Click to go to Forum Home Click to go to maXbimmer Home

Go Back   maXbimmer Forums > Misc > Off-topic
User Name
Password


Welcome to Maxbimmer.com!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 12-08-2009, 08:16 PM   #31
bmdbley'sBro
wouldu like some tinfoil?
 
bmdbley'sBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in your attic!
Posts: 4,674


any sold product to wipe/ erase drives the gov can probably recover.
even shattered, smashed h/d discs. put giant magnets on your door frame?
-


forgot to put this in here & its kinda the punchline:


How Canada's proposed new copyright law could affect you
http://www.maxbimmer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124122
They want your Internet provider to spy on your private communications to make sure you aren’t sharing anything you shouldn’t.
They want to terminate your Internet access on the basis of mere accusations of infringement—with no need to prove you did anything wrong
__________________
bmdbley'sBro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2009, 08:19 PM   #32
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,849
not really. dban and cipher do a pretty good format job. hard to recover data off that. depends on how badly smashed they are. if its in 1000 peices, be pretty hard to recover that.

specially a program that deletes, and then fills it with random data. thats probably really hard if not close to impossible to find stuff off of.
__________________
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2009, 11:38 PM   #33
bmdbley'sBro
wouldu like some tinfoil?
 
bmdbley'sBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in your attic!
Posts: 4,674
so if everybody ignores this it gets its own thread, cause wtf

Quote:
A Supreme Court of Canada ruling has expanded the definition of Internet luring to include anyone having an inappropriate conversation with a child -- even if the chats aren't sexual in nature and the accused never intended to meet the alleged victim.

Justice Morris Fish, writing for the Supreme Court, said physical contact is not necessary for Internet luring because some seemingly innocent chats open the door towards a child being victimized

VIDEO + article
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...203?hub=Canada
also, another canadian news vid

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/clip242619#clip242619

so i think this ruling means any communication between a minor & a adult is now grounds for introspection & ananylsis - an investigation by police?

comments from where i found it
Quote:
This is definately stupid. Now I'm trying to decide if I should quit a site I joined. It is a forum for one of the local Anime conventions. Tons of kids, young adults. I have stated from the start that I'm a parent, have never hid the fact that I am an adult and stay away from many of the "kid" discussions. Now I could be in serious trouble!

And then there is Facebook, Myspace, IM...what the h*ll do we do now?

-----
Like a lot of things this is gone to far one way, but I refuse to stop chatting with my grandson if he wants to talk to me online. This is RETARDED!!!

__________________

Last edited by bmdbley'sBro; 12-14-2009 at 11:51 PM.
bmdbley'sBro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2009, 12:28 AM   #34
AMG_POWER
500HP Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 9,691
Hahaha US is so ****ED UP. Wow... Poor children!
__________________
AMG_POWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2009, 10:16 AM   #35
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,849
unbelievable


this is a good way of taking the onnus off of parents to raise their ****ing kids. WHY IS YOUR 12 year old DAUGHTER ON A CHAT LINE WITH A >17 year old BOY IN THE FIRST ****ING PLACE?


I dont know I mean ya I think its retarded that a 32 year old man wants to talk dirty to a 12 year old girl... that is messed up. But at the same time, I dont see how a virtual chat is akin to a sex crime, or w/e it is. I guess internet luring, but does that mean you have to sign up on the sex offenders list??

Its almost like "thought crimes". You think it and therefore youre guilty. Its a bit of a stretch but its almost at that point.

But I dont really see the correlation with what that poster is saying. Talking to your grandson, or to people on the internets, if you dont have sexual intent, then I dont see how that is possible..
__________________

Last edited by sirex; 12-15-2009 at 10:29 AM.
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2009, 02:48 PM   #36
bmdbley'sBro
wouldu like some tinfoil?
 
bmdbley'sBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in your attic!
Posts: 4,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirex View Post
unbelievable


this is a good way of taking the onnus off of parents to raise their ****ing kids. WHY IS YOUR 12 year old DAUGHTER ON A CHAT LINE WITH A >17 year old BOY IN THE FIRST ****ING PLACE?


I dont know I mean ya I think its retarded that a 32 year old man wants to talk dirty to a 12 year old girl... that is messed up. But at the same time, I dont see how a virtual chat is akin to a sex crime, or w/e it is. I guess internet luring, but does that mean you have to sign up on the sex offenders list??

Its almost like "thought crimes". You think it and therefore youre guilty. Its a bit of a stretch but its almost at that point.

But I dont really see the correlation with what that poster is saying. Talking to your grandson, or to people on the internets, if you dont have sexual intent, then I dont see how that is possible..
i'll explain how. its all about how the words are defined (their meaning) in legalese.

this ruling (an expansion of this laws definition) makes the crime of internet luring very vague, or more easily & widely applicable. interpretation of what constitutes 'luring' is now very wide, and that interpretation is at the investigators (cops) disscretion! they'll be deciding if your speech is 'innapropriate' thus making it Criminal. even if you never tried to meet the 'minor'

and yes i guess this would put you on a pedophile list? like the kid at the beginning of this thread. and like you said earlier sirex: don't matter if he had no intent, he still possesed it.. same thing here i guess? we deem your convo on abortion or warfare or etc to be innapropiate to a child (thats 15 or upto 18even? i guess), so we're charging you with luring! some will of course be 'NO chance', but eh: 2 girls sending bra shots to eachother -felony child pornography charges. 1 dump truck doing 90 in a 40 is 'racing/ stunting' heres your $10K ticket. right?

we have minors on forums (here, all over), we could now as of TODAY be conducting ourselves 'innapropriately' at a criminally chargable level? without even knowing it

I know, I know im just too paranoid, cause im sure not engaging in chat with minors that i know of
__________________

Last edited by bmdbley'sBro; 12-15-2009 at 02:52 PM.
bmdbley'sBro is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Maxbimmer Copyright 2001 - 2015