3 ms·

Given that this comes from a highly questionable source (bitcoin.com, run by Roger Ver, a guy convicted for sending explosives in the mail, a bitcoin investor,

Given that this comes from a highly questionable source (bitcoin.com, run by Roger Ver, a guy convicted for sending explosives in the mail, a bitcoin investor, and libertarian who revoked his U.S citizenship so he wouldn't have to pay taxes, and is highly biased against the government), this should be taken with a massive grain of salt. If this were even slightly true, there would be reputable news sites all over this story by now. Edit: http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/294341-fbi-denies-speeding-up-child-porn-site-during-investigation http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/294341-fbi-denies-s... > In February 2015, the FBI seized control of the site and operated it for two weeks so that the agency could distribute malware to users with the intention of identifying suspects. > The Department of Justice (DOJ) denies that charge, writing in case documents, “The Government Played No Role in Creating the Crime for Which Chase is Being Prosecuted or Otherwise Encouraged His Criminal Conduct. Chase created the Playpen website, not the government.” > The FBI has also denied claims that during their operation of Playpen, agents improved the site’s performance, helping it run faster. > “Chase claims absent actual factual support that the government enhanced or improved the website’s functionality,” the DOJ said. > Even if the FBI did upgrade Playpen’s performance, criminal defense attorney Norman Pattis says, it would have little impact on the case. > “I don’t think there would be much implication at all,” Pattis said. “I think the defense is misapplying entrapment.” > “Speeding up access doesn’t create the desire to do it,” he added. “The fact that people come to the market looking for it already doesn’t make it entrapment.” > The DOJ justified the FBI’s actions in continuing to operate Playpen after arresting Chase. They wrote that shutting down Playpen immediately “might have answered the immediate issue of child pornography trafficking on Playpen, it would have done nothing to address the larger problem.”

spenvo 10y ago
>If this were even slightly true, there would be reputable news sites all over this story by now. The FBI has openly admitted to running the server http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-website-sharing-thousands-child-porn-images/79108346/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-websit...
4ad 10y ago
> If this were even slightly true, there would be reputable news sites all over this story by now. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-website-sharing-thousands-child-porn-images/79108346/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-websit... https://www.rt.com/usa/356896-fbi-kiddie-porn-playpen/ https://www.rt.com/usa/356896-fbi-kiddie-porn-playpen/ https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/23/fbi-improved-dark-web-child-porn-site-lawyer/ https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/23/fbi-improved-dark-web-ch... http://gizmodo.com/traffic-surged-to-a-child-porn-ring-after-the-fbi-took-1785649054 http://gizmodo.com/traffic-surged-to-a-child-porn-ring-after... https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160614/19243034713/judge-playpen-case-fbis-warrant-is-valid-even-if-claims-about-no-privacy-ip-addresses-are-not.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160614/19243034713/judge... http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fbis-unprecedented-hacking-campaign-targeted-over-a-thousand-computers http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fbis-unprecedented-hack...
- aliakhtar 10y ago
  So, a site was made by a pedophile, they got that guy, and then kept the site online so they could make further arrests of people who viewed the site. That's a massively different picture than what you get by reading the article, and the headline 'FBI's deep web child porn ring'. It wasn't FBI's child porn ring, it was this guy's child porn ring.
  - gcb0 10y ago
    but after the creator is in jail, it's 100% the fbi that host and promotes the site. there are law against entrapment. but when fbi agents get on a chat room anonymously and send someone a link "want to see this illegal content?" now the person who could have zero interest in the matter will just want to check it out to see if it's true, for whatever reason, which could very well be to report to the authorities if it is true. but now, since the person was entrapped, the fbi can just deny the anonymous entrapment and prosecute the person for arriving on the site by their own means and drive.
    - aliakhtar 10y ago
Forge36 10y ago
Have the arrests done something to address the larger problem?
thaumasiotes 10y ago
>> “Speeding up access doesn’t create the desire to do it,” he added. “The fact that people come to the market looking for it already doesn’t make it entrapment.” This is a pretty interesting argument for the government to make, given its existing legal theory that the children depicted in child pornography suffer redressible harm whenever such an image is viewed. By that theory, improving the site, resulting in many additional views, means the government is actively causing harm to the viewed children, which it shouldn't be doing.

spenvo 10y ago

>If this were even slightly true, there would be reputable news sites all over this story by now. The FBI has openly admitted to running the server http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-website-sharing-thousands-child-porn-images/79108346/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-websit...

4ad 10y ago

> If this were even slightly true, there would be reputable news sites all over this story by now. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-website-sharing-thousands-child-porn-images/79108346/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-websit... https://www.rt.com/usa/356896-fbi-kiddie-porn-playpen/ https://www.rt.com/usa/356896-fbi-kiddie-porn-playpen/ https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/23/fbi-improved-dark-web-child-porn-site-lawyer/ https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/23/fbi-improved-dark-web-ch... http://gizmodo.com/traffic-surged-to-a-child-porn-ring-after-the-fbi-took-1785649054 http://gizmodo.com/traffic-surged-to-a-child-porn-ring-after... https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160614/19243034713/judge-playpen-case-fbis-warrant-is-valid-even-if-claims-about-no-privacy-ip-addresses-are-not.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160614/19243034713/judge... http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fbis-unprecedented-hacking-campaign-targeted-over-a-thousand-computers http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fbis-unprecedented-hack...

aliakhtar 10y ago
So, a site was made by a pedophile, they got that guy, and then kept the site online so they could make further arrests of people who viewed the site. That's a massively different picture than what you get by reading the article, and the headline 'FBI's deep web child porn ring'. It wasn't FBI's child porn ring, it was this guy's child porn ring.
- gcb0 10y ago
  but after the creator is in jail, it's 100% the fbi that host and promotes the site. there are law against entrapment. but when fbi agents get on a chat room anonymously and send someone a link "want to see this illegal content?" now the person who could have zero interest in the matter will just want to check it out to see if it's true, for whatever reason, which could very well be to report to the authorities if it is true. but now, since the person was entrapped, the fbi can just deny the anonymous entrapment and prosecute the person for arriving on the site by their own means and drive.
  - aliakhtar 10y ago

Forge36 10y ago

Have the arrests done something to address the larger problem?

thaumasiotes 10y ago

>> “Speeding up access doesn’t create the desire to do it,” he added. “The fact that people come to the market looking for it already doesn’t make it entrapment.” This is a pretty interesting argument for the government to make, given its existing legal theory that the children depicted in child pornography suffer redressible harm whenever such an image is viewed. By that theory, improving the site, resulting in many additional views, means the government is actively causing harm to the viewed children, which it shouldn't be doing.