Senator demands info on search engine subpoena

TalkBack 35 of 39:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Databases

Hi, Looneytoon.

You said:

I agree that the data wouldn't be valid if they hired people to do inocuous searches all day. My argument is that it isn't valid the way they are doing the subpoena either. Although my bet is that they will try to make it appear valid. If you've ever had a statistics class you know that you make them show whatever you want them to show.

I don't think there's a problem with the randomness of their data. Picking a date and taking the first million hits from Time A to Time B (which I think is what they're doing, if I'm not mistaken) seems like a reasonable way to get a sample. The only difficulty I see so far is in the claim that a search result is "inadvertent". As inocuous as a search term may seem, there's no way to prove that you didn't click on exactly what you'd wanted in the first place. Theoretically, you could go to the site that was clicked on, get their logs, and see how long a user stayed on a site. This seems like a long way to go though, and for such a large number of sites, it would be impractical, at best. They could bring up some of the more incongruous search results in court, but I still don't think that will do the job. It's not a bad attempt on their part, but I don't think the government will win with that strategy.

If they prevail that creates a database/databases of adults who access porn. That database is subject to abuse. Guess what happens the first time there is a sexually oriented crime committed, the Government then subpoenas that database for that area and starts going to peoples homes to question them even though there is no other indicatiion that they have or will commit such a crime, but they are in the database. Guess what happens when the police or the FBI start pulling up to peoples doors, others see what happens when you purchase an adult ID and they decide not to, the database dries up and voila the porn industry is dead without having to go through that useless drill of passing a law that won't pass muster because it violates the 1st amendment.

I think you're underestimating the numbers involved here. There's not just one database. Hell, there's not even just several databases. There are thousands, if not millions of porn sites, all with their own databases. Even if you were to just search through adult id databases, the search would be daunting, to say the least.

Any smart attorney (and I think the ACLU probably has several) will probably be able to fight the age verification scheme, though. The problem isn't that age verification is too burdensome on adults. (How much of a burden is it, really, to enter in your credit card? It's fairly commonplace now, where you couldn't necessarily say that in 1998.) The problem is that as an age verification mechanism, credit cards don't work. You no longer have to be 18 to have a credit card, so the mere possession of a credit card (even in your name) means nothing. It's hard for me to see a reasonable way around this, without having the privacy people get even more up in arms. The only way I see possible to do age verification is how it's done in the "real" world: Show your driver's license or some other form of ID. But I don't think giving access to that kind of information to web sites is going to make anyone particularly happy.

Like I said before, the xxx domain would have some potential, but there would be constant political pressure on both sides. On one side, you'd have pressure from conservatives wanting to put more content under the xxx domain. On the other side, you'd have people claiming that their content is being put in the xxx domain unfairly, when it's actually got artistic merit. The xxx domain is actually a form of filtering, and filtering has a long and relatively controversial history in the public domain. That's why I favor individual citizens using filtering, if they have children. That way, it doesn't impact anyone else, and they can adjust the filter to their tastes. Many (if not most) ISPs offer filtering as part of their service these days. The government will argue that these filters are ineffective (using their survey data, I'm sure). But they'll have a hard time showing that the credit card/adult id system is any more effective.

Posted by: bhartman36   Posted on: 01/29/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Unrivaled support from Novell, now available for Red Hat Novell If Linux is going to power your mission-critical applications, you'd ... Download Now
• New College Durham Attracts New Students With Robust IT Infrastructure Delivered With the Help of Dell Professional Services Dell When New College Durham received funding from the Learning Skills Council ... Download Now
• Networking and Unified Communications CDW The flourishing area of unified communications offers further testimony to ... Download Now