Re: Wednesday, January 6th is YouTube Porn Day
Governor Rocknar
> 4chan announces its intention to flood YouTube with porn videos, and
> this breaking story makes it straight to the Washington Post. You
> gotta admit, that's POWER, man:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/05/AR201...
> --
> The High Weirdness Project
> http://www.modemac.com
PORN! What a great birthday present for me!!
Rocknar
Zapanaz
wrote:
>4chan announces its intention to flood YouTube with porn videos, and
>this breaking story makes it straight to the Washington Post. You
>gotta admit, that's POWER, man:
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/05/AR2010010500515.html
YouTubes absolute ban on porn annoys me. They have provisions for
allowing me to set my account to view "adult" videos, but then decide
that some "adult" video is too adult for adults. That seems a lot
like net nannying to me.
Of course, I suspect what's really needed is some dependable way of
verifying age in general. I saw some attempts at that on pornographic
sites in the past but it seemed to die out. That would remove the
whole "but the children could sneak in and see it" aspect of it.
But I didn't trust the porn sites enough to sign up for it; it would
have to come from somebody with a higher trust level.
Maybe YouTube themselves should set up a service like that.
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
0x29A - opcode of the beast!
:: Currently listening to Frosty the Snowman, 1996, by Cocteau Twins, from "Lullabies to Violaine (Volume 2)"
Radix Lecti Artemia Salina
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 07:07:01 -0500, Modemac <mod...@modemac.com> wrote:
>
>>4chan announces its intention to flood YouTube with porn videos, and
>>this breaking story makes it straight to the Washington Post. You gotta
>>admit, that's POWER, man:
>>
>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/05/
AR2010010500515.html
>
> YouTubes absolute ban on porn annoys me. They have provisions for
> allowing me to set my account to view "adult" videos, but then decide
> that some "adult" video is too adult for adults. That seems a lot like
> net nannying to me.
>
> Of course, I suspect what's really needed is some dependable way of
> verifying age in general. I saw some attempts at that on pornographic
> sites in the past but it seemed to die out. That would remove the whole
> "but the children could sneak in and see it" aspect of it.
>
> But I didn't trust the porn sites enough to sign up for it; it would
> have to come from somebody with a higher trust level.
>
> Maybe YouTube themselves should set up a service like that.
Age verification is a tough nut to bust. What's needed is a way to
identify the person accessing the video. A special USB powered scanner
that can analyze one's DNA would be needed. The scanner would be made
of latex and the viewer would deposit a DNA sample into/onto the scanner
at some point during the video.
In fact, the scanner could by some means signal to the viewer that it
is ready for the sample. In order not to disrupt viewing of the video
I would suggest some sort of tactile signal, much like a pager set to
"buzz." Any time after the scanner has begun signaling it's readiness,
the viewer may deposit his or her sample for analysis.
--
Artemia Salina: President of the Timothy Treadwell Memorial Petting Zoo
Spencer Spindrift
wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 07:07:01 -0500, Modemac <mode...@modemac.com>
> wrote:
>
> >4chan announces its intention to flood YouTube with porn videos, and
> >this breaking story makes it straight to the Washington Post. You
> >gotta admit, that's POWER, man:
>
>
> YouTubes absolute ban on porn annoys me. They have provisions for
> allowing me to set my account to view "adult" videos, but then decide
> that some "adult" video is too adult for adults. That seems a lot
> like net nannying to me.
>
> Of course, I suspect what's really needed is some dependable way of
> verifying age in general. I saw some attempts at that on pornographic
> sites in the past but it seemed to die out. That would remove the
> whole "but the children could sneak in and see it" aspect of it.
>
> But I didn't trust the porn sites enough to sign up for it; it would
> have to come from somebody with a higher trust level.
I find it's really easy to find free pr0n on the interweb e.g. www.PornTube.com
; xvideos.com and a million others.
Or you could use illegal filesharing - no-one gets busted unless they
do it on an industrial scale.
Spencer Spindrift
wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 09:27:05 -0800, Zapanaz wrote:
LOL, so you only get tested *after* you've cum !
Hey my spellchecker recognised "cum" as a properly spelled word! K00l
or what!
Paul Jamison
"Radix Lecti Artemia Salina" <y...@sheayright.com> wrote in message
news:wcidnRU_i65JFt7W...@giganews.com...
Spencer Spindrift
> "Radix Lecti Artemia Salina" <y...@sheayright.com> wrote in messagenews:wcidnRU_i65JFt7W...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 09:27:05 -0800, Zapanaz wrote:
>
So is this H S d00d of the female persuasion?
Tabatha Cash
Toilet Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 09:27:05 -0800, Zapanaz wrote:
I'll call Reed Richards and Tony Stark to get on it.
Paul Jamison
"Spencer Spindrift" <spencers...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:950cb7d8-42cd-427a...@22g2000yqr.googlegroups.com...
Tabatha Cash
======================
I dunno. Guys' nipples ge hard, too.
Anyway, I always picture Homeland Security as soulless and sexless. Just
what you'd expect coming out of the Bush Administration.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<y...@sheayright.com> wrote:
>Age verification is a tough nut to bust. What's needed is a way to
>identify the person accessing the video. A special USB powered scanner
>that can analyze one's DNA would be needed. The scanner would be made
>of latex and the viewer would deposit a DNA sample into/onto the scanner
>at some point during the video.
>
>In fact, the scanner could by some means signal to the viewer that it
>is ready for the sample. In order not to disrupt viewing of the video
>I would suggest some sort of tactile signal, much like a pager set to
>"buzz." Any time after the scanner has begun signaling it's readiness,
>the viewer may deposit his or her sample for analysis.
And what would stop an underage kid from simply using an adults DNA? I
mean, unless the thing would require a direct blood sample, it'd be
pretty damn easy to fool with not much more than a few hair clippings.
Not to mention that, that wouldn't even cover software based exploits
and work arounds to bypass such forms. Technically what you're
describing isn't any better than the current Net Nanny
software...which can already be bypassed by anyone with a fair degree
of technical expertise. Sure it'll keep out most kiddies, but some
will still get through.
USB based identity verification systems are a good idea though and
we'll likely be seeing them more and more in the future...not this
retarded DNA idea of course, that's just science fiction stupidity.
No, likely what we'll see is like credit card and drivers license card
scanners. Said cards will be embedded with a microchip instead of, or
in addition to a magnetic strip, and the card reader will interface
with that microchip.
They've already got systems like that setup too. Eastern Washington
University in fact has student ID cards with both a magnetic strip and
microchip, which are used for a variety of things, including student
meal purchases.
Of course they're not fool proof, again, anyone with a high degree of
technical expertise and the right equipment can mess around with the
card's data, like how much money it has on it for student meals and
other things.
The next form after that will very likely be USB based retinal
scanners.
After that, USB facial recognition scanners...ASSuming the inherent
problems of that technology can be overcome...it's far from perfect as
it currently is.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm � x �
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.uncensored-inter.net
Hatter Quotes
-------------
"Never do to anyone online what you wouldn't want done to yourself."
"Freedom, true freedom, is nothing more than intellectual advantage over others."
"When I listen to people I don't really listen to what it is they're
saying, so much as what they're saying it for."
"Don't ever fuck with someone who has more creativity than you do."
"Never use your own limitations as the basis of measuring a technology's worth."
"I don't make mistakes, I have other people to make mistakes for me."
"You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one of the
best."
"I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch slapped you
with it."
"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."
"Usenet Filters/Blinders - Learn to shut yourself the fuck up!"
"Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews, my
bad."
"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."
"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"
"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."
"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."
"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."
"People are pretty fucking high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."
"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."
"Those who record history are those who control history."
"I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its tormentive rage,
endless suffering, unfathomable pain and unending horror...but you
don't get sent to me...I come for you."
"Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."
"Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
function?"
"Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the forecast
indicates an increase in Webtv users."
"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )
Zapanaz
<use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:58:28 -0600, Radix Lecti Artemia Salina
><y...@sheayright.com> wrote:
>
>>Age verification is a tough nut to bust. What's needed is a way to
>>identify the person accessing the video. A special USB powered scanner
>>that can analyze one's DNA would be needed. The scanner would be made
>>of latex and the viewer would deposit a DNA sample into/onto the scanner
>>at some point during the video.
>>
>>In fact, the scanner could by some means signal to the viewer that it
>>is ready for the sample. In order not to disrupt viewing of the video
>>I would suggest some sort of tactile signal, much like a pager set to
>>"buzz." Any time after the scanner has begun signaling it's readiness,
>>the viewer may deposit his or her sample for analysis.
>
>And what would stop an underage kid from simply using an adults DNA? I
>mean, unless the thing would require a direct blood sample, it'd be
>pretty damn easy to fool with not much more than a few hair clippings.
(facepalm)
you're a complete idiot, and you don't have any idea how you just
demonstrated that, do you?
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
thirty eight ... thirty nine ... fourty
- Two times
:: Currently listening to Cello-Suite Nr. 4 Es-Dur BWV 1010 - VI. Gigue, 1720, by Bach, from "Cello Suites - Yo Yo Ma"
Onideus Mad Hatter
<http://joecosby.com/code/mai...@foo.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 02:55:42 -0800, Onideus Mad Hatter
><use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:58:28 -0600, Radix Lecti Artemia Salina
>><y...@sheayright.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Age verification is a tough nut to bust. What's needed is a way to
>>>identify the person accessing the video. A special USB powered scanner
>>>that can analyze one's DNA would be needed. The scanner would be made
>>>of latex and the viewer would deposit a DNA sample into/onto the scanner
>>>at some point during the video.
>>>
>>>In fact, the scanner could by some means signal to the viewer that it
>>>is ready for the sample. In order not to disrupt viewing of the video
>>>I would suggest some sort of tactile signal, much like a pager set to
>>>"buzz." Any time after the scanner has begun signaling it's readiness,
>>>the viewer may deposit his or her sample for analysis.
>>
>>And what would stop an underage kid from simply using an adults DNA? I
>>mean, unless the thing would require a direct blood sample, it'd be
>>pretty damn easy to fool with not much more than a few hair clippings.
>
>(facepalm)
>
>
>you're a complete idiot, and you don't have any idea how you just
>demonstrated that, do you?
Let me guess, you don't think your hair has DNA in it, amiright?
*nods*
Talk about face palms, this kid pretty much takes the cake.
Toilet Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
If what you say is true the lizard overlords are slowly taking over
our planet.
Onideus Mad Hatter
Do you believe in the Raptor Jesus?
Zapanaz
<use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 14:15:11 -0800, Zapanaz
><http://joecosby.com/code/mai...@foo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 02:55:42 -0800, Onideus Mad Hatter
>><use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:58:28 -0600, Radix Lecti Artemia Salina
>>><y...@sheayright.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Age verification is a tough nut to bust. What's needed is a way to
>>>>identify the person accessing the video. A special USB powered scanner
>>>>that can analyze one's DNA would be needed. The scanner would be made
>>>>of latex and the viewer would deposit a DNA sample into/onto the scanner
>>>>at some point during the video.
>>>>
>>>>In fact, the scanner could by some means signal to the viewer that it
>>>>is ready for the sample. In order not to disrupt viewing of the video
>>>>I would suggest some sort of tactile signal, much like a pager set to
>>>>"buzz." Any time after the scanner has begun signaling it's readiness,
>>>>the viewer may deposit his or her sample for analysis.
>>>
>>>And what would stop an underage kid from simply using an adults DNA? I
>>>mean, unless the thing would require a direct blood sample, it'd be
>>>pretty damn easy to fool with not much more than a few hair clippings.
>>
>>(facepalm)
>>
>>
>>you're a complete idiot, and you don't have any idea how you just
>>demonstrated that, do you?
>
>Let me guess, you don't think your hair has DNA in it, amiright?
I'm trying to figure out how to do two facepalms at the same time
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
thirty eight ... thirty nine ... fourty
- Two times
:: Currently listening to I No 20 in D minor K466 Allegro, 1785, by Mozart/Beethoven, from "Piano Concertos - Vladimir Ashkenazy"
Onideus Mad Hatter
<http://joecosby.com/code/mai...@foo.com> wrote:
>>>>And what would stop an underage kid from simply using an adults DNA? I
>>>>mean, unless the thing would require a direct blood sample, it'd be
>>>>pretty damn easy to fool with not much more than a few hair clippings.
>>>
>>>(facepalm)
>>>
>>>
>>>you're a complete idiot, and you don't have any idea how you just
>>>demonstrated that, do you?
>>Let me guess, you don't think your hair has DNA in it, amiright?
>I'm trying to figure out how to do two facepalms at the same time
I'm trying to figure out how you can possibly be so stupid whilst
still managing to breath and type at the same time...then again maybe
you're not. o_O
Toilet Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
productions.net> wrote:
>
> Do you believe in the Raptor Jesus?
>
I saw pictures of him in the intenets, so the answer is yes.
Radix Lecti Artemia Salina
I laughed so hard at that guy I farted!
"A tough NUT to BUST" "made of LATEX" "deposit a DNA sample INTO" buzzing.
LO<fart>L!!
Oops, I did it again!