Gonzales pulls out the big "T" word for ISP snooping

[RedCherry]

Originally Posted by walrus

and there really is a toothfairy and a santa claus, virginia

Great to know.

The thing that gets me when they say shit like this is, do they every consider the logistics of storing that would be? There is no way that any ISP would have enough storage to even comply with such a ruling. Get a clue Gonzales. I'd just like to him for thinking this stuff up.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by RedCherry

Great to know.

The thing that gets me when they say shit like this is, do they every consider the logistics of storing that would be? There is no way that any ISP would have enough storage to even comply with such a ruling. Get a clue Gonzales. I'd just like to him for thinking this stuff up.

<rant>

I think it's quite deliberate. Rather than go after online porn through obscenity prosecutions (which are always a chancy thing to do - juries are unpredictable), they use the "regulatory" route. In either case the goal is to drive as much (US) porn out of business so they can tell their religious right nutballs they "did something about porn."

Of course, the East Europeans and (increasingly) Asians get to move into the gap. And there certainly won't be the pretty decent self-regulation that most legit US sponsors and webmasters adhere to, since, like drugs, the production and wholesale distribution will all be free of US jurisdiction, while the largest body of consumers/buyers remains the USA.

The same folks that bought us the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, and the Katrina Rescue are gonna forcibly wean the poor besieged US public from its porn habit? Yeah, right.

</rant>