Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Slow~Mo's Avatar
    Slow~Mo is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    210

    Thumbs down Your porn searches may end up in Congressional testimony.

    This is just great...

    Originally Posted by CNN.com
    SAN JOSE, California (AP) -- The Bush administration, seeking to revive an online pornography law struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, has subpoenaed Google Inc. for details on what its users have been looking for through its popular search engine.

    Google has refused to comply with the subpoena, issued last year, for a broad range of material from its databases, including a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period, lawyers for the U.S. Justice Department said in papers filed Wednesday in federal court in San Jose.

    Privacy advocates have been increasingly scrutinizing Google's practices as the company expands its offerings to include e-mail, driving directions, photo-sharing, instant messaging and Web journals.

    Although Google pledges to protect personal information, the company's privacy policy says it complies with legal and government requests. Google also has no stated guidelines on how long it keeps data, leading critics to warn that retention is potentially forever given cheap storage costs.

    The government contends it needs the data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches as part of an effort to revive an Internet child protection law that was struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court on free-speech grounds.

    The 1998 Child Online Protection Act would have required adults to use access codes or other ways of registering before they could see objectionable material online, and it would have punished violators with fines up to $50,000 or jail time. The high court ruled that technology such as filtering software may better protect children.

    The matter is now before a federal court in Pennsylvania, and the government wants the Google data to help argue that the law is more effective than software in protecting children from porn.

    The Mountain View-based company told The San Jose Mercury News that it opposes releasing the information because it would violate the privacy rights of its users and would reveal company trade secrets.

    Nicole Wong, an associate general counsel for Google, said the company will fight the government's efforts "vigorously."

    "Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for the information is overreaching," Wong said.
    Wonderful.
    Instead of gathering this informaiton which could easily construed as a breach of privacy, how about they just do some searches of their own to see what comes up and this child pornography case is just a front for them to get access to spy on people's activities.





    ^^Click^^
    Last edited by Slow~Mo; 01-20-2006 at 04:19 PM.

  2. #2
    3Vandoo's Avatar
    3Vandoo is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Bandit County
    Posts
    4,249
    porn sponsors terrorism!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. #3
    Myka's Avatar
    Myka is offline Made Of Sugar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    a small room
    Posts
    9,054
    "these porn stars hate freedom" -Bush

    haha...idiot...

    Seriously though...isnt this just to see who is looking up CHILD porn?

  4. #4
    Slow~Mo's Avatar
    Slow~Mo is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    210
    No way, the goverment is using child porn as a front. There is no money in child porn nor is it a major problem, Feds just want more information sources to bust everybody for anything.

  5. #5
    Myka's Avatar
    Myka is offline Made Of Sugar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    a small room
    Posts
    9,054
    I was afraid of that...Americas downward slope is becoming even more steep...

  6. #6
    boots555's Avatar
    boots555 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Looks like a large hand
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by Slow~Mo
    No way, the goverment is using child porn as a front. There is no money in child porn nor is it a major problem, Feds just want more information sources to bust everybody for anything.


    I agree, you might be right.

    Note: I hate child porn.


    I have looked at info on the net both by accident and intentional that I wish I never saw.

    The information could be used against anyone and every one.

    Dont give in google.

  7. #7
    Kale is offline ~ Vet~ I like Thai Girls
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    12,285
    Interesting thing is that all the other major search engines complied with the order a while ago. Google is the only one holding out.
    Last edited by Kale; 01-21-2006 at 07:25 PM.

  8. #8
    boots555's Avatar
    boots555 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Looks like a large hand
    Posts
    625
    The other engines are far smaller, they have enough to deal with, no need for more obstacles that could inhibit growth.

    Only a theory.

  9. #9
    boots555's Avatar
    boots555 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Looks like a large hand
    Posts
    625
    Believe me, there are more effective ways to go after those who look at child pornogrophy, watch and be careful, make sure you know why they attempt to tare this fence down. Child pornography is sick and terrible, I love children, I see the image of God (more cleary) when watch a child, but do not be decieved.

  10. #10
    Myka's Avatar
    Myka is offline Made Of Sugar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    a small room
    Posts
    9,054
    Why are we even going after them? Youll see what I mean here...

    Vermont, child rapist gets 60 days

  11. #11
    boots555's Avatar
    boots555 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Looks like a large hand
    Posts
    625
    Warning
    Chesterton has appropriately declared, that may well be because we have made fiction to suit ourselves.

    Think hard
    A heartrending story of such dimensions was shared with me by a friend some years ago--the truth of which seemed much stranger than fiction. To do full justice to the poignancy of the incident necessitates the description of the very surroundings that occasioned my being privy to it. We were sitting in the parking lot of a historic building, an edifice symbolic of the gathering of the gatekeepers of society. There was an air of sophistication about all who entered. I was preoccupied with the theme of an address I was to deliver on the problem of emptiness that stalks our younger generation, growing up in a time of such moral confusion. Just then, the arrival of a rather prominent individual prompted my host, a minister, to recount the story in very somber tones.

    "There goes our federal prosecutor," he said, "a fine man whom I met under very tragic circumstances." As he labored through the details in recounting their first contact, I knew this was not just another crisis in a minister's routine, but an ineradicable scar on his pastoral heart.

    He told me of a young couple he had married some years ago, who had represented to him every ideal worth emulating. They were the mascot of excellence held up before the youth of the church. Both were in preparation for the practice of medicine, and were on sizable scholarships of merit. As he had driven away after performing their wedding ceremony, he had rehearsed in his own mind what a grand occasion it had been, and that in all his years of ministry he had not seen a more radiant couple. He thrilled at the prospect of all that lay ahead of them.

    But then like a shattered dream, only a few months into the marriage there was a dreadful awakening. In the pre-dawn hours of a wintry night the pastor was aroused by the telephone, and a voice out of control which begged him to come to their apartment. The caller, the young man of such promise, kept stuttering the words, "I think I have killed her! I think I have killed her!" The minister hastily dressed and rushed over to their home, only to find the young woman lying lifeless in her bed, and the young husband emotionally ravaged, sobbing inconsolably at her side.

    What had happened? What had led to this pitiful state of affairs? After a long time of prying and pleading, the story unfolded. Some weeks earlier this young woman had discovered that she was pregnant. With years of study still ahead, neither of them had wanted to start a family. This sudden turn of events spelled chaos into all their plans, and drove them desperately in search of a solution. Every option was considered. Finally, one statement escaped from the young woman's lips that she had never dreamed she would utter. "This is completely devastating," she said. "There is no other way but to abort this child if our careers are to survive."

  12. #12
    boots555's Avatar
    boots555 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Looks like a large hand
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by NewKid
    Why are we even going after them? Youll see what I mean here...

    Vermont, child rapist gets 60 days


    Very intelligent post.
    Very good New kid.

  13. #13
    boots555's Avatar
    boots555 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Looks like a large hand
    Posts
    625
    Understand, please understand, I am not anti America

  14. #14
    Myka's Avatar
    Myka is offline Made Of Sugar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    a small room
    Posts
    9,054
    Quote Originally Posted by boots555
    Very intelligent post.
    Very good New kid.
    Thank you boots

    But help me understand what you were getting at with that tragic story above...

  15. #15
    boots555's Avatar
    boots555 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Looks like a large hand
    Posts
    625
    I will, not now.

  16. #16
    Mike Dura's Avatar
    Mike Dura is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    2,311
    Hey I'm not for child porn but I think the individual's right to privacy should be protected. This administration has no respect for that and many other aspects of the constitution.

  17. #17
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    why worry

    if you are not breaking the law, what in the world do you have to worry about? If you are looking at child porn, I would feel better as a father that you were off the streets. You do not have the "right" to abuse anyone elses rights, if you wanna look around the NAMBLA website, you get what you deserve.

  18. #18
    Kale is offline ~ Vet~ I like Thai Girls
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    12,285
    Do you guys have any idea how many hits there are to porn sites ? I work for a very big US company who builds Cache Engines, among other things. These cache engines are deployed throughout networks that make up the internet and they are there to improve response times by storing http addresses. I have spoken to a number of people in different companies around the world and they all say that at least 90% of web sites stored in those engines are porn related. Now that is a shitload of porn. I hope the govt has A LOT of people because it will take them a long time to go through it all

  19. #19
    tiger909's Avatar
    tiger909 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Dura
    Hey I'm not for child porn but I think the individual's right to privacy should be protected. This administration has no respect for that and many other aspects of the constitution.
    if u watch child porn, ur paying for it, either through membership fees or ads, therefore allowing it to continue...prosecute the vuckers

  20. #20
    Myka's Avatar
    Myka is offline Made Of Sugar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    a small room
    Posts
    9,054
    Quote Originally Posted by tiger909
    if u watch child porn, ur paying for it, either through membership fees or ads, therefore allowing it to continue...prosecute the vuckers
    There are porn agencies that are sponsored by such things as GMC...so when you buy a truck...you are supporting porn...in a way...and all porn is linked...just the illegal stuff is kept quiet...

    You see...its an endless cycle...this is just an excuse to violate our rights...at first it will seem like it is for our own good...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •