CP

Someone posted CP and a link to a CP site in a thread, what can the Lainchan admins do about users who post this stuff? Do you report them to the authorities?

>>8709 >what can the Lainchan admins do about users who post this stuff? Nothing. Most of the time it's posted either from Tor exit nodes or proxies in backwater soykafhole countries. Calling the authorities is a bad idea, unless you want to be bugged by cops or (worst case) get yourself into trouble for "hosting" CP.

>>8712 >neurosuggesting that Tor nodes are at all secure

>>8713 It's almost like you want to tell us something, but I fail to see it.

>>8718 Well, what I'm trying to say is that something should be done about this even if they are hiding behind VPNs or Tor because children are being sexually exploited for the pleasure of psychos on the internet and that needs to be stopped.

>>8720 >Well, what I'm trying to say is that something should be done about this even if they are hiding behind VPNs or Tor Good luck. >because children are being sexually exploited for the pleasure of psychos on the internet You're making the flawed assumption that children are exploited for CP when the vast majority of it is in fact merely a byproduct of child abuse.

We ban users that post CP Spam and delete their posts, if it looks like bot spam (exact same post across multiple boards in short timeframe, then we keyword block future posts based on post structure. In order to report to the authorities you need actual information to report , which we don't have. And as users said IP information is either proxies and Tor Nodes, which only begin the investigation of Internet origin because it is more likely to be a robot from some reseller site , then the original offenders, and actually identifying the victims and location requires actual analysis of the imagery which isn't our job as Lainchan Administration team.

>>8723 its is possible to write model that recognizes person's age on image. Would you add such functionality to lainchan if i wrote it in keras? Process goes like that: someone tries to post CP, image before goes into DB, is being displayed is processed by my script which is just doing boolean=model.predict(image). Image is accepted if person on image is not underrage. Why nobody is doing that on any chan?

>>8768 If it was that easy everyone would use it, so it clearly isnt

>>8770 this is loser mentality, you are loser

>>8768 It is possible to write models to guess many things. But I wouldn't add such functionality (other people's random models or hash database attempts) to Lainchan because it would violate terms of use and legislation by transmitting / receiving inappropriate images unless certain things were done in certain ways. We don't have access to the relevant hash or model databases (CAID, PhotoDNA,etc). We also don't state terms of service with other disclaimers. If someone was serious about sending a pull request to enable this, I would merge it as a configurable feature for others to use. Currently we haven't undergone the required bureaucracy (become official registered organisation, pay lots of money to various government registry yearly ) in order to pass vetting from arbitrary third party US vetting company, that would allow access to PhotoDNA service as an example.

>>8768 >its is possible to write model that recognizes person's age on image. I mean maybe the obvious stuff but I'm under the impression it would take a ton of CPU/GPU resources and not be all that accurate. My ex got refused cigarettes when she was like 29. I think the only thing you can do is assume that if someone is posting porn on lain then we ban them and let pornhub worry about who is legal to fap to. But if they wanted to do a non-machine learning heuristic to ban porn I wouldn't be mad if my posts were sometimes refused on false positives for porn as long as they preserved the text so I could pick a different image. I'd feel a lot safer about the contents of my browser cache but I don't know about everyone else.

>>8723 If you ever see any CP you should e-mail it to cia@gmail.com so we (the CIA) can analyse it and catch the cuprit.

>>8720 Hey! Enough with that! We're not psychos. We're just as well integrated with society as you. Those sickos that go about raping children or posting images on decent clearnet forums are not representative of our values. We have our niches around the internet, and they're not that hard to find. Whoever was posting it was either poorly seeking attention, or as was mentioned, someone trying to make money off it. And it's almost always a scam, and they're often considerably more lenient with abusive, coercive, or outright violent rape. It's not a good scene. >You're making the flawed assumption that children are exploited for CP when the vast majority of it is in fact merely a byproduct of child abuse. Not to mention that there's a lot where the children are perfectly happy to do it, and in many cases get paid well. Of course this raises issues about parents "encouraging" their children to make money that way. And there's a lot where the children make it themselves. One major problem is that there's limited accountability. What idiot, in this legal climate, is going to willfully submit that they make erotic depictions of children? It's a soykafshow to say the least. I've heard emotinoally compelling rhetoric calling for life sentences and death penalties to paedosexuals, under the premise that we're all trolling pristine suburbs looking to snatch innocent children to doom them to a life of physical and psychological torture. That's obviously heinous. But guess what! Most of us are not like that. Most of us don't even lift a pinky towards any contact out of fear of being associated with those bastards. And most of us are completely unnoticed. I've met dozens closeted paedosexuals. Only two were actively practicing, and I made sure with the child that the child's boundaries were being respected, that nothing was happening that the child didn't want or was unsure or felt vaguely about, and that the child understood what they were involved with, so they're not just going along with it because the adult says so. And as a social worker I have to be extra careful to not even seem slightly attracted to children.

>>8940 So you're probably more familiar with how these things work than us. What would you propose to make CP more accountable? So that it's less dangerous, less harmful, to children. (Of course I understand the illegality hinders the willingness to register to be accountable. That problem exists in black markets everywhere. Stuff like dangerous drug substitutes, weapons that are extremely more powerful than `law abiding' neighbors, straight up violence e.g. assassination, or some other pollution or fraud.) >there's a lot where the children are perfectly happy to do it Purely out of curiosity, I tried looking into it. I found the notorious `topic links' websites, and I have to say (apart from just being disgusted---I guess it's really not my cup of tea) most of what I saw, it's not clear one way or another that they're informed and consenting or just following direction. I did see some enthusiastic children, but again that doesn't prove they understood enough about the situation that their consent was informed. Of course the same is true about non-CP porn in maybe similar proportions? But adults tend to have more agency than children, so even if the whole thing is exactly the same except the age, Of course my cursory search is hardly much compared to what your experience must be. It would probably be in your (paedosexuals') best interest, and not much in theirs (I maintain neutrality on the matter), to come up with healthier systems, because they're gonna keep pushing hard in hopes of extinguishing what, due to lack of understanding, may well be innate therefore emerging again and again no matter what. Or it's not innate, but if it's possible to do it in a healthy way, their extinguishing paedosexuality will `throw the baby out with the bathwater,' if you'll excuse the idiom and simultaneous calembour. In that limited sense of preserving diversity as a species, which has the general robustness benefit, as well as probably many unknown benefits, I'm for paedosexuality, but not generally, not as it stands now with it's many severe problems. Also, and this may be just my misunderstanding, but if the paid CP are mostly scams, how can they be more conducive to anything, let alone the ethically worse stuff? Isn't there a market for the ethically worse stuff, i.e. the `sickos?' If it's a scam, how can it also provide the service they demand? I'm just trying to understand this seeming inconsistency. Any elucidation on the matter is appreciated.

Sorry, I'm the same poster as >>8943, but another thought occurred: maybe my being disgusted while looking at had an unfair effect on my evaluation of how informed or willing they seem. I really don't wan't to touch the stuff again, not even remembering it, even if it becomes legal, so I my ability to re-evaluate my position is probably limited.

>>8943 >>8944 Making it less dangerous would require throwing open the doors and normalizing it. You're going to pushing a big boulder up a very steep hill to make that fly. Although, lately the queers seem to be hinting toward accepting maps as another letter in their alphabet stew. Really, that was inevitable. Medically, there is a case to be made, seeing as it is unchanging and unchangable - despite many efforts to try.

>>8964 Now I'm wondering how many people here are pedophiles. There's a lot of arguments for the exploitation of children.

>>8966 do Hebephiles count as pedos? In most civilised countries, they probably don't

>>8969 they do in most countries.

>>8964 >Making it less dangerous would require throwing open the doors and normalizing it. You're going to pushing a big boulder up a very steep hill to make that fly. See, this is the same fallacious argument used often against anarchy. The fallacy is assuming that we demand everything to be done immediately, which is naive at best. Any sudden change is going to be met with a great deal of resistance. Because, believe it or not, however good or terrible something might be, the fact that it exists is probably relied on by many persons. That means to change it will be a process, so that the things that various persons rely on will be preserved. There's one question about whether it should be changed, there's another question about how to go about changing it. Generally: don't assume it's supposed to be an immediate big change. Probably, more than half want this or that changed immediately, but few if any want it all changed immediately. >Although, lately the queers seem to be hinting toward accepting maps as another letter in their alphabet stew. Really, that was inevitable. Medically, there is a case to be made, seeing as it is unchanging and unchangable - despite many efforts to try. It's not a new development. Paedosexuality was initially part of the `alternate' sexualities movement, but they dropped support because of severe public opinion against it---because violently raping children (a longstanding argument against paedosexuality) tends to be seen much worse than violently raping adult men (a longstanding argument against male homosexuality). What is like kicking dead whales down the beach is that it's been so long that there are now persons in the `alternate' sexualities movement, who were not exposed to any decent human beings who were out about being paedosexual, but were, like most other persons, exposed to the violent child-rapist caricature. >accepting maps as another letter in their alphabet What does ``maps'' mean in this context? >>8970 ``Civilized'' is a weasel word. If you have strong feelings about something either way, you'll probably count `civilized' countries only the ones that agree with you. (Surely a civilized country wouldn't do this horrible thing.) Of course no country is civilized, but that's a greater issue outside the scope of this discussion.

>Also, and this may be just my misunderstanding, but if the paid CP are mostly scams, how can they be more conducive to anything, let alone the ethically worse stuff? Isn't there a market for the ethically worse stuff, i.e. the `sickos?' If it's a scam, how can it also provide the service they demand? I'm just trying to understand this seeming inconsistency. Any elucidation on the matter is appreciated. Maybe it wasn't phrased well. Most of them are scams. Most of them advertise the ethically worse stuff. Maybe some of them are legitimate, but they're set up just like any other market scam. Maybe there are reputable dark markets for the stuff, much like the dark markets for drugs, but I haven't heard of them.