Can anyone give us numbers on the precise percentage of Freenet traffic that kiddie porn makes up?
I'm concerned about the kiddie porn problem, but why the hell would people even go through the trouble of using Freenet just to trade kiddie porn?
It's sick, but sometimes I wonder if the individuals who do upload that shit to Freenet do it precisely to get Freenet shut down.
What better way to get something shut down than to upload kiddie porn? Any serious users wont want to use it anymore and then it will ONLY be filled with kiddie porn, which gives the authorities every reason to ban the entire network as a kiddie porn network.
So the Freenet people should keep precise percentages of the traffic and keep the traffic data public. As long as the majority of the traffic is not kiddie porn, Freenet has a chance at being useful.
The problem with wifi is it can be snooped just as easily as wired. The medium you use shouldn't matter if Freenet is actually well designed.
Freenet is only moderately secure because it's designed on top of Java. Let's be real folks, Freenet is only as secure as the Java it runs on. If Freenet were something written in C, which could be compiled for a cellphone or PDA, and install directly into the router itself, well yeah then I'd say it's pretty secure, but when you install Freenet on a PC, it's only as secure as the PC, and if you install Freenet on a PC on top of Java, it's only as secure as Java and the PC. If it's installed on the lower layer, such as the router level, it would be much more secure because your wifi router would download freenet from another wifi router, and you'd access freenet that way.
But overall, Freenet is a good project because it's something we can learn from and study, it's more like a science project though, I wouldn't expect people to use this in China right now. If it's a life threatening situation, I would not use Freenet, but if you want to discuss UFO conspiracy theories, or complain about whatever, try Freenet.
As far as the kiddie porn problem goes, once again we focus too much on solving all problems on the application layer, when we could simply change the jpeg and other protocols to store information in the file about the camera model and where the camera was bought, made, what computer it was originally on and who owned that computer, to help the authorities trace back where the illegal images came from.
The people who download the illegal images have evidence, and they can in some cases help track down who originally created the images in the first place. By the time it gets on Freenet, or even on the internet, it becomes like whack a mole and you end up chasing copies of the images around the internet as it gets further and further away from the originator(s).
Freenet could provide a way to reduce the child porn problem, but if they did that then all images uploaded would have to be registered to the individual who uploads it, which means images from China would also be registered and China will be able to track it down. So it's very complicated and it does not seem that child porn can ever be solved on the application layer.
The Hollywood Stock Exchange idea should be applied to bands as well. Through the prediction markets we can save the arts. We can bet on stuff like album sales, we can bet on anything related to the functioning of the band or the artist. It's a prediction market.
Just as gambling is a sure business model, prediction and speculation is even more sure, because the business model is based on the very model our economy functions on. New bands can issue an IPO of sorts and receive initial investment by the fans who discover them, the original fans along with the band will then get rich together if the band sells a lot of albums.
No need to have record companies, no need to have an RIAA, no need to even care about album sales really.
It's simple. We don't need an RIAA or a record company. We don't need Apples Itunes with their pre-selected music programming.
I say, if you people are serious, create your own business models, create your own distribution models, and design it into the web itself, design it into the internet itself, design it into linux itself, into windows itself, and through the design revolution you get the protocol revolution which brings the licenses like creative commons, and that brings the business models which generate the profits to allow us to save the music industry while getting rich in the process.
There's money to be made, Google shows us this, and so does Youtube.
How do we know there really is a terrorist watchlist? What if the government simply monitors every human on earth? No need to keep a list then. If the government doesn't have enough information about you, they'll monitor you to get the information, regardless of who you are. Even the President is monitored.
Since everyone on IRC is a pirate who has mp3s, movies, or software.
Not to mention this opens up the door to the feds sending you IMs and offering you mp3s, software and other such things and then using it as probable cause to raid you.
So now it's criminal just to know these sites exist?
" All I can say is for your sake I sincerely hope that you do not live in the US or in any country with an extradition treaty with the US. You have just incriminated yourself. Utterly. I can honestly say that I have never, ever, under any circumstances, been to any child porn site. Nor have I ever searched for one on google and have absolutely no awareness that any such sites exist."
Whether or not these sites are real child porn or not, I don't know, but certainly there are lots of questionable "teen" sites out there. Do not assume I've searched for these sites on Google, because thats not the case. I'm just stating the fact that there is a very high likelyhood that these sites exist, because the demand for these sorts of sites is increasing.
"Do you think that FBI agents cannot read slashdot? Or that no one they know might point out this article to them, and by extension, posts like yours? It might have been different if you were posting anonymously from an internet cafe preferably while wearing a ski mask and dark sunglasses and gloves.'
I might be paranoid but I'm not that paranoid. If the FBI wanted to arrest me for no reason they could just label me a terrorist, and under the patriot act theres no need for them to have any evidence that I am. Then they could strip me of my citizenship and put me in a camp. So your point is that I should watch what I post because the FBI might be watching? I know for a fact they are watching and I want them to see it, thats why I posted it. DUH.
"In addition to all that wouldn't a potential customer have to be an absolute moron, as in perhaps genuinely mentally retarded, to use some traceable form of payment (and only hand delivered cash while wearing gloves, ski mask, dark glasses etc is not) as well as your IP address (unless you are downloading to an internet cafe) with such a site? Whether the pictures are 'real' (which in many cases is not possible to determine anyway) or not? I find it hard to believe that such sites could exist at all. And what ISP would host them? And even more to the point who in their right mind would be stupid enough to actually start and to run such a site? Unless they are in fact FBI honey pots. Then the ISPs would welcome them with open arms and they would have nothing to fear from any laws. To me it seems much more likely that any such sites are exactly that."
Paying for (funding) the production of child porn is not a victimless crime. It's not the same as clicking a URL, or having a discussion about childporn sites on Slashdot. The people who actually subscribe to and create memberships to these child porn or teen porn sites, they should be investigated. But just because a suspicious URL existed on the internet, and just because people may have clicked it, does not make them a criminal. Should the FBI raid the internet wayback machine for hosting all these illegal sites?
" Of course that is yet another reason why you have to be a moron to even think about clicking on such links as the one in this story. I highly doubt this guy has ever abused a child. But it is completely irrelevant. His life is over. This guy should really make it into the Darwin Awards. Even if you were looking for child porn what could you even hope to find on the internet? A commercial web site? LMAO. Now freenet or usenet (posted from an internet cafe while disguised for instance) is maybe another matter.
And what makes you think freenet nodes or usenet servers aren't run by the FBI too? If you upload child porn you should be tracked and prosecuted. The debate here is about whether people who click a URL are pedophiles. The answer is no, nobody should get 10 years in prison for visiting any website. Don't you see where this could lead?
The prison industrial complex started in the 80s and really picked up steam in the 90s. Private prisons run by corporations started to replace the state owned prisons. Now KBR is building prisons.
It's to the point now where the prisoners work for free and are paid less than illegal immigrants get paid. It's becoming a criminal class. The only sorta crimes I'm concerned about are violent crimes.
Rape, child molestation, murder, these are violent crimes. Most of the people being put in prisons however are not violent criminals. So I think we should tax these non-violent offenders with an income tax increase.
These laws aren't an attempt to do good. The PRISONS were built BEFORE, not AFTER the criminals were created! They've been building prisons non stop since the 80s. What do you think they are going to do with all of these prisons?
You might be one of those naive people who think that theres no evil forces trying to fill the prisons, but just look at all the people currently in prison due to the war on drugs, look at how the US has the largest prison population in the world.
I don't believe thats by accident. I think we might be stupid, but come on, we aren't THAT stupid. We aren't making these sorts of laws to govern Wallstreet are we?
Currently theres over a million people in prison. Most of the people in prison are in prison because of the war on drugs. The war on the internet could put 10 million people in prison when it's all said and done, and it's beginning right now.
The people are against the war on drugs should join forces with the people who are against the war on the internet.
Even if they don't find any kiddie porn on your computer, they KNOW everyone has SOMETHING illegal somewhere on their computer that they can find. Maybe it's illegal software? Maybe it's illegal music and movies? So now the FBI raids you and takes your computer and instead of locking you up for child porn, they lock you up for piracy!
Sounds like a slick stealthy way for the RIAA to go after those downloaders and illegal file sharers. I guess they will be tomorrows terrorist.
There obviously are child porn websites. I don't know which countries they are from, but still, US laws don't seem to even care if it's REAL child porn or not. Virtual child porn, or just something which APPEARS to be child porn is treated as child porn.
The laws basically suck and need to be completely rewritten. The guy who wrote the laws, Foley or whatever his name was, couldn't even follow the letter of his own laws! Obviously the law sucks if the guy who created it broke it.
Tell it to all those people who have fantasies about being raped.
Rape is wrong, but the video is evidence. Sure there will be sick people who get off on it, but should they be criminals based solely on how they think? I don't think so. Otherwise all of us are criminals of some sort.
The whole point of this is to felonize internet addicts. Sure you can use the next to go to "legal" hyperlinks. Sites like Myspace and Facebook are okay. But if you are an internet addict, now they are going to treat you like they treat drug addicts and sting you. Then you'll get 10 years.
Anytime possession of a digital image is considered criminal, to the point where even if it's an animated cartoon of a child, or virtual child porn as they call it, then it's on the level of thought crime.
I think this is similar to drug possession. You get caught with crack in your car and you get 10 years in prison. You get caught with something which looks like child porn on your harddrive and it's going to get you prison time.
And the problem with this is, you could have downloaded it by mistake, they don't care. They don't care that the image was labeled as over 18 and when it loaded up it was something illegal. And you could delete it, and they can undelete it and still use it against you.
I think the law is ridiculous. But the law does not have to make sense. The goal of the law is to create sex offenders and thought criminals.
The goal of this is not to protect children just like the goal of the war on drugs is not to protect drug addicts or society from drugs. The goal of the war on drugs is felonization! The goal is to generate felons.
The goal of the war on the internet is to generate sex offenders. It's one thing if you've actually harmed a child, but the goal of these laws are not harm reduction. The goal of these laws are to harm internet addicts. This is about the felonization of internet addicts, not the prosecution of actual pedophiles.
The people who upload these pictures to the internet should be arrested. They aren't trying to focus on arresting those people. Instead they want to arrest downloaders, which should tell you all you need to know about the goals of this sting. If they advertised kiddie porn, they basically enticed people into clicking on the URL.
This would be similar to having hundreds of thousands of undercover cops posing as drug dealers selling everyone drugs for years and then having everyones drug connect show up at their door with a with a gang of FBI agents to arrest them. That's just plain wrong. And thats the whole point.
The point is, if you are a drug addict, then you belong in prison with serial killers and rapists. If you are an internet addict, then you belong in prison with serial killers and rapists, and you deserve to live with REAL sex offenders, people who actually molested children, not just fools who thought about it, or who clicked on a URL which said "kiddieporn.com".
This is not about reducing harm towards children. Clicking a link or downloading some bits does not harm the child. The uploader harmed the child.
This is about created felons. This is an attack on internet addicts. It's the war on the internet, and there will be just as many victims as there was to the war on drugs. If you click the wrong URL, you could end up in a prison sell next to a REAL child killer.
And when you finally get released after 10 years for good behavior, you're in the sex offender database now. Your reputation now worse than Jeffrey Dahmer. Regardless of the fact that you got 10 years for clicking a URL, regardless of the fact that you've never harmed a child in your life, you just CLICKED, you didn't even download kiddie porn.
This started in my opinion with the to catch a predator stuff. At first it wasn't a big deal, only people who were dumb enough to go to the house looking for sex were considered pedophiles. Now you don't even have to go to the house, you just have to THINK it and you go to jail.
The purpose of these laws and of this, is similar to the purpose of the drug laws. If you hate drug addicts then you declare a war on drugs. If you hate internet addicts then you declare a war on the internet.
You start by creating laws which target ADDICTS. Maybe you set up shop, you're the cops, you pose as a drug dealer and you offer drug addicts drugs, and when they try to buy it then you arrest them and say they tried to sell it to you.
Or maybe you set up a website that offers a membership for free kiddie porn, they click the link and then you raid their house and search their computers for illegal software, music, or just one picture of a naked child, then you give them a life sentence.
This is the new war on drugs, this is the war on the internet, and it's mainly a war on internet addicts. If you are an internet addict, you have been warned.
The war on drugs is about the felonization of drug addicts. First the prisons are built, later on laws are passed and crimes are invented in order to fill the prisons.
Now once again we have lots of new prisons being built. And don't be surprised when our government declares a war on the internet. Certain websites will be illegal to access. Then you'll have internet addicts in the prison with drug addicts, and their cellmates will be pedophiles and serial killers.
The goal is merely to fill the prisons up. This is equal to opening up a smoke shop with a big sign which says "free marijuana inside" and then waiting for all the drug addicts to enter and then arresting them one by one. Nevermind the fact that you advertised the shop all in magazines, on the internet, and in places where you know they hang out. Nevermind the fact that you created TV ads. If they go to the smokehouse, the swat team enters and gives them 10 years in prison.
This isn't about child porn. It's about the war on the internet.
Slashdot Mirror
Can anyone give us numbers on the precise percentage of Freenet traffic that kiddie porn makes up?
I'm concerned about the kiddie porn problem, but why the hell would people even go through the trouble of using Freenet just to trade kiddie porn?
It's sick, but sometimes I wonder if the individuals who do upload that shit to Freenet do it precisely to get Freenet shut down.
What better way to get something shut down than to upload kiddie porn? Any serious users wont want to use it anymore and then it will ONLY be filled with kiddie porn, which gives the authorities every reason to ban the entire network as a kiddie porn network.
So the Freenet people should keep precise percentages of the traffic and keep the traffic data public. As long as the majority of the traffic is not kiddie porn, Freenet has a chance at being useful.
The problem with wifi is it can be snooped just as easily as wired. The medium you use shouldn't matter if Freenet is actually well designed.
Freenet is only moderately secure because it's designed on top of Java. Let's be real folks, Freenet is only as secure as the Java it runs on. If Freenet were something written in C, which could be compiled for a cellphone or PDA, and install directly into the router itself, well yeah then I'd say it's pretty secure, but when you install Freenet on a PC, it's only as secure as the PC, and if you install Freenet on a PC on top of Java, it's only as secure as Java and the PC. If it's installed on the lower layer, such as the router level, it would be much more secure because your wifi router would download freenet from another wifi router, and you'd access freenet that way.
But overall, Freenet is a good project because it's something we can learn from and study, it's more like a science project though, I wouldn't expect people to use this in China right now. If it's a life threatening situation, I would not use Freenet, but if you want to discuss UFO conspiracy theories, or complain about whatever, try Freenet.
As far as the kiddie porn problem goes, once again we focus too much on solving all problems on the application layer, when we could simply change the jpeg and other protocols to store information in the file about the camera model and where the camera was bought, made, what computer it was originally on and who owned that computer, to help the authorities trace back where the illegal images came from.
The people who download the illegal images have evidence, and they can in some cases help track down who originally created the images in the first place. By the time it gets on Freenet, or even on the internet, it becomes like whack a mole and you end up chasing copies of the images around the internet as it gets further and further away from the originator(s).
Freenet could provide a way to reduce the child porn problem, but if they did that then all images uploaded would have to be registered to the individual who uploads it, which means images from China would also be registered and China will be able to track it down. So it's very complicated and it does not seem that child porn can ever be solved on the application layer.
We need to simply treat the bands as corporations, and buy and sell stocks in our favorite bands.
Here is an example of how it could work Hollywood Stock Exchange
The Hollywood Stock Exchange idea should be applied to bands as well. Through the prediction markets we can save the arts. We can bet on stuff like album sales, we can bet on anything related to the functioning of the band or the artist. It's a prediction market.
Just as gambling is a sure business model, prediction and speculation is even more sure, because the business model is based on the very model our economy functions on. New bands can issue an IPO of sorts and receive initial investment by the fans who discover them, the original fans along with the band will then get rich together if the band sells a lot of albums.
No need to have record companies, no need to have an RIAA, no need to even care about album sales really.
It's simple. We don't need an RIAA or a record company. We don't need Apples Itunes with their pre-selected music programming.
I say, if you people are serious, create your own business models, create your own distribution models, and design it into the web itself, design it into the internet itself, design it into linux itself, into windows itself, and through the design revolution you get the protocol revolution which brings the licenses like creative commons, and that brings the business models which generate the profits to allow us to save the music industry while getting rich in the process.
There's money to be made, Google shows us this, and so does Youtube.
How do we know there really is a terrorist watchlist? What if the government simply monitors every human on earth? No need to keep a list then. If the government doesn't have enough information about you, they'll monitor you to get the information, regardless of who you are. Even the President is monitored.
Since everyone on IRC is a pirate who has mp3s, movies, or software.
Not to mention this opens up the door to the feds sending you IMs and offering you mp3s, software and other such things and then using it as probable cause to raid you.
I hope they don't attempt that. I will leave the country and move to China.
So now it's criminal just to know these sites exist?
" All I can say is for your sake I sincerely hope that you do not live in the US or in any country with an extradition treaty with the US. You have just incriminated yourself. Utterly. I can honestly say that I have never, ever, under any circumstances, been to any child porn site. Nor have I ever searched for one on google and have absolutely no awareness that any such sites exist."
Whether or not these sites are real child porn or not, I don't know, but certainly there are lots of questionable "teen" sites out there. Do not assume I've searched for these sites on Google, because thats not the case. I'm just stating the fact that there is a very high likelyhood that these sites exist, because the demand for these sorts of sites is increasing.
"Do you think that FBI agents cannot read slashdot? Or that no one they know might point out this article to them, and by extension, posts like yours? It might have been different if you were posting anonymously from an internet cafe preferably while wearing a ski mask and dark sunglasses and gloves.'
I might be paranoid but I'm not that paranoid. If the FBI wanted to arrest me for no reason they could just label me a terrorist, and under the patriot act theres no need for them to have any evidence that I am. Then they could strip me of my citizenship and put me in a camp. So your point is that I should watch what I post because the FBI might be watching? I know for a fact they are watching and I want them to see it, thats why I posted it. DUH.
"In addition to all that wouldn't a potential customer have to be an absolute moron, as in perhaps genuinely mentally retarded, to use some traceable form of payment (and only hand delivered cash while wearing gloves, ski mask, dark glasses etc is not) as well as your IP address (unless you are downloading to an internet cafe) with such a site? Whether the pictures are 'real' (which in many cases is not possible to determine anyway) or not? I find it hard to believe that such sites could exist at all. And what ISP would host them? And even more to the point who in their right mind would be stupid enough to actually start and to run such a site? Unless they are in fact FBI honey pots. Then the ISPs would welcome them with open arms and they would have nothing to fear from any laws. To me it seems much more likely that any such sites are exactly that."
Paying for (funding) the production of child porn is not a victimless crime. It's not the same as clicking a URL, or having a discussion about childporn sites on Slashdot. The people who actually subscribe to and create memberships to these child porn or teen porn sites, they should be investigated. But just because a suspicious URL existed on the internet, and just because people may have clicked it, does not make them a criminal. Should the FBI raid the internet wayback machine for hosting all these illegal sites?
"
Of course that is yet another reason why you have to be a moron to even think about clicking on such links as the one in this story. I highly doubt this guy has ever abused a child. But it is completely irrelevant. His life is over. This guy should really make it into the Darwin Awards. Even if you were looking for child porn what could you even hope to find on the internet? A commercial web site? LMAO. Now freenet or usenet (posted from an internet cafe while disguised for instance) is maybe another matter.
And what makes you think freenet nodes or usenet servers aren't run by the FBI too? If you upload child porn you should be tracked and prosecuted. The debate here is about whether people who click a URL are pedophiles. The answer is no, nobody should get 10 years in prison for visiting any website. Don't you see where this could lead?
The prison industrial complex started in the 80s and really picked up steam in the 90s. Private prisons run by corporations started to replace the state owned prisons. Now KBR is building prisons.
It's to the point now where the prisoners work for free and are paid less than illegal immigrants get paid. It's becoming a criminal class. The only sorta crimes I'm concerned about are violent crimes.
Rape, child molestation, murder, these are violent crimes. Most of the people being put in prisons however are not violent criminals. So I think we should tax these non-violent offenders with an income tax increase.
These laws aren't an attempt to do good. The PRISONS were built BEFORE, not AFTER the criminals were created!
They've been building prisons non stop since the 80s. What do you think they are going to do with all of these prisons?
You might be one of those naive people who think that theres no evil forces trying to fill the prisons, but just look at all the people currently in prison due to the war on drugs, look at how the US has the largest prison population in the world.
I don't believe thats by accident. I think we might be stupid, but come on, we aren't THAT stupid. We aren't making these sorts of laws to govern Wallstreet are we?
Currently theres over a million people in prison. Most of the people in prison are in prison because of the war on drugs. The war on the internet could put 10 million people in prison when it's all said and done, and it's beginning right now.
The people are against the war on drugs should join forces with the people who are against the war on the internet.
Even if they don't find any kiddie porn on your computer, they KNOW everyone has SOMETHING illegal somewhere on their computer that they can find. Maybe it's illegal software? Maybe it's illegal music and movies? So now the FBI raids you and takes your computer and instead of locking you up for child porn, they lock you up for piracy!
Sounds like a slick stealthy way for the RIAA to go after those downloaders and illegal file sharers. I guess they will be tomorrows terrorist.
You click that link and you DIE.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/09/foley_resigns_o.html
There obviously are child porn websites. I don't know which countries they are from, but still, US laws don't seem to even care if it's REAL child porn or not. Virtual child porn, or just something which APPEARS to be child porn is treated as child porn.
The laws basically suck and need to be completely rewritten. The guy who wrote the laws, Foley or whatever his name was, couldn't even follow the letter of his own laws! Obviously the law sucks if the guy who created it broke it.
I don't see how making virtual child porn illegal protects children. I'd think it hurts children because it encourages people to make REAL child porn.
Maybe if there were virtual child porn there would be no demand for real child porn.
Tell it to all those people who have fantasies about being raped.
Rape is wrong, but the video is evidence. Sure there will be sick people who get off on it, but should they be criminals based solely on how they think? I don't think so. Otherwise all of us are criminals of some sort.
The whole point of this is to felonize internet addicts. Sure you can use the next to go to "legal" hyperlinks. Sites like Myspace and Facebook are okay. But if you are an internet addict, now they are going to treat you like they treat drug addicts and sting you. Then you'll get 10 years.
And if this can work for childporn why not for other URLs?
Sites which claim to sell marijuana and if you click it, then you get raided.
It's about criminalizing internet addiction and felonizing internet addicts.
The law just is. There is no feeling behind it. At most there is a political agenda calculated to do maximum damage to whoever is the target.
Anytime possession of a digital image is considered criminal, to the point where even if it's an animated cartoon of a child, or virtual child porn as they call it, then it's on the level of thought crime.
I think this is similar to drug possession. You get caught with crack in your car and you get 10 years in prison. You get caught with something which looks like child porn on your harddrive and it's going to get you prison time.
And the problem with this is, you could have downloaded it by mistake, they don't care. They don't care that the image was labeled as over 18 and when it loaded up it was something illegal. And you could delete it, and they can undelete it and still use it against you.
I think the law is ridiculous. But the law does not have to make sense. The goal of the law is to create sex offenders and thought criminals.
The goal of this is not to protect children just like the goal of the war on drugs is not to protect drug addicts or society from drugs. The goal of the war on drugs is felonization! The goal is to generate felons.
The goal of the war on the internet is to generate sex offenders. It's one thing if you've actually harmed a child, but the goal of these laws are not harm reduction. The goal of these laws are to harm internet addicts. This is about the felonization of internet addicts, not the prosecution of actual pedophiles.
The people who upload these pictures to the internet should be arrested. They aren't trying to focus on arresting those people. Instead they want to arrest downloaders, which should tell you all you need to know about the goals of this sting. If they advertised kiddie porn, they basically enticed people into clicking on the URL.
This would be similar to having hundreds of thousands of undercover cops posing as drug dealers selling everyone drugs for years and then having everyones drug connect show up at their door with a with a gang of FBI agents to arrest them. That's just plain wrong. And thats the whole point.
The point is, if you are a drug addict, then you belong in prison with serial killers and rapists. If you are an internet addict, then you belong in prison with serial killers and rapists, and you deserve to live with REAL sex offenders, people who actually molested children, not just fools who thought about it, or who clicked on a URL which said "kiddieporn.com".
This is not about reducing harm towards children. Clicking a link or downloading some bits does not harm the child. The uploader harmed the child.
This is about created felons. This is an attack on internet addicts. It's the war on the internet, and there will be just as many victims as there was to the war on drugs. If you click the wrong URL, you could end up in a prison sell next to a REAL child killer.
And when you finally get released after 10 years for good behavior, you're in the sex offender database now. Your reputation now worse than Jeffrey Dahmer. Regardless of the fact that you got 10 years for clicking a URL, regardless of the fact that you've never harmed a child in your life, you just CLICKED, you didn't even download kiddie porn.
This started in my opinion with the to catch a predator stuff. At first it wasn't a big deal, only people who were dumb enough to go to the house looking for sex were considered pedophiles. Now you don't even have to go to the house, you just have to THINK it and you go to jail.
The purpose of these laws and of this, is similar to the purpose of the drug laws. If you hate drug addicts then you declare a war on drugs. If you hate internet addicts then you declare a war on the internet.
You start by creating laws which target ADDICTS. Maybe you set up shop, you're the cops, you pose as a drug dealer and you offer drug addicts drugs, and when they try to buy it then you arrest them and say they tried to sell it to you.
Or maybe you set up a website that offers a membership for free kiddie porn, they click the link and then you raid their house and search their computers for illegal software, music, or just one picture of a naked child, then you give them a life sentence.
This is the new war on drugs, this is the war on the internet, and it's mainly a war on internet addicts. If you are an internet addict, you have been warned.
The war on drugs is about the felonization of drug addicts. First the prisons are built, later on laws are passed and crimes are invented in order to fill the prisons.
Now once again we have lots of new prisons being built. And don't be surprised when our government declares a war on the internet.
Certain websites will be illegal to access. Then you'll have internet addicts in the prison with drug addicts, and their cellmates will be pedophiles and serial killers.
The goal is merely to fill the prisons up. This is equal to opening up a smoke shop with a big sign which says "free marijuana inside" and then waiting for all the drug addicts to enter and then arresting them one by one. Nevermind the fact that you advertised the shop all in magazines, on the internet, and in places where you know they hang out. Nevermind the fact that you created TV ads. If they go to the smokehouse, the swat team enters and gives them 10 years in prison.
This isn't about child porn. It's about the war on the internet.