In which Tiff is supposedly now a purveyor of porn to unsuspecting children
For those of you who’ve been following this saga, here’s the latest installment:
Who knew 7-year-olds were so precocious at HOTLINKING IMAGES and STEALING BANDWIDTH? One would think that if the child were so adept at theft, a lil LemonParty action wouldn’t have offended her so.
February 1st, 2006 at 9:40 PM
You and your friend seemed to have forgotten to mention that porn was made available to a child.
Do you really think a 7 year old understood the difference between hotlinking and downloading?
February 1st, 2006 at 9:55 PM
In your haste to lay blame, you seem to have forgotten, “Lurker”, that it is the RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PARENT TO SUPERVISE a child when they are in the Internet.
You’re telling me that it’s perfectly ok for a child of 7 to be creating web pages and linking around the web?
That it’s okey for a child of 7 to be on the web unsupervised, regardless? I think not.
Put the blame where it rightfully belongs: on the parent. They failed their child by not providing adequate supervision. Nobody “forced” her to create a web page; nobody “forced” her to hotlink. Bandwidth theft is bandwidth theft, if done by a 7, 17 or 70 year old.
Are you saying that if this “child of 7” were to go and download music via one of the P2P services out there that the Parent should not be held responsible for the actions of the minor? If you were to say “NO” to that, the RIAA would not hesitate to show you the errors of your ways.
This entire fiasco wouldn’t be an issue except for the fact that the company in question reacted in a knee-jerk reaction and an employee “over reacted due to being caught up in the emotion”. Bullcrap. What was done, was done out of spite, damn the rules.
Just becuase the world has morons doesn’t mean I have to stoop to the lowest common denominator in my life. I guess expecting others to act like they have intelligence is asking too much as well.
February 1st, 2006 at 10:02 PM
[…] s. Not to beat a dead horse (boy, doesn’t it feel like it these days), but Dawn gives a final spin on the Tiff situation. In the comment section, Lurker Says: February 1st, 2006 at Yo […]
February 1st, 2006 at 10:30 PM
Lurker, ya missed the damn point, as did a lot of people in this scenario, unfortunately. Nobody sought for a child to see porn (if that even WAS what happened — I suspect having a child in the house was a CONVENIENT excuse by someone who was caught stealing red-handed and who knew how to hunt down a webhost and pitch a fit). Nobody sought for ANYBODY to see porn. Seriously, the Soccer Mom in question just needs to get a job or, failing that, take her own damn photos. Which, if she’d done that in the first place (or, god forbid, ASKED to use the image), none of this would have been an issue.
February 2nd, 2006 at 10:06 AM
The alternate image was unlinked anywhere on the site- the only ways to display the image were to:
1. Know where it was already and type the image URL directly into the address bar of the browser.
2. Try to steal a different image, triggering the .htaccess file to redirect the thief to the alternate image.
“I didn’t know it was wrong” is hardly an excuse when the news is full of stories about the RIAA and MPAA suing families for everything they’ve got because a minor child was engaging in theft of copyrighted material. Do I need to put a big sign on the door of my house to tell burglars that theft is wrong, too? The woman’s husband is a computer science professor- she really ought to know better.
What it comes down to is this- a perfectly legal and First Amendment-protected image was displayed to an adult because she was stealing. But because she was in the process of teaching her child how to steal, suddenly I’m the one with the problem. Whatever.
February 2nd, 2006 at 10:44 AM
Not to mention, but turning on NetNanny is easier than, say, programming your TV to only show child-friendly channels. I suspect this mom, while not so hot in the common sense department, knows enough (or her husband knows enough) about computers to put up a firewall and ban XXX images and sites. But nooo, let’s create drama for one person out of millions who have their own website. Brilliant strategy, I say. Much better than, say, taking your kid (and your idiot self) away from the computer and being a good parent for a change. Bravo, you dumb bitch. Bravo.
February 22nd, 2006 at 2:39 PM
Great blog. Found your blog while searching for more information at yahoo about detection firewall intrusion. Your blog has quite a lot of interesting thoughts. Keep up the good work, :D.
Cheers,
idetection firewall intrusion