3 ms·

Pornhub was cut off for failing to police child pornography. Why would you want to participate in a financial system that was incapable of excluding evildoers?

by tootie 4y ago

vlovich123 4y ago
Look, I dislike crypto as much as the next guy, but I must have missed the memo. Are evildoers not perfectly capable of participating in the current financial system? https://www.thelocal.ch/20150208/hsbc-swiss-bank-helped-terrorists-and-criminals/ https://www.thelocal.ch/20150208/hsbc-swiss-bank-helped-terr... https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/how-the--war-on-terror--exposed-compliance-gaps-in-swiss-companies/46915746 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/how-the--war-on-terror... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico... Let’s also ignore all the shadiness that the Russian Oligarchs, oil shieks, Bibi, Berlosconi all seem to engage in and yet seemingly have no limit to the financial systems. The belief that our financial system excludes evildoers is a nice fantasy that I haven’t seen be rooted in reality.
cypress66 4y ago
That should be dealt with by the justice system, not some corporations.
- throwaway290 4y ago
  Payment processors saw the writing on the wall. The reason they did what they did and PH made a 180 and disposed of incriminating content all in one month is because justice system has teeth and they did not want to find themselves liable. And justice system has teeth because PH is a proper company participating in a financial system. Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin
  - miracle2k 4y ago
    There is no reason for payment processors to be liable. If you have a problem with Bitcoin, you need to support a general, unrestricted right be all persons and orgs to be served by the financial system, except maybe for a narrow and limited set of injunctions through the courts. No other position is cohesive.
    - throwaway290 4y ago
      Sorry, I do not support your right to be serviced by financial system if it supports your wrongdoing. Your freedom stops where mine begins. My position seems pretty cohesive to me. If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. This is a human problem and won't be solved with tech. (And again, it was pretty clear to anyone that there was wrongdoing in this case and PH was going to get sued. I do think it should have been sued anyway, that it was not may have to do with victims not willing to come forward given sensitive nature of the crime, general disinclination of people to deal with dirt, or a good content cleanup job.)
      - miracle2k 4y ago
        > If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. So - if I have to fear being being shutoff from the financial system by private actors who dislike me, despite not having been convicted of a crime, a law to ensure my right to be served.
        throwaway290 4y ago
        What private individual was blocked by MasterCard? Private actors significant enough don't care about you enough to not deal with you unless dealing you puts them in legal jeopardy. At which point you might want to ask yourself why.
  - acdha 4y ago
    > Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin Interesting choice of examples: the FBI found bitcoin to be very helpful in exactly that context since it gave hard evidence linking criminals together. https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-video-crypto-anonymity-myth/ https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-v... This idea that police agencies haven’t figured out how to talk with their colleagues in other countries is oddly anachronistic given that we have examples going back to before the turn of the previous century.
    - throwaway290 4y ago
      It is helpful with those who don't use mixers, like the article says. I'm sure criminals not smart enough to use mixers are not the ones making the real money.
dangero 4y ago
why would you want to participate in an internet that is incapable of excluding evildoers?
- throwaway290 4y ago
  because internet is not the mechanism that allows distributors and producers of CSAM to get paid? But good point, with cryptocurrency the internet would obviously have to become capable of excluding evildoers.
- tootie 4y ago
  The pipes of the internet are essentially a public utility. Anyone operating above the level of an ISP should be able to police their usage.
Dylan16807 4y ago
My understanding is they policed it a lot better than facebook does. And the solution they were pushed into was extreme overkill. Either way, I don't want a financial system to punish a Canadian company for breaking the law, I want the government to do it.
- throwaway290 4y ago
  Your understanding is wrong. In fact, Facebook has been consistently reporting millions of videos even before PH got heat. Any platform that hosts images or videos has this problem, but with all its shenanigans FB has been among the best at identifying and removing the content. It is ridiculous to blame them for actually doing the right thing, which includes reporting found CSAM. Microsoft with Bing done markedly worse. PH pre-2021, obviously, too (and the bar is higher since it distributed this content for actual profit). This is all public information.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    Reporting millions of videos is a good thing, but having millions is pretty crazy too. And Bing doesn't host things.
    - throwaway290 4y ago
      Anywhere you can upload images they have this. No one is on the radar because no one cares except few companies. For a porn-oriented platform however, having this and not reporting this and selling this, that's egregious. > host If it's findable on Bing with previews and all, Bing has ingested the content at some point. In some cases it's justified to get all technicalities fully clarified before taking an action, otherwise we'd be wondering and litigating whether PH did something wrong.

Pornhub was cut off for failing to police child pornography. Why would you want to participate in a financial system that was incapable of excluding evildoers?

by tootie 4y ago

Pornhub was cut off for failing to police child pornography. Why would you want to participate in a financial system that was incapable of excluding evildoers?

vlovich123 4y ago

Look, I dislike crypto as much as the next guy, but I must have missed the memo. Are evildoers not perfectly capable of participating in the current financial system? https://www.thelocal.ch/20150208/hsbc-swiss-bank-helped-terrorists-and-criminals/ https://www.thelocal.ch/20150208/hsbc-swiss-bank-helped-terr... https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/how-the--war-on-terror--exposed-compliance-gaps-in-swiss-companies/46915746 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/how-the--war-on-terror... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico... Let’s also ignore all the shadiness that the Russian Oligarchs, oil shieks, Bibi, Berlosconi all seem to engage in and yet seemingly have no limit to the financial systems. The belief that our financial system excludes evildoers is a nice fantasy that I haven’t seen be rooted in reality.

cypress66 4y ago

That should be dealt with by the justice system, not some corporations.

throwaway290 4y ago
Payment processors saw the writing on the wall. The reason they did what they did and PH made a 180 and disposed of incriminating content all in one month is because justice system has teeth and they did not want to find themselves liable. And justice system has teeth because PH is a proper company participating in a financial system. Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin
- miracle2k 4y ago
  There is no reason for payment processors to be liable. If you have a problem with Bitcoin, you need to support a general, unrestricted right be all persons and orgs to be served by the financial system, except maybe for a narrow and limited set of injunctions through the courts. No other position is cohesive.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    Sorry, I do not support your right to be serviced by financial system if it supports your wrongdoing. Your freedom stops where mine begins. My position seems pretty cohesive to me. If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. This is a human problem and won't be solved with tech. (And again, it was pretty clear to anyone that there was wrongdoing in this case and PH was going to get sued. I do think it should have been sued anyway, that it was not may have to do with victims not willing to come forward given sensitive nature of the crime, general disinclination of people to deal with dirt, or a good content cleanup job.)
    - miracle2k 4y ago
      > If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. So - if I have to fear being being shutoff from the financial system by private actors who dislike me, despite not having been convicted of a crime, a law to ensure my right to be served.
      - throwaway290 4y ago
        What private individual was blocked by MasterCard? Private actors significant enough don't care about you enough to not deal with you unless dealing you puts them in legal jeopardy. At which point you might want to ask yourself why.
- acdha 4y ago
  > Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin Interesting choice of examples: the FBI found bitcoin to be very helpful in exactly that context since it gave hard evidence linking criminals together. https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-video-crypto-anonymity-myth/ https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-v... This idea that police agencies haven’t figured out how to talk with their colleagues in other countries is oddly anachronistic given that we have examples going back to before the turn of the previous century.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    It is helpful with those who don't use mixers, like the article says. I'm sure criminals not smart enough to use mixers are not the ones making the real money.

dangero 4y ago

why would you want to participate in an internet that is incapable of excluding evildoers?

throwaway290 4y ago
because internet is not the mechanism that allows distributors and producers of CSAM to get paid? But good point, with cryptocurrency the internet would obviously have to become capable of excluding evildoers.
tootie 4y ago
The pipes of the internet are essentially a public utility. Anyone operating above the level of an ISP should be able to police their usage.

Dylan16807 4y ago

My understanding is they policed it a lot better than facebook does. And the solution they were pushed into was extreme overkill. Either way, I don't want a financial system to punish a Canadian company for breaking the law, I want the government to do it.

throwaway290 4y ago
Your understanding is wrong. In fact, Facebook has been consistently reporting millions of videos even before PH got heat. Any platform that hosts images or videos has this problem, but with all its shenanigans FB has been among the best at identifying and removing the content. It is ridiculous to blame them for actually doing the right thing, which includes reporting found CSAM. Microsoft with Bing done markedly worse. PH pre-2021, obviously, too (and the bar is higher since it distributed this content for actual profit). This is all public information.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  Reporting millions of videos is a good thing, but having millions is pretty crazy too. And Bing doesn't host things.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    Anywhere you can upload images they have this. No one is on the radar because no one cares except few companies. For a porn-oriented platform however, having this and not reporting this and selling this, that's egregious. > host If it's findable on Bing with previews and all, Bing has ingested the content at some point. In some cases it's justified to get all technicalities fully clarified before taking an action, otherwise we'd be wondering and litigating whether PH did something wrong.