It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Using Government databases to verify age on regular websites *warning*

page: 9
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by justamomma
 


i'm not going to do anything about this in particular, like i said, at the moment it's none of my concern, not my government. i feel it's something to be aware of, there's not much else i can do at the moment but be aware of it, watch for the next step and try to raise awareness of the issues.

it seems to me your only real problem is with my level of paranoia, what kind of content and membership do you expect on a site like ATS, exactly? all anybody said was that this might have negative aspects, which is true. why do you feel a need to argue that fact?




posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma
Think about Anne Frank.


how ironic, seeing how privacy was of utmost concern to someone like Anne Frank. She probably didn't want everyone to know her address, right?


Originally posted by justamomma
Look at what she went through locked away in the tiny little room with a bunch of adults with death looming over their heads (and this wasn't an assumption, but a reality) and yet hers is a story of hope and contentment despite the fact that it ended with her death. She saw beauty in the world at a time when evil was in great abundance. This was a teenage girl in dire circumstances..


that was perhaps the worst example ever for optimism.

justamomma, your opinions and comments in this thread paint you to be somewhat of a nihilist. That's fine, but hardly a defense against privacy concerns.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by scientist]

[edit on 3-9-2008 by scientist]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   
It doesn't check against a government database. It's not a scam for identity theft. I've put fake information in it quite a few times and it's accepted every one, 4 of which were "John Smiths".

A possibility of why it failed to let you in with fake information was a possible server side or scripting error. Also verification mechanisms usually have a common database of things such as asdf or 1234 etc and will often block those.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   
This system has a flaw! I can think of a handfull of people other then myself that I know there first and last name, as well as there birthday and where they live?

this will not halt a child either, anyone with children if your kids asked you what year you where born in or what your birthday was are you going to suspect they want this info to get some where they shouldn't be online?



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   
all that site is doing is checking for a valid zip... i put in fake info with zip 55555 and it didnt work... tried again with same info but this time i used zip 21221. and it worked



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


Alright, we'll do a formal debate. All I request is that you dispense with the hypocritical arguments and actually show how these things are being forced upon us.

I don't want a debate over how YOU think freedom should be, that is hypocritical in it's own right because I have the freedom to not accept your definition of freedom. So piss on that and let's get this party going! HOORAH!



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
Alright, we'll do a formal debate. All I request is that you dispense with the hypocritical arguments and actually show how these things are being forced upon us.


since that was never my argument (although it seems to have been yours), I'm not sure what it is you are getting at. You seem to have setup your own straw-man argument to battle.

Let me know how that debate works out first, then we can get started on mine.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


So in other words, you won't debate the actual issue? Like I said, no one is forcing you to GPS your kids, no one is shoving an implant into you, no one is watching you go peepee.

You WANT there to be something wrong, why is beyond me. You claim the government is doing all these nasty evil things.

What I see is a private company giving me the tools to keep my kids safe. A couple of government departments that we asked for to keep a standard of quality for our food. Yet to you that somehow translates to the government getting ready to shove an implant up our bumholes.

You want me and the rest of this country to have your definition of freedom. You don't want us to ask our government to enforce standards in quality, you don't want private companies to give us tools to protect ourselves. You want to impose your views of freedom on us in such a hypocritical fashion that when asked to not do a formal debate on your hypocrisy that your just going to refuse it. Sad ....



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Ok, how about this, we'll do the debate, but every time you get hypocritical I get to point it out. Yet, unless you can't adequatly show how it isn't hypocritical, then that argument must be dropped. If this is going to be a formal debate, then no hypocrisy should be used as valid arguments.

Hrm... Before we even start, do you agree or disagree with the last statement in my signature? Should we allow 10 year old johnny to do those things?

[edit on 3-9-2008 by sirnex]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
Ok, how about this, we'll do the debate, but every time you get hypocritical I get to point it out. Yet, unless you can't adequatly show how it isn't hypocritical, then that argument must be dropped.


so once you back yourself into a corner, you merely have to say "hypocrite!" and then I have to drop my argument and start over? thanks, but I'll pass.


Originally posted by sirnex
If this is going to be a formal debate, then no hypocrisy should be used as valid arguments.


provide some examples of this alleged hypocrisy first, so I can see exactly what kind of b.s. you expect me to wade through. AN itemized list is preferred.


Originally posted by sirnex
Hrm... Before we even start, do you agree or disagree with the last statement in my signature? Should we allow 10 year old johnny to do those things?


disagree, although I think it paints a pretty accurate picture of your ignorance.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by scientist]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
no one is forcing you to GPS your kids, no one is shoving an implant into you, no one is watching you go peepee.


please direct me to the post where I brought up GPS or urination. I did bring up RFID, alluding the the evolution of technology. Would you like to debate whether or not technology evolves?


Originally posted by sirnex
You WANT there to be something wrong, why is beyond me. You claim the government is doing all these nasty evil things.


...sigh... ok, please direct me to where I made this statement as well. Thanks.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 





so once you back yourself into a corner, you merely have to say "hypocrite!" and then I have to drop my argument and start over? thanks, but I'll pass.


Where have you backed me into a corner? I have accepted your debate offer, all I am asking is that we dispense with the hypocritical view of freedom. You can't try and IMPOSE YOUR VIEW of freedom and call it freedom.



provide some examples of this alleged hypocrisy first, so I can see exactly what kind of b.s. you expect me to wade through. AN itemized list is preferred.


Well, how about your view that a private company choosing it's right to freedom to use whatever verification system it wants on its own website is somehow equated by you to mean eventual forced implants imposed by the government? Seems like a good place to start as any!




disagree, although I think it paints a pretty accurate picture of your ignorance.


My ignorance your your hypocrisy? You can't surely be telling me it is woefully wrong for a pricatly owned website to use what verification system it chooses to use to keep kids from view adult content and yet somehow it is ok to use other means to keep kids from obtaining other adult materials?

So perhaps it IS just your hatred of everything government?



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Id like to add that hypocrisy does not negate an argument.

For example, a heroin addict that advocated not using heroin would be a hypocrite, with a valid point, would they not?

Your constant referrals to hypocrisy are no more than failed ad hominem attacks. In other words, you are trying to debate me as a person, instead of my points. his is the equivalent of dismissing anything you say, because of a spelling error.

That being said, I'm not afraid of being called a hypocrite. In fact, I would tend to believe everyone is hypocritical in one way or another. If you don't think so, you are just in denial.

I'll try to make sense of your previous post once I get enough time to do so.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by scientist]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by piemani'm not going to do anything about this in particular, like i said, at the moment it's none of my concern, not my government.


Exactly!! Not your country, not your concern! Couldn't have said it better myself. I will not argue that there are things that are being taken part of by this gov't that should concern the world, but this is NOT one of them as it involves a privately owned website that the citizens here can or cannot log into.

But agreed and certainly the most common sense filled statement... not your country, not your concern!




i feel it's something to be aware of, there's not much else i can do at the moment but be aware of it, watch for the next step and try to raise awareness of the issues.


Ireland has a great history of minding its own business and defending itself only when others try to impose themselves onto the folks there. I hope to one day make it that way to visit the homeland of my ancestors.

I am all for being aware. I think there should be awareness to the impositions that the Government (either here or elsewhere) IS making. There are impositions that were imposed on me, personally, that I have had to take stance on. But being aware of other ppl's business that aren't imposing on you is nosey.. not something to be proud of.


it seems to me your only real problem is with my level of paranoia, what kind of content and membership do you expect on a site like ATS, exactly? all anybody said was that this might have negative aspects, which is true. why do you feel a need to argue that fact?


Because paranoia has led to many losses of freedom for people throughout history, or had you not noticed this fact?

Here's one of the MANY Irish proverbs my grandmother taught to me: A lock is better than suspicion. Basically, take care of yourself and don't worry about what could happen to the point that you are finding devils in everybody and everything else. Their business, not yours..


Edited to add: And I respect your right to maintain your ignorance. But as long as questions are still asked of me and the opinions put down, seeing that this site is meant to discuss and educate, I feel that I am being invited to inject my perspective into the thread. So, the "MY" that you highlighted is all good and fine.. remain in your ignorance.. it IS your choice and your right.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by justamomma]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Does this mean that they are tracking my visits to acquire my inter-racial gay granny midget poo porn?


So be it...That's why I have multiple alias's...that all point back to Kevin Bacon!



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientisthow ironic, seeing how privacy was of utmost concern to someone like Anne Frank. She probably didn't want everyone to know her address, right?


No and her father did what he could to secure HIS family's privacy FROM the world, but never did he try to secure everyone else FROM his family. During his time of planning their "disappearance," he kept his head low and rules were followed only until THEY WERE PERSONALLY IMPOSED on when his oldest daughter was told to go a "work camp."



that was perhaps the worst example ever for optimism.

justamomma, your opinions and comments in this thread paint you to be somewhat of a nihilist. That's fine, but hardly a defense against privacy concerns.


Well, for someone uneducated as to what personal rights really are and lacks the wisdom in how to go about securing their own personal rights, you opinion of me is hardly suprising.

And yes, to someone who is more intent on securing everyone else in order to maintain their personal rights, I can see how you would view my citing the story of Anne Frank as the worst example of optimism. Again, not suprised.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by justamomma]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   
i had someone do a little digging around in all this. and from i could see, it mostly looks like it is a smart program. it can recognize things like a real name, zip, DOB. but from i can see it does not match you up with who you really are. what i mean is, if i log on to that trailer as joe bob it does not come back to tell me that i am not joe bob. but it does look like something that is evolving into something real. for sure it is something to keep an eye out for.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


No, this is very different than your example. Your defining a form of freedom by YOUR own terms and coming off as if everyone should accept only that definition. Which is hypocritical in its own right and is woefully different than a heroin addict advocating against heroin. Your not advocating for freedom itself, your advocating for freedom by your terms only.

You say it's wrong for the site owner to verify against a government database while neglecting to accept his freedom to do so. You neglect to even accept that the site owner has that freedom and demand it isn't even the site owner, but instead the government is somehow at fault here. Yet the government hasn't been shown to be forcing this one particular site owner to verify against its database.

You don't even give two craps about the issue of freedom itself, you just have some messed up insane hatred and view for the government. You refuse to argue your points in a logical manner and when I decide to take you on your debate offer but without your hypocritical view of what freedom is, you back out like a little baby.

You want to cry like a little girl about people forcing things on you when no one is and demand it's an issue of freedom? Where in the hell is the logic in that? Think about it man. Do you seriously even think about what you write, or do you just try and bash the government at every turn you can manage?

And I have tried debating your points, you just won't listen because the word government is involved. To you, anything involving government equals bad, and that just isn't so. If I owned my own website and I decided to verify age's against a government database, would you consider me to be the one at faut or the government, because by your arguments over this persons site, it's the government.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:46 AM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


The list that it is checking against is the publicly available voter's list.

I can assure you it's not the social security database or a medical database etc.

If you are voting age, it's a good bet that you are on the list.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by daddymax
Does this mean that they are tracking my visits to acquire my inter-racial gay granny midget poo porn?


So be it...That's why I have multiple alias's...that all point back to Kevin Bacon!


Oh my good god!!!

I haven't laughed hard enough for my drink to come out of my nose EVER!!!!!

Until I saw the Kevin Bacon thing! Holy cow is that hilarious!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Star for you for creative merit!
you've also made it to my signature. If I can make you famous for this, by golly I'm gonna try!

[edit on 4-9-2008 by Atlantican]



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join