January 20, 2006

silhouette3.JPG From the desk of Jane Galt:

Color me surprised

The folks in the Justice department really need to subpoena Google's records to find out that there's a lot of porn on the internet*? Don't they have computers over there at Justice?

*This link is fairly work-safe as long as you are using headphones, and have a boss who doesn't mind you watching videos of monsters.

Posted by Jane Galt at January 20, 2006 02:59 PM | TrackBack | Technorati inbound links
Comments

There's sometin' unsettling about that.

Posted by: anony-mouse on January 20, 2006 05:13 PM

I couldn't figure it out either.
Why didn't they simply do a search for "naked women"?
Unless of course what they really want is a list of the 50 million American men who look at such sights.

Posted by: Raw Data Complex on January 20, 2006 05:43 PM

And since I often have to look at "adult sites" for work, what would they think of me.

Really, with all the currently problems in the world, don't we all agree that DOJ resources are better spent on pretty much everything else.

(by the way, I loved the link...except that the prude was named "Kate." I take issue)

Posted by: Kate on January 20, 2006 06:25 PM

Bwahahaha! Thanks Jane :-)

More seriously, how scary is it that Google appears to be the only search company asked for that data that stood up for sanity and told the DOJ no?

Posted by: Deena on January 20, 2006 07:27 PM

Well, once again it sucks to have dial-up.

Posted by: gene on January 20, 2006 07:56 PM

Uh, Jane? What were you looking for when you found that video?

Posted by: Brian on January 20, 2006 08:25 PM

Jane, I think this is the link you meant to put up:

http://forporn.ytmnsfw.com/

Also, to Raw Data Complex:

50 million? That number sounds waaaaay low.

Posted by: Tim on January 21, 2006 02:22 AM

As I understand it, they're looking for people that were searching for child pornography. Yes, there are other large problems in the world, but ending the sexual abuse of children is pretty high up on my list.

Posted by: Ann on January 21, 2006 01:42 PM

Well, your understanding isn't very good. COPA's intent is to prevent children from viewing pornography. It does not involve child pornography.

The DoJ is trying to prove that COPA is constitutional, and have asked to see all searches for a particular period of time. Their goal is to prove that COPA would be more effective than software filters. Google is contesting it for a number of reasons, with the first being their request has no relevance to their objective.

Posted by: cal@footballfansfortruth.us on January 21, 2006 02:04 PM

Thanks for clarifying that, since children viewing adult porn is very different from child porn, and the justification for government involvement is far lower.

For better or for worse, Yahoo is being consistent. Yahoo handed over records to the Chinese Communist Party that led to a journalist being sentenced to ten years in prison. The reporter had forwarded a routine list from the Chinese government telling reporters which stories should not be reported. This particular communication was about not reporting the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre.

So, at least Yahoo is being consistent and will apparently roll over for any government, under any circumstances.

Posted by: Ann on January 21, 2006 02:57 PM

Hey! As a gamer, I take offense-- Orcs are NOT mosters! That's Alliance bias. Horde FTW!!!!!

/geek

Posted by: Sailorette on January 22, 2006 03:59 PM

Would the DOJ be able to use Google's data on search inquiries to lead to individual arrests? Aside from people who use Google with a personalized homepage and a user login, do authorities actually have the capabilities to link IP addresses with actual physical addresses? I haven't read this anywhere as of yet.

Posted by: Jeff on January 23, 2006 09:42 AM

Just a random little tidbit--I believe that song is from the Broadway musical "Avenue Q." Interesting that someone thought to put it to animation from a game.

Posted by: Shawn on January 23, 2006 03:58 PM

Comments are Closed.