The Copyright Lobby Absolutely Loves Child Pornography

[Autumnlicious]

I don't understand.Does it restrict you to being a leech? I have no problems with that.I never upload any illegal material.

No, it doesn't, which is the problem. In addition, the randomized routing to avoid censorship et al incurs a heavy overhead on any network communication, including torrents. Furthermore, torrents use significant bandwidth.

The TOR network, by it's design and current deployments, has extremely limited bandwidth for anything but small, delay-resistant protocols (like HTTP).

If you are using Bittorrent on TOR, you are, verifiably, an asshole, through depriving others of significant resources what would be best served with DHT, an alt DNS and protocol encryption.

I've heard all sorts of conflicting things about just how useful Tor is. It's moot,because I can't get it to work. I use only Peer block and 'trackmenot' (a Firefox add on)

In my experiments with TOR, I found mode onion nodes to be infested with child pornography and other vile material. It is of my opinion that the only saving grace of TOR is the ability to bypass any filtering, albeit with significant delays that makes even web traffic slightly unbearable.

Oh, and finally, it is known that the FBI runs a few TOR exit nodes so they have an idea into the traffic flowing into and out of the network. While they cannot easily figure out who uses it, they can track the dissemination to public sites and act upon it.

Anyone can run a qualified exit node, including whomever you are attempting to outfox.

[Violet]

Last I checked, the manufacturing of child pornography was a crime for the harm it does to the minors who produce it, not for the tautological virtue of 'it is'.

Can cause. Usually does, but there can be times when it doesn't (ie: Ace).

CP is an issue of informed consent, which minors are incapable (legally) of, and of contract law. Ergo, the manufacturing thereof is upheld to be widely illegal. Additional arguments over the morality of such are superfluous.

Informed consent is a joke. Not the consenting, but the suggestion that consent can be 'informed'. While child porn is widely upheld to be illegal: there was a time when it was widely upheld that homosexuals could not marry. Obviously... legality has squat diddly to do with morality.

However, I find the anti-possession laws to be of questionable standing, as it reeks of the very same thought crime that, in some jurisdictions, bans The Anarchist Cookbook. The 'justification' for such anti-possession laws is under the thought that if the commodity is criminalized, manufacturing of such would face a limited demand, preventing scaled operations.

Which is foolish and demonstrably a failure

I find economic arguments to be quite weak in face of stronger legal precedents, like contracts and informed consent.

Contracts are considered only by the foolish... a smart person does what they will whether or not they said they would.

The weaker the argument, the more nebulous the gray areas and proposed legislation against such.

This makes it easy for malicious and self-interested parties to pass legislation under the guise of "think of the children" with little opposition.

Case in point - the copyright lobbies and their cynical, if not outrageous, use of the Child Pornography platform to enforce their completely unrelated agendas.

I find laws funny partly because of this. When I think of the children, the first thing the first thing that comes to mind is that they are annoying