Matthew Findley wrote:
This message contains improperly-formatted binary content, or attachment.
Hotmail sucks. I sends 8-bit content without the right
"Content-transfer-encoding: 8-bit" headers. It's been so for years
and they don't seem to have any plans to fix it.
Yes only the end user gets prosecuted. You are the end user with freenet.
What exactly are you getting at?
I always try to keep this sort of discussions civilised and avoid
the use of invectives, but I have to admit you make it very hard
for me.
The issue of the node operator himself downloading or inserting
illegal material has never been part of this discussion; that case
is clear enough to not need any discussion. This discussion is
about the liability of a node operator for transit files. So, if
X uploads kiddie porn to freenet and Y downloads it through my
node, you're saying I'm the end user? WTF is X then? WTF is Y?
I neither upload it nor download it, and you make me the end-user?
Matthew Findley, as far as I am concerned, this thread is over.
While you started by posting relatively serious FUD, you have by
now resorted to totally incoherent blathering, not worth wasting
any more time or bandwidth on. If your intention was to spread
FUD, you failed. If your intention was to come across the way
you do, you succeeded.
[knowledge/intent vs lack of knowledge]
So you agree with me? Because you have a chance to stop it right now. Just
turn the node off.
No, you [deleted], I do not agree with you. That's plain and
obvious to everyone except you; a fact which, when put together
with your grammar, makes me start wondering whether you really
work for the DoJ. Are you sure it's not your daddy who's called
Matthew and works for the DoJ?
And what exactly do you mean by "you have a chance to stop it
right now"? Because if I don't, then what? Will you come and
arrest me then? You and what army? Better start packing then,
because I have no plans whatsoever to stop running my node. On
the contrary, as soon as I get some time I'll try to put some
real work on my open freenet proxy.
[the system]
That's another discussion dropped. If you really think that the
system you work for is not rotten, then that says something about
you, not about the system.
So your accusing the prosecutor of fabricating evidence....
Do you really think the government is out to get you?
What does the DOJ have to gain by putting an innocent person behind bars?
We don't have some sort of quota to make.
Yes you do. The quota is one conviction per crime committed. That
makes the government look good. "We couldn't prevent the crime,
but we acted swiftly and we did get the perpetrator", that's what
government officials like to say on TV. If the convicted happens
to be innocent, too bad for him; the government couldn't care less.
As noted at
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/exonerations/Bentley.htm
the government will even coerce the wrongfully convicted out of
his right to compensation. You probably didn't even notice that
when you read the page, it probably seemed perfectly normal to
you. To me it's hair raising. Everything I was ever taught to
regard as dishonourable and shameful pales and withers compared
to this. And it's your legal system permitting this kind of thing,
that same system which you work for and demand respect for. I'm
not sorry for you Matthew Findley, but I am sincerely sorry for
the American people, or at least for a big part of it.
Z
--
Framtiden är som en babianröv, färggrann och full av skit.
Arne Anka
_______________________________________________
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
