Alito confirmation and porn

[TheEnforcer]

As I have listened to the confirmation hearings it is VERY obvious that the GOP senators want Alito to take a hard line approach on porn. Though I have problems with Altio on other fronts his answers in this area are actually quite fair and open minded on the issue and realizing that a balance needs to be struck between the rights of parenbts to protect their kids and free speech.

[MorganGrayson]

TE...if I may gently correct: parents do not have a "right" to protect their kids. They have a "responsibility" to protect them. Their failure to live up to their responsibilities is not a reason to infringe on the rights of others. The existence of pornography is not and never was the problem. The failure of certain parents to adequately supervise and teach their children is the problem.

[TheEnforcer]

Yes, I see what you are saying and agree wholeheartedly. Alito said in his reply that the primary reason for the problem many parents have is a lack of knowledge on computers and such as compared to their kids. Either way with the answers he gave he gives the appearence he will be fair on the issue as he seemed to recognize the rights of adults to view the material.

[softball]

TE...if I may gently correct: parents do not have a "right" to protect their kids. They have a "responsibility" to protect them. Their failure to live up to their responsibilities is not a reason to infringe on the rights of others. The existence of pornography is not and never was the problem. The failure of certain parents to adequately supervise and teach their children is the problem.

But how do you protect your kids from porn spam?

[JoesHO]

But how do you protect your kids from porn spam?

I think spammers should be given a much stiffer sentence, and they need to take away these safe havens such as panama, palistan, korea, etc that they operate from.

spam is the worst thing in this business and wilol eventually be something that hurts all the clean operators soon enough if we do not all turn the known spammers in when we have the chance .

[softball]

I think spammers should be given a much stiffer sentence, and they need to take away these safe havens such as panama, palistan, korea, etc that they operate from.

spam is the worst thing in this business and wilol eventually be something that hurts all the clean operators soon enough if we do not all turn the known spammers in when we have the chance .

I have been banging this drum for years. It is virtually impossible to take away safe havens. What are you going to do about the freeking east bloc? You can't do much about Russia. And tons of this spam is coming out of Western Europe, the US and Canada as we all know. Some spin it as mailing, but we all know what it really is. Glad to see this board is moving on and I hope you make it a policy dump on spammers. I think a little social responsbility is good for business. We need to regain customer confidence that was lost when low life spammers trashed the net.


BTW, where is Palistan???

[TheEnforcer]

They have curbs now for adult mailing in the states which is all the USA can control. Non adult mail is an entirely different story in my book though. No different than the multitudes of junk mail people get in their physical mailbox at home every day.

[MorganGrayson]

But how do you protect your kids from porn spam?

It depends on the age of the child.
Also, knowledge of the child.
Very young children don't need separate email accounts. They can email grandma and grandpa through their parents accounts, which the parents can monitor. They can email their friends the same way. Kids start chatting on AIM very young, as soon as they can type. They have to be taught how to use it.
After that, you teach the child how to use the spam filters on email, how to set up the account as safely as you can, instruct them never to open an email coming from an address or name that isn't on their "approved list" (i.e. friends or relatives), never open anything with an attachment...basically, you teach the kid the way to use a computer. You also create an atmosphere where if the kid sees something like porn spam, you're there to discuss it with him/her. Make the kid feel like - no matter what it is - he/she can *always* come and talk to you about it. There's a lot of trust involved, but frankly, if you haven't built up that kind of trust with the child, there are a lot more problems in the family than porn spam. You also let the kid know that using the computer is a privilege, not a "right."

If a parent is totally worried about the email, the parent should be with the kid every time the email is opened and go through and delete the spam for the kid.

Lots of work, yes. But if you don't want to do the work...don't have the kid in the first place.

You can't protect your child from everything. You can just do the best that you can.

I sent my kids to school, which means they were exposed to every germ going around. I would have preferred giving that chicken pox epidemic a miss, but that's the way it goes. There's no plastic bubble to stick a kid in and keep them totally safe from everything.

[SykkBoy]

It depends on the age of the child.
Also, knowledge of the child.
Very young children don't need separate email accounts. They can email grandma and grandpa through their parents accounts, which the parents can monitor. They can email their friends the same way. Kids start chatting on AIM very young, as soon as they can type. They have to be taught how to use it.
After that, you teach the child how to use the spam filters on email, how to set up the account as safely as you can, instruct them never to open an email coming from an address or name that isn't on their "approved list" (i.e. friends or relatives), never open anything with an attachment...basically, you teach the kid the way to use a computer. You also create an atmosphere where if the kid sees something like porn spam, you're there to discuss it with him/her. Make the kid feel like - no matter what it is - he/she can *always* come and talk to you about it. There's a lot of trust involved, but frankly, if you haven't built up that kind of trust with the child, there are a lot more problems in the family than porn spam. You also let the kid know that using the computer is a privilege, not a "right."

If a parent is totally worried about the email, the parent should be with the kid every time the email is opened and go through and delete the spam for the kid.

Lots of work, yes. But if you don't want to do the work...don't have the kid in the first place.

You can't protect your child from everything. You can just do the best that you can.

I sent my kids to school, which means they were exposed to every germ going around. I would have preferred giving that chicken pox epidemic a miss, but that's the way it goes. There's no plastic bubble to stick a kid in and keep them totally safe from everything.


that pretty much sums it up

My kids' email addresses all go through me first...the accounts will be ready for them when they are older, but for now, everything goes through me first. I can't raise everyone else's child, only my own and it's not my job to raise other kids.

I can't protect my kids from everything, but I can certainly educate them and hope they make the right decisions. I'm more worried about chatrooms than if my kids see a pair of boobs. I'm much more worried about bombmaking sites, godhatesfags.com, etc. than if my kids want to do the digital equivalent of me scoping out my father's playboy stash when I was younger.

[softball]

Its not the very young you need to worry about. They are easier to protect. It is when they get older and can surf themselves, have their own email accounts that you might not even know about, and, of course with mobile, this all becomes easier. And it is not the boobs anyone really worries about, it is the really bad stuff and we all know what that is without having to go into the gory details.

[sarettah]

But how do you protect your kids from porn spam?

You don't allow your kids to have an "unsupervised" mail address.

Just as you should review what snail mail your child receives, you should be supervising what email they receive.

The problem is not the "spammers". Even the most diehard spammer wants to send their shit to folks with credt cards. They don't want kids in their lists. If a kid is in an email list that usually means their email was either entered into a porn site, put out by them on a message board or some other such.

My children have never been allowed, on our compuers, to have a password protected user account and have been strongly advised against ever entering their real email address into a site. I scan through who is sending them emails on a regular basis.

Granted, that does not stop them from openng a yahoo account fom the library or the school. I have to trust them to a large extent to obey the rules.

And as a result they ecive very little spam in thei mailboxes and they receive zero porn spam in their mailboxes. I know because I have them set up on my mail server and can monitor it all. And I don't run any blockers.

I am quite tired of you puting all the blame on everything bad on the adult net on the spammers and by innuendo trying to rag on Nick.

[softball]

You don't allow your kids to have an "unsupervised" mail address.

Just as you should review what snail mail your child receives, you should be supervising what email they receive.

The problem is not the "spammers". Even the most diehard spammer wants to send their shit to folks with credt cards. They don't want kids in their lists. If a kid is in an email list that usually means their email was either entered into a porn site, put out by them on a message board or some other such.

My children have never been allowed, on our compuers, to have a password protected user account and have been strongly advised against ever entering their real email address into a site. I scan through who is sending them emails on a regular basis.

Granted, that does not stop them from openng a yahoo account fom the library or the school. I have to trust them to a large extent to obey the rules.

And as a result they ecive very little spam in thei mailboxes and they receive zero porn spam in their mailboxes. I know because I have them set up on my mail server and can monitor it all. And I don't run any blockers.

I am quite tired of you puting all the blame on everything bad on the adult net on the spammers and by innuendo trying to rag on Nick.


OK, here's the deal. Your kid is 13 to 15 years old. He hangs out at internet joints. He is curious. He sees a porn site. That is where it starts. Now a few years ago when Nick was spamming some pretty vile stuff, parents did not know how to protect their children. Many still don't.
So I do put a huge amount of blame on spammers for the damage they have done to the business and by association and admission, nick is proud to have been one of the biggest.
So, do you actually think that spam is good? Do you actually believe that that shit was good for our business and never hurt it?
I will always rag on vile porn spammers. I think it is evil shit. Could you please tell me one good thing that spam has done for our business? It is universally reviled including on this board. And when Nick had this joint, he bragged about what he had done and (nudge nudge, wink wink) had stopped doing.
I think bragging about making a fortune in spam or any other internet scam that ripped people off, sent porn to kids, or was really bad for fledgling internet commerce (porn and straight) is somewhat akin to bragging about making a fortune selling coke. It is not somthing to be proud of, for anyone to emulate, or to promote as a legitimate internet business model.
So you tell me what you think about spam and those who produce it.

Edit: oh yeah, and the amount of heat that spam brought down on us was immense. Even criminals hate those who attract heat. It gets them busted.

[sarettah]

I do snailmail spam systems during the day time. I have about 11 or 12 years experience doing them. We call them "direct marketing databases" but it is spam. People did not request to get our letters, they just showed up on our list by virtue of having bought a new house, gotten a new telephone number or several other events that get them identified in a system as a "new mover".

Is junk mail reviled. Generally, yes.
Do people profess to hate it. Generally, yes.
Does it kill trees by using up massive amounts of paper. Yes.
etc etc etc.

There are tons of bad things people say about junk mail. Same sort of things they say about email spam. They don't receive quite as much junkmail as they do email spam because junkmail costs to send each piece.

But for all the folks who claim to hate it, all the folks who want it stopped etc.

PEOPLE RESPOND TO IT. IT WORKS.

Just like email spam. If people did not respond to it, if the mailer was not making bucks by sending it, it would stop. That simple.

As far as the amount of heat brought upon this industry by spam, I don't think it did half as much damage as did credit card schemes and the like.

How come no one is claiming that the mortgages industry has been hurt by spam, how come the heat isn't on them. I get ten times the amount of spam from them as I do adult. How come the heat isn't coming down super hard on pharma, illegal software, or any of the 5000 other subjects I get spammed daily (none of them adult).

Because SPAM was just another excuse to come down on Porn. The heat comes down because it is porn, not because it is being spammed. A certain minority in our country would love to see every expression of sexuality shut down. They don't give a shit about how many folks they hurt. They would love nothing more then to see every one of us "pornographers" dead in the name of their morality.

And 99.99999% of the time they try to do it in the name of the children.

It is my job as a parent to supervise my children until they are old enough to make their own choices. It is also my responsibility to educate them in how to make intelligent, rational choices so that when they are away from my supervision I can be pretty sure that they are going to be ok. It is also my responsibility, as a parent, to educate myself as to the things my children involve themselves in or want to involve themselves in.

[sarettah]

OK, here's the deal. Your kid is 13 to 15 years old. He hangs out at internet joints. He is curious. He sees a porn site. That is where it starts.

Additional response to this...lol.

What is the problem there? When my son was 14 or 15 I discovered that some playboys magazines that I had in my closet had suddenly disappeared. I went into his room, lifted up his mattress and there they were. (I left them there and did not mention it to him until he was 21 and I took him to a titty bar for his birthday when he was home on leave). How did I know where they would be? Because that is where I stashed my pilfered magazines when I was 14 or 15.

Boys are going to be curious about what women look like naked. That has gone on forever and will go on forever. A child can find all the porn they want through google images. Google doesn't ask how old you are when you go turn off the safe filter. So, how come the problem isn't Google ? How come the problem isn't the proliferation of porn on the internet and society in general. How come the problem isn't the beach? You can see a whole lot of near naked folks all over the place.

[softball]

"As far as the amount of heat brought upon this industry by spam, I don't think it did half as much damage as did credit card schemes and the like."
and most of the spam put you straight into some sort of cc rip off...come on.

" You can see a whole lot of near naked folks all over the place."

But not sucking dicks...nudity is not pornography.

Junk mail is different. It is not something that is going to influence young people one way or another except by selling them another ipod or something.
That spam that Whitcon was mailing was pretty nasty stuff. I also disagree with a lot of that supposed "mainstream" pharma shit. A bunch of totally uninformed webmasters selling drugs like ersatz viagra...which, as it turned out, contained real viagra which can cause all kinds of heart problems.
This is just wrong. And don't blame the consumer for trusting the vendor. That is like blaming the victim.

[sarettah]

And don't blame the consumer for trusting the vendor. That is like blaming the victim.


Caveat emptor

[softball]

Caveat emptor

You know, I have never actually believed that.....
I buy a car from ford, the gas tank explodes....its my fault? Caveat emptor. I don't think so.

[sarettah]

Imho, the only folks who get ripped off in these schemes are ones who are trying to beat the system to begin with.

I am not going to win a lottery I didn't enter.
I am not going to get an application for a .005% home loan approved when I never applied.
I know that it is illegal to but prescription drugs without a prescription.
I know that no guy in Nigeria really wants to send me 200bazilliion bucks that were left when the president of that oil company died.
If I give someone my credit card number, they are going to charge something to it.

The folks that succumb to the scams are just as bad as the folks trying to perpetuate the scams.

From "If you see the buddha on the road, Kill him"


I remember early in my practice treating men who "used" prostitutes. All they had to do to control these women was to give them some money and they could manipulate them into doing whatever they wanted. They coould make a whore not only do any sexual trick they commanded, but could get her to be nice to them as well. If such men couldn't buy love, at least they could rent it. The women needed the money. The men had it. The women had to give in. The men were contemptuous, superior, in control.

Later in my practice, I began to treat some hookers and strippers. They made it clear to me that the Johns with whom they dealt were suckers. Give them a little sexual excitement, and you could get them to pay all the money they had. Men were so easy to control. I now feel that trying to identify who is controlled, and who is being controlled, is six-five, pick 'em. And when I try sorting out who is the victim and who the perpetreator of manipulation, I can't tell the knife from the wound."


Or as Robert Heinlein would say TANSTAAFL :okthumb:

[sarettah]

You know, I have never actually believed that.....
I buy a car from ford, the gas tank explodes....its my fault? Caveat emptor. I don't think so.


Depends on who has the bigger pockets in court most of the time. Ford would never up front take responsibility for an exploding gas tank until it was forced down their throat and you know that. Look at the shit with the tires a few years ago. Ford trying to pass it off on Goodyear, Goodyear trying to pass it back on Ford and it took a bunch of fucking people dying before the law ever got involved. That is the way big money business is played.

So, yes. Caveat Emptor. It is up to the consumer to protect themselves. Since the first day that one ape picked up a shell and decided it was worth something and then found out that he could trade the shell to another ape for a big shiny rock (stupid fucker, shit, he doesn't know theres like a billion of these over by the big wet thing) someone has tried to scheme on how to get the most shells while giving out the least amount of rocks.

We have laws against some of it but the United States was founded as a capitalist country. Business is given a lot of free rein and it is usually up to the consumer to prove he was wronged before any action is ever going to ber taken.

[PornoDoggy]

You buy a car from Ford and the gas tank explodes, it will be the fault of anyone BUT Ford unless you can find a nasty evil trial lawyer to sue the cocksuckers. If enough nasty evil trial lawyers sue the cocksuckers, the companies will take action.

It's hard to feel sympathy for those that fall for the pitch that "some guy in Nigeria really wants to send me 200bazilliion bucks that were left when the president of that oil company died."

What about spoofed PayPal/eBay/bank pages - some of them, at first glance at least, of higher quality that the companies actually do sent out?

That America is a capitalist country doesn't have a fucking thing to do with fraud.

[softball]

Depends on who has the bigger pockets in court most of the time. Ford would never up front take responsibility for an exploding gas tank until it was forced down their throat and you know that. Look at the shit with the tires a few years ago. Ford trying to pass it off on Goodyear, Goodyear trying to pass it back on Ford and it took a bunch of fucking people dying before the law ever got involved. That is the way big money business is played.

So, yes. Caveat Emptor. It is up to the consumer to protect themselves. Since the first day that one ape picked up a shell and decided it was worth something and then found out that he could trade the shell to another ape for a big shiny rock (stupid fucker, shit, he doesn't know theres like a billion of these over by the big wet thing) someone has tried to scheme on how to get the most shells while giving out the least amount of rocks.

We have laws against some of it but the United States was founded as a capitalist country. Business is given a lot of free rein and it is usually up to the consumer to prove he was wronged before any action is ever going to ber taken.
Yes America is a capitalist country and blah blah blah...but welcome to the internet...it is the world....

As a great American once said..."Get out of the new world if you can't lend a hand....the times they are a changin..."
More true now than in 1966.

[softball]

You buy a car from Ford and the gas tank explodes, it will be the fault of anyone BUT Ford unless you can find a nasty evil trial lawyer to sue the cocksuckers. If enough nasty evil trial lawyers sue the cocksuckers, the companies will take action.

It's hard to feel sympathy for those that fall for the pitch that "some guy in Nigeria really wants to send me 200bazilliion bucks that were left when the president of that oil company died."

What about spoofed PayPal/eBay/bank pages - some of them, at first glance at least, of higher quality that the companies actually do sent out?

That America is a capitalist country doesn't have a fucking thing to do with fraud.

I wish I had said that.

[sarettah]

Yes, fraud is fraud and is illegal and should be punished as such. Spamming email was not and, if you follow the rules properly, is not illegal or fraudulent on it's own.

[softball]

Yes, fraud is fraud and is illegal and should be punished as such. Spamming email was not and, if you follow the rules properly, is not illegal or fraudulent on it's own.

Come on, S. Just because it is not technically illegal does not make it right. Don't even go there. I could post an entire thread of shit that would piss you off if you got caught up in the scam. S and L.....Ring a bell?

I read that thread under the old management. I read Serge's "well you should have taught them a lesson" crap. And that is what it is....crap.
Personally, I am not one of those who will do anything to make money just because it is legal...you know like redirecting phone calls around the world. Or sending traffic to those who did that. Do you think that was right? I would like an answer to that one.

[sarettah]

Just because I don't think it is right, does not necessarily make it wrong. It may be worong to me and I may rant and rail against it based on my own personal feelings but we don't make laws based on just my own feelings (otherwise the world would be fucking perfect).

[softball]

Bottom line. Grifters suck.

[buechee]

TE...if I may gently correct: parents do not have a "right" to protect their kids. They have a "responsibility" to protect them. Their failure to live up to their responsibilities is not a reason to infringe on the rights of others. The existence of pornography is not and never was the problem. The failure of certain parents to adequately supervise and teach their children is the problem.

Amen hands down :wnw:

I to think that parents should teach their kids and not expect the net to be the new nanny. they act like they want it to take the place of tv, lol. :clapping:

[Sin]

Alright, I don't have kids, but I'll play along & pretend for a few minutes that I do.

I will have the net at home, that much is certain. They will not be "hanging out at net cafe's" they will be online at home, or at school. I have yet to find a 13-15 year old kid who would rather use their allowance money on "internet" than "candy" (or, in other terms, I have yet to find a kid that age who will pay for something that is readily accessible at home to them anyways)

As far as spam goes, and unsupervised emails go, well there are ways around that. Yes they can start out writing emails to grandma & grandpa though one of my emails when they're little. When they're older, I'll let them have an email of their own through one of the free email providers, and I'll even help them set it up. I'll get it set up with filters & everything. Hotmail filters when used properly, do actually work amazingly well. Then, when its all set up, I'll show them how to change the password to something they want, and something that only they know. This way they have the security the filters provide, (which is a lot when used properly) they have their "own" email, and the fact that its theirs & not a supervised or parent controlled one, will more than likely keep them from signing up a new one... at the very least, until they reach an age where I'm not going to be all that concerned about them seeing porn spam and it having a "lasting/damaging effect" of any kind on them.

Parents are FAR too quick to pass on blame, the kid is theirs, the responsibility is theirs both to protect their child from stuff like this, as well as educate themselves enough that they are able to do so effectively.