In the belly of the beast Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140303/20073526417/uk-porn-filter-architect-arrested-child-porn-charges.shtml
tasmlab Posted April 9, 2014 Posted April 9, 2014 Intuitively, if somebody's job was to filter porn, he would have to download and analyze all sorts of it. As an analog, if somebody's job was to make mosquito repellent, you'd expect him to have all sorts of mosquitos to analyze. I guess it depends on whether he had his dick out or not.
In the belly of the beast Posted April 9, 2014 Author Posted April 9, 2014 True, it is possible that his political enemies had him arrested and his name dragged through the mud. Maybe I posted this partly out of a desire for this architect of internet censorship in the UK to be paid back for his enabling of evil in a karmically satisfying way. On the other hand, if I was a betting man, I'd put my money on his man-parts being out of his pants.
Bedouin Posted April 10, 2014 Posted April 10, 2014 Maybe he just wasn't sneaking in enough GCHQ-approved orwellian spyware into the architecture, or was privvy to too many state secrets regarding online surveillance and disagreed, but then was aprehended on a charge which makes little to no sense (again, on the basis that his job description would in a way probably require exposure to such stuff) given his task. Or does that all sound a bit too paranoid? I have trouble putting much past the government, especially here in the UK, these days.
st434u Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 Having this in his possession should no more be a crime than someone having a video of a real murder, or even an assault or beating.
In the belly of the beast Posted April 12, 2014 Author Posted April 12, 2014 Having this in his possession should no more be a crime than someone having a video of a real murder, or even an assault or beating. True. I am not defending the enforcement of these laws. It is absolutely repugnant, but viewing child pornography, as opposed to the production of child porn, does not violate the NAP on its own (assuming the arrest was not the result of a setup). I initially thought that it was a case of "live by the sword, die by the sword", but perhaps Bedouin's speculations are more accurate.
Recommended Posts