4 ms·

I don't think I am naive, just imagine the repercussions of the headline "FBI collected thousands of child rape photos for blackmail" or "Cop work computer was

by breppp 11mo ago

I don't think I am naive, just imagine the repercussions of the headline "FBI collected thousands of child rape photos for blackmail" or "Cop work computer was found filled with child porn" Anything linked to pedophilia in the US and elsewhere is without remorse, and will continue that way due to parental fears.

user982 11mo ago
> I don't think I am naive, just imagine the repercussions of the headline "FBI collected thousands of child rape photos for blackmail" What were the repercussions of this: "FBI ran website sharing thousands of child porn images" (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-website-sharing-thousands-child-porn-images/79108346/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-websi...)
- breppp 11mo ago
  "The Justice Department said in court filings that agents did not post any child pornography to the site themselves" "The FBI kept Playpen online for 13 days" "There was no other way we could identify as many players" I think the normal person would think this is worth while to catch more pedophiles, hence why this would work politically. However, you can read by the tone of the article that even this drew a lot of rage. Imagine the FBI agents collecting CSAM, uploading it to websites for the purpose of... preventing copyright infringement
- fentanyl_peyotl 11mo ago
  I think there’s a difference between leaving a CP site up for two weeks so you can track the users, versus actively posting CP on legal websites for the purpose of blackmailing third parties into blocking them (“The Bardfinn Method”).
hobs 11mo ago
How about "The President was close friends with a known child sexual predator and his entire government spends a significant amount of time covering up their connections because it seems fairly obvious the president fucked teenagers and then fomented a coup and put literal criminals and felons in his cabinet so no one would hold him accountable while destroying the nation's economy and starting wars nobody can even understand"
- immibis 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  - gruez 11mo ago
    >with the evidence from the emails we can upgrade it to the much more direct fact "President Trump is a pedophile who liked to rape little girls" A bunch of vaguely worded emails is enough to summarily conclude that someone is a criminal? I'm glad you're not a judge.
    - lostlogin 11mo ago
      The convicted criminal hasn’t been convicted of that particular crime yet. Innocent until proven guilty again.
    - hobs 11mo ago
      And pictures and letters and cohabitation and friendship and mutual business arrangements and the list goes on. The court of public opinion is not an actual court.
      - gruez 11mo ago
        >And pictures and letters and cohabitation and friendship and mutual business arrangements and the list goes on At best that proves he's affiliated/associated with a convicted pedophile. Going from that to "we can upgrade it to the much more direct fact "President Trump is a pedophile who liked to rape little girls" is a massive leap. There's plenty of other famous people who turned out to be sexual offenders, but we don't go around accusing their entire circle of being "pedophile who liked to rape little girls". >The court of public opinion is not an actual court. Good. The court of public opinion has shown itself to be massively partisan. People's evidentiary standards change on a whim depending on how much they previously like/hate the person. By invoking the "court of public opinion" excuse, you're basically admitting that there's weak evidence for the allegations, so you need a lower bar to "convict" someone.
    - 11mo ago
matheusmoreira 11mo ago
Seizing control of criminal websites is literally standard procedure. Three letter agencies are known for hacking their way into criminal platforms and keeping them running for as long as possible. They justify it as an opportunity to catch high value targets. They're quite willing to literally distribute CSAM from their own servers for months, years on end if that's what it takes. They don't just react either, they are very proactive. They start their own CSAM communuties to entrap criminals. So called honeypots. It's a recurring theme with these authorities. You see, they're special. They get to spread this sort of material with complete impunity. They get to stockpile cyberweapons and use them against the targets of their investigations, or even indiscriminately. If you do it, you're a hacker spreading malware. They're just doing their jobs. Sometimes those two privileges collide, resulting in truly comical and absurd situations. FBI has allowed cases against child molesters to go down the drain because the judge ordered them to reveal some Firefox exploit they used. They didn't want to invalidate their "network investigative techniques".
- AstralStorm 11mo ago
  It's even more legally funny than this. They are also allowed to enact entrapment to some degree and it passed court muster in the US. That because it's extremely hard to use it as a defence. Note that these actions are illegal in most continental jurisdictions as stings must be devised ahead of time against specific groups of people. There's also Article 6 of ECHR. In other words, FBI cannot run a sting off an EU site like this, at least definitely not a German one.
wholinator2 11mo ago
I am imagining the consequences of that headline and there are none. If you disagree maybe you should imagine some of the real headlines that have occurred lately and check your imagination against reality. Federal agents are actively encouraged to violate your civil and constitutional rights. Those consequences live only in your imagination

by breppp 11mo ago

user982 11mo ago

> I don't think I am naive, just imagine the repercussions of the headline "FBI collected thousands of child rape photos for blackmail" What were the repercussions of this: "FBI ran website sharing thousands of child porn images" (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-website-sharing-thousands-child-porn-images/79108346/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/21/fbi-ran-websi...)

breppp 11mo ago
"The Justice Department said in court filings that agents did not post any child pornography to the site themselves" "The FBI kept Playpen online for 13 days" "There was no other way we could identify as many players" I think the normal person would think this is worth while to catch more pedophiles, hence why this would work politically. However, you can read by the tone of the article that even this drew a lot of rage. Imagine the FBI agents collecting CSAM, uploading it to websites for the purpose of... preventing copyright infringement
fentanyl_peyotl 11mo ago
I think there’s a difference between leaving a CP site up for two weeks so you can track the users, versus actively posting CP on legal websites for the purpose of blackmailing third parties into blocking them (“The Bardfinn Method”).

hobs 11mo ago

How about "The President was close friends with a known child sexual predator and his entire government spends a significant amount of time covering up their connections because it seems fairly obvious the president fucked teenagers and then fomented a coup and put literal criminals and felons in his cabinet so no one would hold him accountable while destroying the nation's economy and starting wars nobody can even understand"

immibis 11mo ago
[flagged]
- gruez 11mo ago
  >with the evidence from the emails we can upgrade it to the much more direct fact "President Trump is a pedophile who liked to rape little girls" A bunch of vaguely worded emails is enough to summarily conclude that someone is a criminal? I'm glad you're not a judge.
  - lostlogin 11mo ago
    The convicted criminal hasn’t been convicted of that particular crime yet. Innocent until proven guilty again.
  - hobs 11mo ago
    And pictures and letters and cohabitation and friendship and mutual business arrangements and the list goes on. The court of public opinion is not an actual court.
    - gruez 11mo ago
      >And pictures and letters and cohabitation and friendship and mutual business arrangements and the list goes on At best that proves he's affiliated/associated with a convicted pedophile. Going from that to "we can upgrade it to the much more direct fact "President Trump is a pedophile who liked to rape little girls" is a massive leap. There's plenty of other famous people who turned out to be sexual offenders, but we don't go around accusing their entire circle of being "pedophile who liked to rape little girls". >The court of public opinion is not an actual court. Good. The court of public opinion has shown itself to be massively partisan. People's evidentiary standards change on a whim depending on how much they previously like/hate the person. By invoking the "court of public opinion" excuse, you're basically admitting that there's weak evidence for the allegations, so you need a lower bar to "convict" someone.
  - 11mo ago

matheusmoreira 11mo ago

Seizing control of criminal websites is literally standard procedure. Three letter agencies are known for hacking their way into criminal platforms and keeping them running for as long as possible. They justify it as an opportunity to catch high value targets. They're quite willing to literally distribute CSAM from their own servers for months, years on end if that's what it takes. They don't just react either, they are very proactive. They start their own CSAM communuties to entrap criminals. So called honeypots. It's a recurring theme with these authorities. You see, they're special. They get to spread this sort of material with complete impunity. They get to stockpile cyberweapons and use them against the targets of their investigations, or even indiscriminately. If you do it, you're a hacker spreading malware. They're just doing their jobs. Sometimes those two privileges collide, resulting in truly comical and absurd situations. FBI has allowed cases against child molesters to go down the drain because the judge ordered them to reveal some Firefox exploit they used. They didn't want to invalidate their "network investigative techniques".

AstralStorm 11mo ago
It's even more legally funny than this. They are also allowed to enact entrapment to some degree and it passed court muster in the US. That because it's extremely hard to use it as a defence. Note that these actions are illegal in most continental jurisdictions as stings must be devised ahead of time against specific groups of people. There's also Article 6 of ECHR. In other words, FBI cannot run a sting off an EU site like this, at least definitely not a German one.

wholinator2 11mo ago

I am imagining the consequences of that headline and there are none. If you disagree maybe you should imagine some of the real headlines that have occurred lately and check your imagination against reality. Federal agents are actively encouraged to violate your civil and constitutional rights. Those consequences live only in your imagination