for your benefit or that of any third party. If the investigation reveals any information, act, or omission, which in Cloudflare’s sole opinion, constitutes a violation of any local, state, federal, or foreign law or regulation, this Agreement, or is otherwise deemed harm the Service, Cloudflare may immediately shut down your access to the Service.
Where companies like Cloudflare and Google and Microsoft and Apple and Amazon and all the major players shut down the entire internet infrastructure- displaying a message on how to contact congress and sign a message stating they are against this and that the internet will not return until this bill is reversed. We would have an IMMEDIATE response by congress within 24 hours. An emergency session would be called for because the internet would basically go down.
"Relax Mark," she says. I slowly unzip my pants.
The living room in this house has an incredible view. It’s as if you can see every inch of the Bay Area from up here. Is the Bay Area seeing every inch of me though?
Mark begins to sob. "My mother was right." He hangs his head in anguish. "I should have married a nice Jewish woman."
"Oh please." Priscilla rolls her eyes. "Have you ever even met a Jewish American Princess? The first JAP you would have tied the knot with would have taken half of your shit and used that money to keep the ball rolling with the next ten men."
"But look at what you’re doing now! I guess I should have expected no better from a girl I met at an AEPi party!" Mark shoots back.
"We agreed this would be the best action to take for the health of our marriage. Why are you so bitter now?"
"I don’t know. It just feels weird."
"That’s normal," Priscilla says coolly. She looks straight at me: "Let’s get this over with."
"Listen, if you guys aren’t comfortable with this, I can leave," I say, trying to keep the situation calm. A dog enters the room. It’s big, with what looks like long white pool noodles for fur. If Bob Marley had an Albino dog, this would be it. He seems confused, but he can tell Mark is agitated. The canine looks at me and begins to snarl.
"Calm down, Beast!" Priscilla shouts.
The dog immediately cowers back in fear, whimpering quietly. How did I get myself into this? Priscilla looks back at me: "No, you’re finishing this."
I shift my gaze back from the dog to the window. "So, are you comfortable, Priscilla?" Great view.
"Doctor," she corrects me.
"Doctor Priscilla?"
"Doctor Chan."
"Have you done something like this with your patients?" Mark interrupts anxiously.
"No Mark, I just prefer to be called by my proper title with strangers. Stop being so petty. You know I love you. I’m doing this for you," she replies gently.
"Yeah. I’m sorry honey. You know I’m just getting worked up," Mark begins to twiddle his thumbs.
"Ugh. You’re worse than your mother. Do you want to be like them?"
I have to interject- "Like who?"
Priscilla is quick to answer: "The Obamas. The Musks. You know."
"No, I really don’t," I answer. Because I don’t. What are these bizarre people going on about?
"Like last New Year’s eve. Elon Musk filed for divorce while everyone was out having the time of their lives," Priscilla explains.
"And the Obamas?" I inquire further.
Mark answers, "I’m pretty much on a first-name basis with Barry. The controversy is that last Christmas vacation when the Obamas flew out to Hawaii, Barry came back, but Michelle stayed an extra week. It was quite a spectacle."
"’I’m pretty much on a first-name basis with Barry.’" Priscilla repeats mockingly. "As if we don’t all know Obama’s first name."
"I don’t get it. What do those guys have to do with you?" I need to ask again, for I am not one of quick wit.
"Well, frankly, the marriage is stagnating. We married too young and never really got to explore ourselves. But we can’t get a divorce, it would be too high profile. The press wouldn’t stop harassing us about it. It would be like if Hillary and Bill got a divorce halfway through her campaign run," Priscilla explains.
"I understand." I don’t actually understand. But who knows how long this explanation of their scheming and paltry concerns will go on for? I don’t really care.
"The last thing Mark would want," Priscilla starts again, "is for me to run away from San Francisco, and travel the world alone! I’d even have a blog, where I would tell everyone that they need to quit their jobs, marry a nice Jewish boy from Harvard with a budding social network, and
The myth of the free and open internet got the last nail in its coffin, in part because of Cloudflare deciding whose traffic they were and were not going to carry. It was fun while it lasted, but c'est la vie.
They have the reign of power of all houses THEREFORE they are responsible , no matter what the other party vote.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Yeah, there's no way traffickers could get fake ID numbers.
The answer to trafficking is to legalize all forms of prostitution. If there's plenty of consenting supply then there's less profit in supplying it illegally and less people will be trafficked.
The same goes for drugs: Making drugs illegal doesn't take any drugs off the streets, it just fills the pockets of the mafia.
No sig today...
See, Dipshit, Zuck dipped his penis in shit then proceeded to fuck the world with it.
That's the old way of thinking. You're talking about the old Eurocentric way of thinking, the one that has been used to dominate other people. For the past several decades, more and more academics have called this way of thinking into question, especially the sort of rationalist worldview that emerged in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The one that came up with outdated ideas like the one you espouse, the rights of innocents. The world has moved on, and if innocents must be harmed to fight a greater evil, then so be it. You want to argue, go find some post-structuralist thinkers and tell them your 18th century values are still valid in a globalized world.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
The general sense I get from this is lawmakers either wanted to make a well-intentioned law but, didn't understand the internet well enough to write it, were informed it was bad as written and it would take far more research and work to design it to work as intended, and the lawmakers decided they didn't want to spend the time/work and passed "whatever" instead or anti-sin activists wanted to shut down smut sites on the internet and intentionally passed it under the guise of an anti-trafficking bill to slide it through. Both scenarios are believable so I'm not sure which is correct. It is possible that group 1 started the bill and group 2 hijacked it, too.
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
"Whoosh!"
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
The problem is this bill gathers them all up and treats them equally. There's no distinction or any incentive for the sites to create distinction. That's the problem with this bill.
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
... trump legislating a bill that frustrates his biggest source of pleasure? That can't be, can it? So where would he get his next prostitutes from then?
Bach says it all.
The same platforms that are used by "legitimate" prostitutes are also used by human traffickers. Since we can't tell them apart, all of them have to go. "If there are ten people who have been accused, and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, it seems better to get rid of all ten people."
Ironically, that is the antithesis of Blackstone's Formulation. Most know it as what
Children could be harmed. Think of the children. Always think of the children.
Illegal is not immoral.
Whoa now, Robespierre.
So the obvious solution is to legalize prostitution so that adults who make their own choice to enter that profession can do so safely and openly without having to resort to more clandestine customer acquisition methods. But of course, the goal isn't really protection of these women, it's about punishing something they feel is immoral.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Crying about stopping child prostitution, claiming it is a 1st amendment issue.
While screaming to censor political speech, of groups like Citizens United.
Says A LOT about them.
What we need is responsibility on the individual breaking a law, not the carrier of the information. The internet should be like the air, it carries sound from person to person but it isnâ(TM)t the airâ(TM)s fault for doing so. You wouldnâ(TM)t blame the post office because someone used their service to ship a package with illegal drugs in it. The internet and websites that rely on user submitted data such as YouTube, twitter, and yes the hosting providers, need to be allowed to do their job which is carrying the data of the user, without being responsible for that users message. The individual user is responsible for their message. Policing is difficult as users cross cities, states, and countries and have anonymity, but paper mail delivery has the exactly same issues and we donâ(TM)t blame the post office.
If it is not forced or for lack of a reasonable alternative for survival, I am all for legalizing and regulation of prostitution and sites that facilitate sexual hookups. I even applaud the women her wilfully serve in such roles and they make life better for over stressed and depressed men. It's a good thing.
However, Craigslist and others should be held responsible when they know that a good amount of the hookups going on are with women who have been abducted and forced into sexual slavery. The Internet has caused a massive growth in that crime/industry in the United States. The fact that willing prostitutes rely upon such sites to pre-screen their clients for their own safety does not make up for the criminal use... which frankly, I think is more common--but even if it wasn't.
What's worse, to me as a software engineer, is that it seems to be largely those in the tech industry that take most advantage of these services. Where are most abducted girls taken to service paying men? Silicon Valley, Seattle--near large hubs of tech workers. Paying for prostitution with girls forced into service is worse than mere rape, as if rape isn't bad enough. It is institutionalized rape and rape for which the victims often go to jail, when caught. And it is a huge and horrific stain on the tech industry in the United States.
since more than a few are used to trade liquor and goods for sex
Next do guns.
All plausible. It really will be impossible to differentiate ignorance from malice in this instance, I believe... unless you consider purposely attempting to legislate something you do not understand without taking the time to at least attempt to understand it a malicious act, in which case we're looking at clear-cut malice no matter what angle we look from.
I, for one, always consider willful ignorance to be malicious.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
This congress (not this congress, I mean any congress in this country) should not be in charge of any legislation remotely concerning technology, period. Not one of them understands any of it. We do need some laws governing technology, but these people aren't qualified. Many of them have been in office since the 70s, too.
Collective punishment is not a legitimate tool to use in literally any situation, including the military. How it ever worked in Roman times is amazing, but it does not work now.
I am convinced that it is because "they" (the people in power) know that if it was perfectly legal and anyone could go get nice service in a clean and safe environment there would be a fairly large proportion of men who would become far less inclined to date and/or marry. And the fact is that the exact men that would become most likely to forego dating/marriage would be ones that are relatively successfully financially speaking, i.e., the most eligible of eligible bachelors.
So dating/marriage and the children that frequently follow is a huge driver of the economy both in terms of the direct expenditures and getting young men to "settle down and become productive members of society" and the oligarchy doesn't want that. It wants everyone getting into debt slavery as soon as possible.
Fucking sexists. Men can also be prostitutes. See the wonderful documentary Deuce Bigalow.
Then I should be allowed!
Why does some 70 year old white privileged billionaire and his corrupt congress have the right to deny me of using my vagina how I please?
So I guess if you are really good at driving fast, speed limits are an imposition on your freedom?
But we're not talking about moral vs immoral, we're talking about innocent vs guilty. You can argue all you want that prostitution should be legal (I think it should be as well), but the fact is it is illegal, and thus anyone participating in the act cannot, by definition, be called innocent.
Yes they are. But as I said, in practice these aren't absolutes; the pros and cons need to be weighed. Only a few people are really good at driving fast as opposed to the hordes of idiots who merely think they are good. Even if you are really good, that really only applies to controlled conditions. On public roads, even the best driver is subject to risk of an unavoidable collision, and that risk increases with speed, even for really good speeders. In this case, almost everyone* agrees that the downsides far ouweigh the rather small imposition on your freedom to go at any speed you like. Same for the obligation to wear seat belts. In case of human traficking and Internet platforms, the imposition of these measures on free speech and the platforms to provide it are far more fundamental.
*) I suppose Germany is the exception, where there are still stretches of Autobahn with no speed limit.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Look, it's not even illegal everywhere in the US. Moreover, the impact will affect vastly more innocents than exploiters. Who this bill will really punish is single mothers in rural areas who will now have to hit the streets to keep their kids from starving. You've backed a solution that increases exploitation and illegal prostitution, the two things you claim to hate so much. Good job.
Crying about individual liberty and personal responsability.
Voting for a law to force the religious ideology of their voting base on every single american.
Says A LOT about them.
Pot, meet kettle.
Any form of communication can be used to "facilitate prostitution". This is clearly a massive breach of our first amendment freedom of speech. If FOSTA is left to stand then what we'll have is:
The Internet
R.I.P.
1983-2018
It works, that's why it is used. It is also wrong.
If you want to stop a behavior, don't just punish those who do it. Punish those who allow it to happen.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
It's one of the primary tools of dictators.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Well, dipshit, the most pertinent difference is the fact the law in question and the topic of this Slashdot post is the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act and doesn't mention anything about prostitution in any context other than online services.
So...the free newspapers stacked on the window sills at supermarket exits, the ones with prostitution ads on their back pages, which is what Backpage modeled itself after, are still free? Those rags with their relentless Industrial Workers of the World Unite! attitudes that make Nancy Pelosi look like a knuckle-dragging gorilla named Adolf?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
See subject: Cloud is REALLY for an easily mined/tracked CENTRAL CHOKEPOINT for information on YOU (like DNS).
* Wake up people...
(Why? It's a HELL OF A LOT EASIER on the "powers that be" to get shit on you from 1 point is WHY vs. a myriad of websites...)
APK
P.S.=> Unbelievable - are there bennies to it? Yes, some (geographic closeness/less hops to a 'destination' via cache & SOME protection via site resource distribution offsite vs. DDoS) but the REAL DEAL is what I write here... apk
The answer to trafficking is to legalize all forms of prostitution. If there's plenty of consenting supply then there's less profit in supplying it illegally
You assume there would be "plenty of consenting supply". And you assume that the regulation of the industry would not impose costs that illicit providers would avoid, just like those who smuggle and illegally distribute alcohol, cigarettes, and pot already do.
Where there is profit, there is a profit motive. No, I'm sorry, but the answer to trafficking is to keep it illegal and prosecute those who profit and promote it.
You assume there would be "plenty of consenting supply"
And you assume that there won't be.
Unfortunately for you, the evidence is on my side. Try looking at a country where it's legal, eg. most of Europe.
No sig today...
And you assume that there won't be.
I don't see a surplus in places like Nevada or Amsterdam, so yes, I assume that this would not change.
Unfortunately for you, the evidence is on my side. Try looking at a country where it's legal, eg. most of Europe.
Why yes, I see scads of beautiful women just lining up to become sex partners with the kind of men who need to pay for sex, because it is such a wonderful, safe, and desirable profession. I remember walking down the street in Amsterdam to see what could be seen, and I remember wanting to flush my eyes with bleach after doing that.
While the supply might be amazing in such places, the demand isn't for what the supply can do, and the costs of being legal are still lost profit to those who act extra-legally. Legalizing prostitution is not the answer to sex trafficking and unwilling participants, any more than legalizing booze was the solution for moonshining and bootlegging.
I remember walking down the street in Amsterdam to see what could be seen, and I remember wanting to flush my eyes with bleach after doing that.
Ah, yes, the famous Amsterdam street. For tourists.
That ain't typical. Really.
No sig today...
But that is not why Cloudflare is saying this. They know itâ(TM)s a tipping point where they will be forced to actually police the child porn they are enabling.