Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Tor of the Dark Web

slifty.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 212 posts

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#141

Post by Cushman »

nacker wrote: post #139
Cushman wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people smoking weed right now would not shed a tear for you if you were arrested because you went looking for child pornography.

So you missed my point exactly. Would you not shed a tear for the OP then?

Yes, because I'm super baked.

No, but seriously-- is it off that I can be made a felon because I clicked the wrong link? Yes. Does that make the laws forbidding the possession of child pornography dumb? No. If there were a reliable way to find out who they all were -- which is a fairy-tale scenario, so we're clear -- would I have a problem with anyone who looked for child pornography on the Internet being brought in for questioning? Nope. Because it is that bad.

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#142

Post by nacker »

Tor is good, but totalitarianism is galloping to control the internet. They HATE the freedom we have come to take for granted, and they are surely encouraged by how easily the sheep are persuaded to acquiesce whenever they point at the familiar boogey men: paedophiles, terrorists, drug dealers, etc.

I am quite optimistic though about the development of mesh networks such as http://project-byzantium.org

Of course it will only take one state to declare it illegal, and there will be plenty of cowardly fools urging each other NEVER to use it, because it's just too DANGEROUS, and anyway, TERRORISTS find it useful for pursuing their nefarious and immoral activities.

I will keep on ignoring them.

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#143

Post by ArneBab »

runn1ng wrote: post #27

Yes, I know I shouldn't say it out loud, but here I am saying it (take me, Police) - out of curiosity, I went to Hard Candy section of The Hidden Wiki. (Yes, it is exactly what you would think it is.) GOD. There are seriously forums full of pedofiles sharing pictures and - maybe worse? - their stories and wisdoms. Maybe out of utter fascination, I spend about few hours on there and I felt like I want to murder all hu…

So now all this information about them is freely available. Why doesn’t the police do text and psychology analyses to find those people?

Once you write, you give something of you away.

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#144

Post by nacker »

Cushman wrote: post #141
nacker wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you missed my point exactly. Would you not shed a tear for the OP then?

Yes, because I'm super baked. No, but seriously-- is it off that I can be made a felon because I clicked the wrong link? Yes. Does that make the laws forbidding the possession of child pornography dumb? No. If there were a reliable way to find out who they all were -- which is a fairy-tale scenario, so we're clear -- would I have a problem with anyone who looked for child pornography on the Internet being brought in…

Well, I'm gonna upvote you just for being baked! First, you have accepted the principle that you will follow what YOU feel is OK to do, regardless of its legality, and second, it's a damned good excuse!

Have you had a look at how widely the age of consent varies around the world? There have been cases of 17 year olds in the US being jailed for sex with their 15 year old girlfriends. In Islamic countries there are 8 year olds getting married. It just isn't that cut and dried, and I don't believe the state should be involved in policing ANY aspect of people's sex lives. Yes, I am an anarchist - of the Lew Rockwell type ;)

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#146

Post by GFKjunior »

lolcraft wrote: post #136
GFKjunior wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would that be any different from a weapons market? If either existed (in brick and motor or amazon style stores) I would frequent both regularly.

Some of us see it as, drugs being something that one inflicts to oneself, while weaponry, assassination, terrorism and manufacture of pedophile pornography is, in contrast, inflicted to others by force.

Well yes, the last three in your list are terrible exactly because they harm others. That is what I said.

Weapons are like drugs, they don't necessarily hurt anyone unless you plan to invade my home or threaten me. Assassination implies that the sole goal is killing a target, buying a gun can be for protection, for a collection, for fun and hobby, for sustenance, ect.

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#147

Post by elorant »

noonespecial wrote: post #31
runn1ng wrote: post #27

Yes, I know I shouldn't say it out loud, but here I am saying it (take me, Police) - out of curiosity, I went to Hard Candy section of The Hidden Wiki. (Yes, it is exactly what you would think it is.) GOD. There are seriously forums full of pedofiles sharing pictures and - maybe worse? - their stories and wisdoms. Maybe out of utter fascination, I spend about few hours on there and I felt like I want to murder all hu…

That's the proof that its working. As you say, when the child molesters are really and truly safe to speak their minds, everyone is. These people would exist anyway. Sometimes humanity sucks. Interesting though, TOR allowed you to study them in a way you would never have been able to otherwise. It merely disgusted you, but it could be a valuable resource to someone who studies how people break and thinks about what m…

I bet law enforcement agencies crawl those places frequently trying to lure child molesters. And that's the good part of the story, without the Internet in general or specifically Tor there would be little chance to catch those pricks. The more they express themselves the easier I guess it gets to nail one or two of them eventually.

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#148

Post by Cushman »

nacker wrote: post #144
Cushman wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because I'm super baked. No, but seriously-- is it off that I can be made a felon because I clicked the wrong link? Yes. Does that make the laws forbidding the possession of child pornography dumb? No. If there were a reliable way to find out who they all were -- which is a fairy-tale scenario, so we're clear -- would I have a problem with anyone who looked for child pornography on the Internet being brought in…

Well, I'm gonna upvote you just for being baked! First, you have accepted the principle that you will follow what YOU feel is OK to do, regardless of its legality, and second, it's a damned good excuse! Have you had a look at how widely the age of consent varies around the world? There have been cases of 17 year olds in the US being jailed for sex with their 15 year old girlfriends. In Islamic countries there are 8 y…

Okay, so that's a fair point: Federal and international laws about pornography are arguably broad. For example, it would be legal for me to have sex with a 16 year old, but illegal for me to photograph the act-- that's definitely silly.

And of course, there's a glut of images that teenagers upload of themselves, without any perpetrator or victim, and understandably this is treated as a very low priority by law enforcement. It's also an issue of some consternation to consumers of child pornography, which is why there are clear divisions in the community between content involving "jailbait" (13-17), pubescent (10-13), pre-pubescent (6-10), toddlers (2-6), and babies (0-1). (Honestly, it makes me a bit sick just writing that. I wish I didn't know this.)

I don't see a gray area here: I feel absolutely comfortable with pursuing individuals who search for images featuring pre-pubescent children being penetrated sexually. If they wind up having sought these images without any intention to molest children, then, like the man who walks into a bank with a mask and gun to make a legitimate withdrawal, they can damn well explain themselves.

This is not an overreach of the state; this is exactly what the state should be doing.

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#149

Post by nowarninglabel »

thinkingisfun wrote: post #116
DanBC wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What goods are there to exchange There are "new" images. There are children.

Sure you can catch some by that, but what then? The remainder will be resistant, and very used to how to phrase things, and also noticing attempts to play them into giving something away. We're also talking about people who exchange tips on how to get at actual children, remember, and you can do that fine without giving anything away. It's like open source, no strings attached, works fine with dead mailboxes. Unless…

If you read "Kingpin", even though the owner of one of the top carding forums could have just traded digital goods and been fine, he choose to dabble in physical goods for the money/whatever. That was how he was caught. I'd surmise the predators are not too different, though perhaps decidedly more cautious.

Re: A Tor of the Dark Web

#150

Post by alexqgb »

nacker wrote: post #140
praptak wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a world of difference between "citizen spotted using SSH" and "citizen spotted using Tor". In the first case you are just one in a huge number of people using SSH to avoid sniffers. With Tor the authorities know you're doing something you'd rather not be seen doing. It's a much, much bigger red flag.

I'd rather "the authorities" would stop spying on me whatever I'm doing, and I believe everyone should actively send up as many red flags as possible to confuse the bastards. I don't accept the authority of any random gang of thugs over me, from whatever part of the world, period.

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
Post reply on HN