This is patently and typically absurd on the face of it. Suppose someone posts a sketch, drawing or cartoon: who's to say how old that imaginary being might be? How about if someone posts a photo of his 2-year-old daughter with her bottom showing? I'm sure some perv in our government would find this enough of a turn-on to declare it 'child porn'! I guess filth is different things to different people; to me it's when idiots like McCain get their filthy hands on our Constution and tear it apart one little piece at a time. I'm all for prosecuting child pornographers, but don't make it the ISPs' problem, don't fuss unless you can prove the subject of the image is a minor, and please don't project your personal perversions on the rest of us. We, The People, are not all perverts.
Remember Mark Foley? In my free opinion, this is nothing more than a cover for a sick, pornographic database to be enjoyed by all the sexual deviants and pedophiles running Washington. Makes one wonder about McCain.
There is a big technical mess trying to get every ISP to monitor every image that every customer puts on line. Is the government going to cover the cost of every ISP doubling their computing power, and doubling the internet bandwidth to support this? Does the criminal justice department have the servers or band width to let every ISP run these database searches against their database a billion times a day? Someone here is totally clueless about the magnitude of what would be required to comply with such a law, including the massive budget some government agency would need.
There is a lot of legal precedent that the responsibility for illegal actions is upon the one performing those actions. Gun manufacturers aren't charged for murder when someone gets shot. Alcohol bottlers aren't charged for GUIs committed after over-indulging in their product. Auto manufacturers aren't charged for vehicular manslaughter. And there have been recent rulings that ISPs are not liable when their subscribers perform illegal acts.
If the law enforcement agencies want to compare every image on the web to every image in a databasse of theirs, it should be law enforcements responsibility to do this, not the ISPs. If the government doesn't have the resources, they can write a big check to someone that does (i.e. Google).
Yeah, the gubment can always write a big check, they have all the money they want. They'll just take it from the citizens or print more. If anybody else did this it would be extortion and counterfeiting and they'd be put away. We, The People should let the gubment get away with it either!
This would be like tapping the phone line of everyone in America. Just instead of a phone it is the internet. The Republicans (I am a republican but I refused to be one sided) have pushed through many laws in the last decade to intrude on american freedoms. I have noticed a trend as of late in using exploited children to get certain laws in.
Lets face it, child pornography is a problem on the net. However many writing laws to rid us of this truly awful thing want to rid us of legal porn as well. This bill could later be used to monitor other things. Traffic cameras are now used to monitor crime. Cell phone GPS is used now to track people.
With carnivore I do not even understand why they need the ISPs unless they want to have a private corporation "tap the line" then they can say they (the federal government) isn't doing it.
Besides the way hashes work, you could change the hash just by slightly altering the image. It is impracticable and they must know that.
How do you decide if an image is of a child or an 18 year old consenting ca
How do you determine a cartoon's age? How do you decide if an image is of a child or an 18 year old consenting cartoon? Now you begin to see the absurdity of this.
Or what about the brilliant 19th century artist Egon Sheila, he paints young women masturbating. Will that art now be banned?
What I don't understand is the US's push to regulate the internet, a global economy. I just don't get it.
Many drafting these bills wanted to make porn illeagal in all respects
Many republicans wanted to outlaw all porn on the net and in real life. They failed, so they backed up and re-grouped. Now they are fighting child porn. As the laws become stronger they can them slowly move into banning now legal porn or any other content they do not like.
Why pound Senator Mc Cain, Senator Chuck Schumer is shareing the spotlite also. Did you send them an email stating your objection to invasion of privacy and the stiff penalties.
Left and right wing Big Brother sexophobes gone wild!
These people don?t have any real love and concern for children. If they did, they would apply their time and resources towards those abuses that are hurting and killing the most children----poverty, child labor and physical abuse. They don?t really care about dealing with real sexual abuse because it affects all age groups not just children. They don?t seem to understand the difference between healthy sexual play and sexual abuse. Like most sexophobic people on the left and right, they seem to think that any sexual activity, that does not take place between a married man and women solely for the purpose of reproduction, must involve a predator and a victim! They continue to make the same mistake that the real or mythical Adam and Eve made when, after eating the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, they decided that the nudity God allowed was really shameful and a sin. Shame on God! The concept of shame of sexual parts of the human body and healthy sexual play, did not come from God! These people need to get off their Big Brother hobby horse and start doing their job of protecting the responsible freedom, liberty and tolerance of diverse religious morals, that they supposedly have fought for and are fighting for in Iraq!
SpiritMatter, you are very wise. Censorship of the internet is a very easy (and like most easy ways totally ineffectual) action to take in the name of children's safety. I'm glad that someone is not afraid of being thought a predator when they speak out against this nonsense and call it what it is--sexophobia. Meanwhile, my respect for McCain began to wane seriously when he caved in to the Xian-right and Jerry Falwell (who, let's face it wouldn't know Jesus Christ if he were giving him a ******* in a public men's room!)
You are putting light were there is darkness...(concerning children).. When your doing the will of God, you will have much opposition, when your doing the right thing. Thats how you know your on the right path. CONGRADULATIONS)
I am sure that McCain had good intentions. I support his goals of getting rid of child porn. The problem is the actions that he is outlining will not have a positive effect on the problem.
Other better solutions exist. The truly sad thing about this is that all this talk is probably causing a larger market for this trash and causing more kids to be molested.
In the long run the people who are into child porn need to understand that sooner or later they will be caught.
I do not make it a habit to judge one's grammar and spelling. However, your's is so atrocious that I had to read your comment 3 times to understand what YOU'RE saying.
John McCain is not putting light WHERE there is darkness. He is positioning himself as the "Christian" candidate for the 2008 presidential race. For that, he deserves no CONGRATULATIONS.
Wouldn't it be useful if we could surveil them to ensure all of their official actions--not just those in the chamber--are in the interest of their constituents?
I mean, if they've got nothing to hide and they're holding a public, representative office...
I wrote the code to do this many years ago. It works just fine.
People getting caught up in MD5 and SHA1 hashes are on the wrong track. The "signature" of a specific image is not something that you simply compare A = B. It is a pyramid encoding of the 2D image in the frequency domain, and a match is simply above a certain threshold, say 90% confidence.
You can take an original image that has had a signature made for it, and compress it, reencode it, resize it, tint it, add noise, text captions, whatever... when the signature is made for THAT image, and then "compared" to the original signature, they will have high spatial correlation and the mangled copy will still get flagged.
Similarly, one cannot construct an image file that has very high 2D color space correlation to another image file without them "looking very similar"... aka, if your picture doesn't look almost identical to a known image with a signature, it simply won't match it.
Modern cpu's can compute a signature for a screen-sized image in a few milliseconds. Building a web service that sends the unknown signature to a server someplace and has IT do the big database task of finding the closest match and reporting it back as FLAG or DONT-FLAG is straightforward.
Of course the threshold for what "matches" can be adjusted to balance the hit detection/false alarm rate that is inherent in any statistical analysis. I would guess any such program if applied to every single web image, (billions?) would start out with something like 98% and see how many hits they get and go from there.
Also, note that video files, while being more computationally intensive to compute are even easier to get good hit_detection/false_alerm rates, because of the extra dimension (t).
Certainly the cpu time and bandwidth overhead requited to check if this a horrible image of a child being exploited is in the noise compared to the time and cost to upload and store the image in the first place.
There is simply no legitimate argument for not doing this that involves time, money or technology.
The only argument, is in regards to constitutionality of a law that makes it illegal to possess a computer file if it can be rendered as a grid of pixels such that a viewer of said pixels might be induced to think impurient thoughts about a minor, real or imagined.
I doubt even the most liberal american would complain if this exposed and convicted dangerous child predators... the gray area comes in when it also destroys the life of the thousands of "relatively" innocent men who unwittingly or otherwise have one or two images on their computer that are deemed illegal. Federal mandatory minumums with a 10 year "internet bump" are going to hurt a lot of people for having possibly maybe thought something once.
Lets use your fourier trick (Sounds cool by the way) with a small ISP that handles 100,000 email transactions a day. Lets say that you have a 1% false positive. Unless I am wrong, This little ISP would need to have a human check and compare 1,000 images a day.
The other issue I have is that it will only take a few milliseconds to generate your hash (I am assuming you still use some kind of hash) How long will it take to compare the result with 5 or 10 million other hashes? I guess you could save them up and do them all in one batch at a slow time.
I suppose this technology could also be used to keep web surfers from inadvertently or otherwise downloading an image, provided it could be analyzed at the source before being downloaded? But of course that would suppose that the image could legally exist somewhere. It's all a bit confusing!
This is the dumbest thing I have heard of going after people for looking at cartoons. Come on they are cartoons. If a person cannot tell the difference between Reality and non reality that person needs help. But cartoons COME ON!!every day this country is founded all "stupid rules" we do not need another "stupid rule" real images I understand but cartoons. I hate to admit this but I rather some perv release there pleasure on college rulled paper than end up building it up inside and going after a real child. People need to think about how many rules we are making. Sooon this is going to get to the point where people are not allowed to read book and and just listen to the goverment. GAWD this is so Stupid
how the hell do you tell if a cartoon is a minor or not?
yay more snooping, first FBI is allowed to wiretap VoIP communications now ISPs are allowed to look through emails and attatchments indiscrimintantly for child porn! w00t!
...is no longer the party that believes in a small Federal gov't. Nope -- Big Brother has slipped out his donkey outfit and now wears an elephant mask.
The senator wants our ISP to track "illegal" images. IF THE IMAGES ARE ILLEGAL THEN THE IMAGES SHOULD BE BLOCKED AND THE PROVIDERS HUNTED DOWN AND PROCECUTED. But honestly, how are the ISPs supposed to know what images are legal vs. illegal. It simply isn't practical if not impossible to track every image that flies over the internet. Why argue about all the other bs when this legislation has zero chance of being enforced even if it gets passed. I would have thought that the people posting here would have been a little more tech savy than what they are portraying now.
I need to ask you.. how would they track them? So... you proposing a system that can monitor every file on the internet, and calling this a good thing(tm)?
What is next, after authorizing reading of emails and internet? Will phone conversations, what is said in your bedroom next? Moving from a democracy to a police state and all for a few votes. Who gets to define an illegal image? I hope that if this sees the light of day that is tried in court for years to come and finally overturned by reasonable people in the courts. Oops, my bad.
Come on People I can't hear you on this one. When are WE "Little people" going to Stand UP AND ROCK THERE WORLD ? Can you just imagine That Tough Little Guy in the Hanoi Hilton ? And today if Ole G.W.Bush the "Destroyer" was to stop short oh well there goes the little guy. How can One Little white headed old Man go from being an honorable believable POW-VET to a Raving Ranting PRO-WAR PRO-BUSH PRO-HALLIBURTON Al-Queda This Taliban that with some of the most completely absured Propanganda Crap I have ever In My life heard. In fact some of the Hyper Bull that was spelled out in perfectly timed Interviews that the Bush/Cheney McCain Tripod had given was so Absured So Manufactured that I could only shake my head and laugh in utter Humiliation Disgrace and total Disgust Can any of you who still "Honestly" care about the Sovereignty Of Mother Liberty {Mrs America} Still claim to this day That WE were REALLY and TRULY ATTACKED ON 9/11? FOR WHAT? And if you still think that way Can you Help US to understand why after all the Hundreds of thousands of Innocent People Our Military has "Quote" accidently Killed in there Quest for spreading out that "Free Democracy" maybe you can explain Why all these Quote EVIL-DOERS have NOT ATTACKED ONE LOUSY GARBAGE CAN, NOT ONE SUBWAY URINAL STANKIN GARBAGE CAN ? And please if you have Any shame or Disgust left in you do NOT try and say it's Because HomeBoy security Firm is doing there JOB Cause I hate to Be the One to tell you nice people this BUT they could NOT Find there Own ***** with Both hands doing the looking So now We have Five times More Idiots running around loose in the united States with GUNS all swearing they are RAMBO and single handidly are going to save Thar USofA . **** on em . What happened to this country on and before 9/11 was Operation Northwoods PERIOD it was THE only SONG BEING played !!!! All any of you need do is just Check with them nice fellas down at the Council on Foreign relation .
It made me ill to hear Obama talk about the 911 attacks the other day... more "defending the homeland from the terrorists" bs. Everybody knows it but nobody will just say it: The WAR ON TERROR is a SCAM! It's the GREAT FRAUD of the new century. A MYTH. A LEGEND. The LIE on which the other lies are built. 911 and other large scale terror attacks (London subway, etc.) are false flag operations carried out by western intelligence agencies to mislead the masses and provide a justification for illegal acts of agression (for war profiteering, oil resources, power expansion, etc.) around the world, and the creation of a police state authoritarian dictatorship at home.
These people are not subtle. They are blatant, obvious, smug, treasonous, ruthless, psychotic, dangerous, and absolutely predictable. They have nothing but contempt for their fellow citizens - and the rest of the world for that matter (and they are preparing to nuke Iran at this very moment!).
who is going to step up?
Forget the media. The corporate media is a mouthpiece for their newspeak-like rhetoric of deception. Just check out the Libby trial happening right now. Every reporter in Washington knew the real story - first hand - but they all mislead the public by acting like it was some big mystery for over 2 years.
Forget the democrats (who don't even have the balls to be the republicans they wish they were!).
It's up to us to demand it. loud and clear. IMPEACHMENT. NOW.
Dear Friend's: Can you believe the Bell's On this "Little Man" I think his stay at the Hanoi Hilton must have done irreversable dane bramage. Not only is this "Loose Cannon" wandering around as an elected official with power But Now He want ISPs to inform On Who is creating WMD Cartoons ? ARE WE NUTS FOR ALLOWING THIS SOB to even be allowed outside the Hospital. THEN WILL SOMEONE PLEASE HELP ME To understand at what point are these Crazy SOBs going to STOP THIS INSANITY ? What One must ask themselves is Are they Blowing all this Wacky Tabacky Smoke to keep We Little People Off center and busy chasing are shadows to keep Us from focusing on the Impeacment process and the Criminal charges that are being put together against the Bush / Cheney Boyz Club ? All I can say folks Is I AM DEEPLY DISGUSTED AND ASHAMED TO BE AMERICAN AT THIS POINT IN TIME, Not because I hate My country But rather Because I'm ashamed at the Lie's told and the Gross Fraud they Perpitrated on the American people just so they could drag our youth into War to kill innocent Iraqis. They knowingly Manufactured Evidence to Create the Need for this Bogus War and because so many of the Senators they used to sign off on this War were so Bullied into Signing they Never bothered to question even One Piece Of Ficticious evidence. In fact they were so scared they would Be called Traders or even Terrorist's that they all lined up Behind Old G.W.Bush which We now know for Fact was the Biggest Single Mistake anyone could make . So Now We have the GOP wanting to Imprison Anybody who Draws a Coartoon They DON'T LIKE ? Can any of you guess who this remindes Us Of, How about the Old USSR and the KGB. Make's you wander What's Next !
Please tell me why NO ONE has the nerve to ask "john mccain" why he is deceiving the very same Americans that prayed for his safe release from captivity. I have undeniable proof that his word ain`t worth a dam....He Lies! Jerry Alexander
Manage updates with the Download App
I guess filth is different things to different people; to me it's when idiots like McCain get their filthy hands on our Constution and tear it apart one little piece at a time. I'm all for prosecuting child pornographers, but don't make it the ISPs' problem, don't fuss unless you can prove the subject of the image is a minor, and please don't project your personal perversions on the rest of us. We, The People, are not all perverts.
There is a lot of legal precedent that the responsibility for illegal actions is upon the one performing those actions. Gun manufacturers aren't charged for murder when someone gets shot. Alcohol bottlers aren't charged for GUIs committed after over-indulging in their product. Auto manufacturers aren't charged for vehicular manslaughter. And there have been recent rulings that ISPs are not liable when their subscribers perform illegal acts.
If the law enforcement agencies want to compare every image on the web to every image in a databasse of theirs, it should be law enforcements responsibility to do this, not the ISPs. If the government doesn't have the resources, they can write a big check to someone that does (i.e. Google).
Lets face it, child pornography is a problem on the net. However many writing laws to rid us of this truly awful thing want to rid us of legal porn as well. This bill could later be used to monitor other things. Traffic cameras are now used to monitor crime. Cell phone GPS is used now to track people.
With carnivore I do not even understand why they need the ISPs unless they want to have a private corporation "tap the line" then they can say they (the federal government) isn't doing it.
Besides the way hashes work, you could change the hash just by slightly altering the image. It is impracticable and they must know that.
Or what about the brilliant 19th century artist Egon Sheila, he paints young women masturbating. Will that art now be banned?
What I don't understand is the US's push to regulate the internet, a global economy. I just don't get it.
is shareing the spotlite also. Did you send them an email stating your objection to invasion of privacy and the stiff penalties.
WEB
They continue to make the same mistake that the real or mythical Adam and Eve made when, after eating the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, they decided that the nudity God allowed was really shameful and a sin. Shame on God! The concept of shame of sexual parts of the human body and healthy sexual play, did not come from God! These people need to get off their Big Brother hobby horse and start doing their job of protecting the responsible freedom, liberty and tolerance of diverse religious morals, that they supposedly have fought for and are fighting for in Iraq!
Other better solutions exist. The truly sad thing about this is that all this talk is probably causing a larger market for this trash and causing more kids to be molested.
In the long run the people who are into child porn need to understand that sooner or later they will be caught.
The GOP is the new Democratic Party.
John McCain is not putting light WHERE there is darkness. He is positioning himself as the "Christian" candidate for the 2008 presidential race. For that, he deserves no CONGRATULATIONS.
I mean, they're job is representation, no?
Wouldn't it be useful if we could surveil them to ensure all of
their official actions--not just those in the chamber--are in the
interest of their constituents?
I mean, if they've got nothing to hide and they're holding a
public, representative office...
Now that would be eaves-dropping I could support.
Last I heard child pornography and related problems have been on
the decline for years.
But, it continues to be a hot-button issue for the Republican base.
It doesn't matter if it passes or not. the introduction is enough to
score points.
You are a damned liar.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/01/12/net_blamed_for_massive_increase/" target="_newWindow">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/01/12/net_blamed_for_massive_increase/</a>
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1121332,00.html" target="_newWindow">http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1121332,00.html</a>
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/chpornography/" target="_newWindow">http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/chpornography/</a>
People getting caught up in MD5 and SHA1 hashes are on the wrong track. The "signature" of a specific image is not something that you simply compare A = B. It is a pyramid encoding of the 2D image in the frequency domain, and a match is simply above a certain threshold, say 90% confidence.
You can take an original image that has had a signature made for it, and compress it, reencode it, resize it, tint it, add noise, text captions, whatever... when the signature is made for THAT image, and then "compared" to the original signature, they will have high spatial correlation and the mangled copy will still get flagged.
Similarly, one cannot construct an image file that has very high 2D color space correlation to another image file without them "looking very similar"... aka, if your picture doesn't look almost identical to a known image with a signature, it simply won't match it.
Modern cpu's can compute a signature for a screen-sized image in a few milliseconds. Building a web service that sends the unknown signature to a server someplace and has IT do the big database task of finding the closest match and reporting it back as FLAG or DONT-FLAG is straightforward.
Of course the threshold for what "matches" can be adjusted to balance the hit detection/false alarm rate that is inherent in any statistical analysis. I would guess any such program if applied to every single web image, (billions?) would start out with something like 98% and see how many hits they get and go from there.
Also, note that video files, while being more computationally intensive to compute are even easier to get good hit_detection/false_alerm rates, because of the extra dimension (t).
Certainly the cpu time and bandwidth overhead requited to check if this a horrible image of a child being exploited is in the noise compared to the time and cost to upload and store the image in the first place.
There is simply no legitimate argument for not doing this that involves time, money or technology.
The only argument, is in regards to constitutionality of a law that makes it illegal to possess a computer file if it can be rendered as a grid of pixels such that a viewer of said pixels might be induced to think impurient thoughts about a minor, real or imagined.
I doubt even the most liberal american would complain if this exposed and convicted dangerous child predators... the gray area comes in when it also destroys the life of the thousands of "relatively" innocent men who unwittingly or otherwise have one or two images on their computer that are deemed illegal. Federal mandatory minumums with a 10 year "internet bump" are going to hurt a lot of people for having possibly maybe thought something once.
The other issue I have is that it will only take a few milliseconds to generate your hash (I am assuming you still use some kind of hash) How long will it take to compare the result with 5 or 10 million other hashes? I guess you could save them up and do them all in one batch at a slow time.
from inadvertently or otherwise downloading an image, provided it
could be analyzed at the source before being downloaded? But of
course that would suppose that the image could legally exist
somewhere. It's all a bit confusing!
~another slave helping your world go round~
by them.
McCain has no issues to campaign with. Zero, zip, nada. So like
every other politician, he's dragging out the old witch hunt fear
mentality.
Trouble is, people are getting tired of hearing it.
yay more snooping, first FBI is allowed to wiretap VoIP communications now ISPs are allowed to look through emails and attatchments indiscrimintantly for child porn! w00t!
What good is a redundant bill that only further ties the hands of the good guys?
You solve a problem by cutting it off at the root. That said... then why is this bill only interested in trimming the branches?
FWIW
other day... more "defending the homeland from the terrorists"
bs. Everybody knows it but nobody will just say it:
The WAR ON TERROR is a SCAM!
It's the GREAT FRAUD of the new century. A MYTH. A LEGEND.
The LIE on which the other lies are built.
911 and other large scale terror attacks (London subway, etc.)
are false flag operations carried out by western intelligence
agencies to mislead the masses and provide a justification for
illegal acts of agression (for war profiteering, oil resources,
power expansion, etc.) around the world, and the creation of a
police state authoritarian dictatorship at home.
These people are not subtle. They are blatant, obvious, smug,
treasonous, ruthless, psychotic, dangerous, and absolutely
predictable. They have nothing but contempt for their fellow
citizens - and the rest of the world for that matter (and they are
preparing to nuke Iran at this very moment!).
who is going to step up?
Forget the media. The corporate media is a mouthpiece for their
newspeak-like rhetoric of deception. Just check out the Libby
trial happening right now. Every reporter in Washington knew
the real story - first hand - but they all mislead the public by
acting like it was some big mystery for over 2 years.
Forget the democrats (who don't even have the balls to be the
republicans they wish they were!).
It's up to us to demand it. loud and clear.
IMPEACHMENT. NOW.
I have undeniable proof that his word ain`t worth a dam....He Lies!
Jerry Alexander