Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Feds Demand Google Search Records

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • theprez98
    replied
    Originally posted by GBHis
    I am what you guys seem to be calling a "script kiddie" of one single reason:
    I'm minor.
    The "kiddie" in "script kiddie" has nothing to do with age and everything to do with experience:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Script_kiddie

    Leave a comment:


  • GBHis
    replied
    I am what you guys seem to be calling a "script kiddie" of one single reason:
    I'm minor.

    Now, I don't watch porn myself, but if I somehow, someday wanted access to porn, I'm sure that I could get it without using google. (crackspider.net, e.t.c.).
    So, if it ain't possible for the feds to prevent me find it, the question is:
    Why google?
    Why not put a filter on their own mix'es?
    I think the answer is surveillance. (Can't spell it)
    They don't give a fuck about porn. They want control. Why the hell did they want the pgp-keys for v. 6-7?
    Control.

    Do they want to "prevent terrorism"?
    Is this a new step in their "war" against it?
    We'll see...

    I, too, find it offensive with naked children. And I swear to god, that if I ever see one of those sites, I'll do what I can to make my first DoS sufficient!!

    The .porn domainname is a good idea. It will help me and my identify porn sites and avoid them. (Well, i like the boobs, but having a cock shot into your face is offending me very serious. :( )

    Think about it and let my know!

    For the freedom and privacy of the Public: Discuss!!
    -GBHis

    Leave a comment:


  • crazyishone
    replied
    I don't even want to think about it. Having said that, I suppose I have to now. (Gotta love the human psyche).

    Well, I think that I would probably either end up going to prison for some random search I don't even remember (That's just my luck)... Or if it became one of those apocolyptic scenarios nobody ever gets tired of talking about, I might do the whole "freedom fighter" thing. But honestly, thats so unlikely.

    Leave a comment:


  • VAX_to_PBX
    replied
    No, it wasn't a George Orwell book, it was some old cyberpunk themed book written in the sixtys.

    Back on topic though, I'd be suprised if the US Government, or to be more specific, Bush Administration, didn't get the logs! The Government is useing religion and money to keep protestors at bay instead of the drugs like LSD and heroin that where not efficient enouph back in the Vietnam erra. A few thousand negative remarks aren't gonna effect what the government does, and most Americans are to worried about there careers to start any proactive democracy. It's gonna take more people losing jobs in America to actually start waking America up from this consumerized coma we are all in and start making the Government and big buisness listen.

    QUESTION: What would you do if the Government did get the logs and immediatly start imprisoning people by the hundreds? anything?

    Leave a comment:


  • ck3k
    replied
    Originally posted by VAX_to_PBX
    This reminds me of a book I read years ago(I forget the title,) where while a single government was gradually achieving the position as -the- one world government they where arresting all possible internal threats and putting them in special prisons.
    1984, by any chance?
    think they just killed them.

    In response to my earlier post, yes I feel -all- kiddies should not look at porn, I admit it could put them in the wrong frame of referance for the rest of life. Of course this brings up the whole how young is to young to know about that evil sex.

    Then of course my little jab at religion, if you knew me personally it would be taken as a joke, I have a fondness for a bit of religious humor once in awhile. I of course do find the fact we have any referance to god on our money or any goverment document to be a clear violation of church and state, however this is not to be discuessed here.

    ...and to close with some on topic stuff, I am glad to see google sticking up for what they believe is right. If they eventually are made to give in so be it, at least they are fighting it. I am sure every company has gotten at least one ludicris request from the powers that be. I just don't want this all to be turned into 1984, which sadly it is spiraling towards. I think instead of looking at all these years of unrest/terrorism we look at how many years it worked without wiretaps, or logging of every keystroke. I can't say I feel any safer knowing the big brother is always listening.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thorn
    replied
    Originally posted by crazyishone
    Thorn, thank you for clarifying that bit about there being a subpeona. (By the way, where in Vermont do you live? I used to live in Brattleboro.)
    :::::::::
    You're welcome.
    I'm just outside of Burlington.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazyishone
    replied
    I think if a government or organization tried to control the internet, they'd end up with more crime, and an eventual failure.

    Think Prohibition. Did it solve anything in the long run? No. Did it stop people from drinking? No. Was there a resulting crime rate? yes.

    Everybody knows that history repeats itself.

    Leave a comment:


  • skroo
    replied
    Originally posted by crazyishone
    Ok, perhaps the way I said it annoyed you, but I think that on most levels we agree. A single power (or any power) attempting to control the internet is ridiculous.
    Believe me, you didn't annoy me. I'm just tired of hearing the same thing repeated over and over and over like it's gospel truth.

    And yeah, I'm in agreement that any one body attempting to control the Internet is both counterproductive and futile. Hence my intense dislike of The UN Internet Governance Forum. Screw the UN in general, but if there's one thing that affects me directly I don't want them poking their noses into it's the Internet.

    Leave a comment:


  • VAX_to_PBX
    replied
    Heh, I think there going to use the records to bust people for google hacking, pedaphilia, and to form a list of suspects who search for books similiar to the ones published at paladin, black market press etc...

    This reminds me of a book I read years ago(I forget the title,) where while a single government was gradually achieving the position as -the- one world government they where arresting all possible internal threats and putting them in special prisons.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazyishone
    replied
    Thorn, thank you for clarifying that bit about there being a subpeona. (By the way, where in Vermont do you live? I used to live in Brattleboro.)
    :::::::::
    Scroo,

    Ok, perhaps the way I said it annoyed you, but I think that on most levels we agree. A single power (or any power) attempting to control the internet is ridiculous.

    I undestand that the whole "the internet is a global...." thing is becoming quite cliche', but regardless of that fact, the statement holds true.

    Leave a comment:


  • skroo
    replied
    Originally posted by crazyishone
    The internet is a global thing, not something any one national government should have jurisdiction over. I can see it now....
    No one government has jurisdiction over the Internet. Seriously folks, if, for example, China dropped off-line tomrrow, the rest of the world would get along just fine (if not better) without them. The real threats here are repressive governments trying to control the information published and accessed on the Internet.

    Seriously, I keep hearing this repeated and every time it grates on my nerves just a little bit more.

    Leave a comment:


  • Beginner
    replied
    Originally posted by crazyishone
    Is this not somehow illegal? ......(clipped extra stuff)......
    The internet is a global thing, not something any one national government should have jurisdiction over. I can see it now....
    I think you are right. MANY countries OTHER than the US use the INTERNET and GOOGLE. In some countries that IS legal. In others it is not. Do they think they are the supreme ruler of the world?

    Since Google is technically INTERNATIONAL, being that almost all nations use it, they should have to get permission form ALL of the countries in order to do it.

    Am I right?

    Leave a comment:


  • theprez98
    replied
    Originally posted by the rules
    Be safe, and avoid topics of Politics and/or Religion.
    I so want to get into this argument but I think I'd be on the losing end. ;-)

    Leave a comment:


  • Thorn
    replied
    Originally posted by crazyishone
    Is this not somehow illegal? If police want to search somebody's home, they need a warrant. Should it not be the same for the government trying to find out what google users are searching for?
    Effectively, that is what they have. Note this in the MSNBC story:
    ... White House subpoena first issued last summer...
    A subpoena is a demand to produce records or for a witness to testify. While a lawyer may argue the fine points of how subpoenas and warrants differ, what it amounts to is that Google was hit with a legal demand to produce those records. Countless subpoenas are served every day for all sorts of records. It is very common to demand records for things such as phone/utility and bank accounts to support investigations.

    In regards to the specifics here though, couldn't they have saved a lot of time and effort if someone just bought J0hnny L0ng's book?

    Leave a comment:


  • Ridirich
    replied
    Originally posted by ck3k
    ...*,*....I agree that some of the kiddies shouldn't look at porn but it is not something the goverment needs a week of searching to get, it solves no problems. I feel google does the best job of filtering out objectional material.....*,*...

    ....*,*....I will be the first to say that children should also not be allowed to view religious websites, because I deem them offensive....*,*...
    Some children? You ARE kidding right? ALL children should not see that.
    How about this: I deem 'leet speak' offensive, yet you use it in your name.

    There is a 'Seperation of Church and State' so, by law the government could not keep children from viewing them anyway, or it breaks those laws.

    Furthermore, if you find it so offensive, why not return all money you currently have or trade it for foreign money, since all it says "In god we trust"? Keep in mind it does not specifically say WHICH god, just 'god' in general. This gives people the ability to have whatever belief system they so wish without trampling on others' rights. This is a place founded where people could believe what they want as long as it hurts no one else and in all honesty, anyone who does not like a level playing field, religion wise, can leave.

    I like porn as much as the next guy, but in all honesty...I think it should be illegal for any porn site to end with any designation other than ".porn" at the very minimum, and having it's own form of 'internet', including the need for a seperate browser at the very best. I find it VERY offensive that a child can see this and find it even more offensive that adults actually take pictures of naked children in a sexual manner. It further pisses me off that a mother who has a 5 year old cannot take a candid picture of her daughter playing in the tub without having it be considered porn.

    Does this mean I support Bush trampling on my right to privacy on what I search for? No. I think he can take his little idea and shove it where the son doesn't shine. My right to privacy, my right to bear arms, my right to freedom of speech, my right to do as I please as long as it causes no harm to others...these are things my entire family has faught for...and things I have upheld. It is a major reason why I became an EMT...because I had the right to learn and the right to heal others. Trampling on those rights is simply not allowed, and those terms are not negotiable.
    Last edited by Ridirich; January 20, 2006, 13:49.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X