Thursday, January 19, 2006
By hook or by crook, W wants information...INFORMATION...
The Bush administration wants Google to turn over a ton of info on you and me -- including records of ALL Google searches. The excuse: The Bushies are gunnin' for child molesters. I suspect that their definition of "molester" is broad enough to include anyone who criticizes the war. Of course, if the Feds were really interested in finding pedophiles, they would look at the GOP.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
From the article you link to: "The government indicated that other, unspecified search engines have agreed to release the information, but not Google."
Any idea what those other seach engines are? It's not that I surf for porn, and CERTAINLY not kiddie porn. It's the principle of the thing. I have a lot of respect for Google.
.R.S.E.
Actually it has nothing to do with kiddie porn. It has to do with cracking down on porn sites that allow minors to view porn.
The move is part of a government effort to revive an Internet child protection law struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. The law was meant to punish online pornography sites that make their content accessible to minors. The government contends it needs the Google data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches.
I understand the distinction, and I thank you for making this clear. But the request is still ridiculously broad.
It also makes no sense. If you want to crack down on a porn site that allows entrance to minors, simply go to that site and test it. What need of the Google info?
This also gets us into the ancient question of what constitutes "porn." There are pages from Leonardo da Vinci's notebooks which include naughty bits; he even did a diagram of coition. Do we really want this material to be viewed only by those who have gone through a cumbersome ID check involving credit cards? Isn't it better to ask parents to install protective measures and to oversee the net activities of their children?
Of course, the preceding paragraph presumes that the administration's stated rationale is on the level. I say that this rationale is deceptive.
There are a few naughty words on this blog. Will we soon see a world in which liberal bloggers must watch their every word while hard-core sites continue to do business unfettered?
Joseph:
I am not defending the government's action in this matter (or in any matter).
I agree with you that this is not really about porn, with the demand for a million random web addresses.
Not to mention the records of all Google searches for a one-week period.
Keep up the good work. You are one of the few bloggers who routinely conduct original research.
Thanks, effwit - my bad. Porn viewed BY kids, not OF kids. Funny, I would think the latter would be much more important to investigate. If the Govt really wants to get porn out of the hands of pubescent boys, it should go after the Playboys hidden by their dads. :-P I'm kidding, kidding!
Seriously, I still ask: What search engines HAVE given in? Any idea?
(Thanks for all your hard work, Joseph. I've told many people about your site.)
.R.S.E.
Great use of a reference to "The Prisoner."
I am not a number, I am a free man!
Post a Comment