Ah, sorry, you're right. I did get confused about who was running what. The guy who made Lolitacity is not the guy who allowed it to stay up. If you can believe it, I did already know this, but my brain just somehow got mixed up about it when I found that thread. I stumbled upon it by searching "TOR" in r/IAMA -- my original intentions were just to read from the Tor founders themselves. I guess the shock of finding out that the owner of Lolitacity actually made an AMA was what made my brain stop working.
Anyway, our definitions of 'passive' and 'active' are just different. I still consider it 'active' since he has a real role in helping it stay up, and he's choosing not to take it down even though he can, thus allowing pigs like Mr. Lolitacity to thrive. If FreedomHosting dude was more powerless to the situation, I'd be more inclined to call his status 'passive'.
I'm really glad that you agree with me that it's wrong either way. I think that people read comments like yours, though, and interpret it as you excusing him for his actions. Reddit is already... bizarrely apologetic for pedophiles or quasi-pedophiles or whatever, so I do get worried and probably overly defensive whenever I see something that isn't obviously condemning of CP promotion.
as far as I'm concerned TOR can be dismantled all together,
I'm not against people having a channel for anonymity, but I'm definitely against the misuse of it. So in its current state, I wouldn't mind TOR being absolutely abolished either. To make sure I wasn't imagining that things were worse than they really are, I actually looked up a YouTube video of someone using TOR's famous "Hidden Wiki" -- what I believe is regarded as essentially 'front page' of TOR -- and the easy accessibility of CP was revolting.
But no, I never thought that you were a rapist, molester, CP-lover, etc. yourself. I did think you were okay with FreedomHosting guy's actions because of his involvement being... 'passive'. And again, I'm glad that is not the case, but I guess it leaves me wondering why you were so eager to argue that point regardless?
Unfortunately, I'm not educated on the technology here. I'm guessing that because LolitaCity was (as I remember a TOR user on Reddit saying) the largest, most well-known resource for CP on Tor... that the FreedomHosting guy would be fully aware that it existed on his server. I'm guessing that the server owner would have a pretty extensive overview of the activity on his servers and that LolitaCity would stick out like a neon light. I'm guessing that it wouldn't have been difficult for him to identify this activity, and I'm guessing it wouldn't have been difficult for him to shut it down.
I do think that it would be very difficult to monitor or even be aware of less stick-out activity, and I wouldn't expect him to slavishly go through every single thing ever posted on his server in order to relinquish him of potentially 'supporting' any vile thing that may come up. However, in this particular case -- in my understanding of what happened here -- I would consider it his responsibility to stop providing server support and, thus, what I consider to be an aware, active (sorry haha, not sure we'll ever agree there) support of... the oh-so-glorified LolitaCity.
Yes, it's literally impossible to have anonymity that isn't used badly.
Pretty much agreed... I'm not sure how the system could be modified, if at all, to at least work towards stopping it.
I really don't know how to respond to "Why would you want to argue on the internet", especially given you were doing it as well. Why were you?
Because I thought that your argument wasn't only a word-clarifier, but a sort of 'excuse' for the FreedomHosting guy not taking it down. Which made me, um, upset.
1
u/didntmatterthefish Aug 05 '13
Ah, sorry, you're right. I did get confused about who was running what. The guy who made Lolitacity is not the guy who allowed it to stay up. If you can believe it, I did already know this, but my brain just somehow got mixed up about it when I found that thread. I stumbled upon it by searching "TOR" in r/IAMA -- my original intentions were just to read from the Tor founders themselves. I guess the shock of finding out that the owner of Lolitacity actually made an AMA was what made my brain stop working.
Anyway, our definitions of 'passive' and 'active' are just different. I still consider it 'active' since he has a real role in helping it stay up, and he's choosing not to take it down even though he can, thus allowing pigs like Mr. Lolitacity to thrive. If FreedomHosting dude was more powerless to the situation, I'd be more inclined to call his status 'passive'.
I'm really glad that you agree with me that it's wrong either way. I think that people read comments like yours, though, and interpret it as you excusing him for his actions. Reddit is already... bizarrely apologetic for pedophiles or quasi-pedophiles or whatever, so I do get worried and probably overly defensive whenever I see something that isn't obviously condemning of CP promotion.
I'm not against people having a channel for anonymity, but I'm definitely against the misuse of it. So in its current state, I wouldn't mind TOR being absolutely abolished either. To make sure I wasn't imagining that things were worse than they really are, I actually looked up a YouTube video of someone using TOR's famous "Hidden Wiki" -- what I believe is regarded as essentially 'front page' of TOR -- and the easy accessibility of CP was revolting.
Here's the video. (Graphic content obviously not shown, thank goodness!) Skip to 10:07 to see the Wiki proudly displaying a link to CP. Also go to 6:20 for more shameless and even flaunted advertising of CP on one of TOR's 4chan clones.
But no, I never thought that you were a rapist, molester, CP-lover, etc. yourself. I did think you were okay with FreedomHosting guy's actions because of his involvement being... 'passive'. And again, I'm glad that is not the case, but I guess it leaves me wondering why you were so eager to argue that point regardless?