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

Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#41

Post by ethanbond »

willcipriano wrote: post #37
Retric wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see why you think that supports your argument.

Here's another, December of last year, there are a lot of these: "Three school administrators in Bellingham accused of failing to report alleged sexual assault" https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/bellingham/school-a... If teachers are willing to cover up for random child molesters in the community what do you think they'd do for one of their own?

Quite a leap from a textbook example of bystander effect to “teachers are protecting pedophile teachers.”

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#42

Post by [deleted] »

ethanbond wrote: post #41
willcipriano wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's another, December of last year, there are a lot of these: "Three school administrators in Bellingham accused of failing to report alleged sexual assault" https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/bellingham/school-a... If teachers are willing to cover up for random child molesters in the community what do you think they'd do for one of their own?

Quite a leap from a textbook example of bystander effect to “teachers are protecting pedophile teachers.”

[deleted]

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#43

Post by Spooky23 »

Hizonner wrote: post #18
beebmam wrote: post #10

> “I fought the worst of the worst: ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Taliban,” Skull Games president and former Delta Force soldier Jeff Tiegs has said. “But the adversary I despise the most are human traffickers.” Tiegs has told interviewers that he takes “counterterrorism / counterinsurgency principles” and applies them to these targets. I agree with this. Human trafficking is a nice way of saying slavery. Human traffickers are…

> Human traffickers are some of the worst criminals on earth ... which is why it's so valuable to some people to expand the definition of "human trafficking" beyond ACTUAL human trafficking. Right at the moment, if you hear the phrase "human trafficking" in some random place, especially used by somebody who's asking for money, power, or support of whatever kind, there seems to be about a 95 percent chance it's being…

Yup. It’s a great way to get federal grants for the vice squad and buy cool toys to fuck around with pimps.

Losing weed as a source of easy convictions is leading to new opportunities.

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#44

Post by rayiner »

morkalork wrote: post #38
rayiner wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course—congregations are much bigger than classrooms. But the figures above are cited in terms of complaints (corresponding to number of victims) not number of perpetrators. Thus the better comparison is how many people attend school versus the number who attend Catholic Church. Catholics are 1/4 of the population, and over the relevant timeframe (back to 1950), probably half or more attended church regularly.

Wait no, this doesn't make sense. You should be comparing the rates of bad actors against the number of potential actors (ie rates amongst church staffs vs rates amongst school staffs). Comparing the volume of potential victims is meaningless. To draw an extreme example, what would you say about a religious sect where 100% of its leaders were rapists but there was only 10 people in each congregation? That's okay beca…

Parents care about the probability of their kid being victimized. They don’t care whether 1 priest abuses 10 kids in a congregation of 300 or 10 teachers abuse 10 kids in a school of 300. The relevant metric is number complaints normalized by the relevant potential victim population. There’s more complaints in one year against schools than in 50 years against the Catholic Church. Yes, that’s partly because way more people attend school (everyone) than attend Catholic church regularly. But the difference isn’t a factor of 50. In the relevant period—complaints peaked in the 1980s—probably 1 in 8 Americans attended Catholic Church weekly. (Probably even more than that because families with children are much more likely to attend church.)

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#45

Post by Hizonner »

Natsu wrote: post #29
Hizonner wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Human traffickers are some of the worst criminals on earth ... which is why it's so valuable to some people to expand the definition of "human trafficking" beyond ACTUAL human trafficking. Right at the moment, if you hear the phrase "human trafficking" in some random place, especially used by somebody who's asking for money, power, or support of whatever kind, there seems to be about a 95 percent chance it's being…

Someone going after people keeping child sex slaves doesn't really seem to be stretching the definition of human trafficking.

If you read the article, you'll see some TALK about child sex slaves. The only evidence you'll see of any ACTION is doxxing self-employed adult prostitutes.

That's probably because actual child sex slavery is relatively hard to find.

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#46

Post by za3faran »

beebmam wrote: post #10

> “I fought the worst of the worst: ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Taliban,” Skull Games president and former Delta Force soldier Jeff Tiegs has said. “But the adversary I despise the most are human traffickers.” Tiegs has told interviewers that he takes “counterterrorism / counterinsurgency principles” and applies them to these targets. I agree with this. Human trafficking is a nice way of saying slavery. Human traffickers are…

He has quite the gall as well. What did he expect the Afghanis to do, roll over and let a foreign invader come in an wander in their home lands free without consequence, with his gang raping, stealing, and killing? What a load of ...

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#47

Post by mlyle »

rayiner wrote: post #44
morkalork wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait no, this doesn't make sense. You should be comparing the rates of bad actors against the number of potential actors (ie rates amongst church staffs vs rates amongst school staffs). Comparing the volume of potential victims is meaningless. To draw an extreme example, what would you say about a religious sect where 100% of its leaders were rapists but there was only 10 people in each congregation? That's okay beca…

Parents care about the probability of their kid being victimized. They don’t care whether 1 priest abuses 10 kids in a congregation of 300 or 10 teachers abuse 10 kids in a school of 300. The relevant metric is number complaints normalized by the relevant potential victim population. There’s more complaints in one year against schools than in 50 years against the Catholic Church. Yes, that’s partly because way more p…

> The relevant metric is number complaints normalized by the relevant potential victim population.

It's obvious there's problems with either rate you'd choose for either task.

We have varying degrees of exposure / vulnerability within the populations. Neither one really directly leads to a "risk per unit of exposure of child" or "risk of a given person being an offender".

But it seems like you have some pretty motivated reasoning going on: it sure looks like religious organizations have not done well, and are relatively likely to be much worse per unit of youth exposure.

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#48

Post by rayiner »

Retric wrote: post #32
rayiner wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course—congregations are much bigger than classrooms. But the figures above are cited in terms of complaints (corresponding to number of victims) not number of perpetrators. Thus the better comparison is how many people attend school versus the number who attend Catholic Church. Catholics are 1/4 of the population, and over the relevant timeframe (back to 1950), probably half or more attended church regularly.

The number of possible victims isn’t the limiting factor here, it’s the number of pedophiles and their ability to prey on children. A substitute teacher may teach tens of thousands of children per year, but they don’t have a position of particular trust nor are they protected by the school system. The core complaint isn’t that the Church has more perpetrators, but rather that by protecting the perpetrators they incre…

Schools absolutely protect sexual abusers. At my kid’s school, it was an open secret in the 1970s through 1990s that teachers were sexually abusing students: https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2019/01/29/key-sch.... This is an affluent, extremely progressive, private school in a deep blue state. It’s just about the opposite of the Catholic Church.

Re: Counterterrorism internet surveillance is being retargeted at sex workers

#49

Post by morkalork »

rayiner wrote: post #44
morkalork wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait no, this doesn't make sense. You should be comparing the rates of bad actors against the number of potential actors (ie rates amongst church staffs vs rates amongst school staffs). Comparing the volume of potential victims is meaningless. To draw an extreme example, what would you say about a religious sect where 100% of its leaders were rapists but there was only 10 people in each congregation? That's okay beca…

Parents care about the probability of their kid being victimized. They don’t care whether 1 priest abuses 10 kids in a congregation of 300 or 10 teachers abuse 10 kids in a school of 300. The relevant metric is number complaints normalized by the relevant potential victim population. There’s more complaints in one year against schools than in 50 years against the Catholic Church. Yes, that’s partly because way more p…

Okay, so say you have a kid and you're putting them into bible study and you have a choice between two sessions, one with 20 kids and an instructor that has a 5% chance of being abusive, and another with 10 kids and an instructor with 9.5% chance of being abusive. You would suggest the latter is better because the odds are better for your kid?

The expectation is higher in the first case, but then chances that it's your particular kid would be 1/group size. So I guess it would be more accurate to have 5 kids in the first group to make it 1% vs .95%. That's still not any better is it?

Post reply on HN