StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3133192.stm

That must've taken some balls... or not, but it seems quite a drastic act. Wonder if others will follow suit like Yahoo! or ICQ.

Remember, everybody! It's not your job to take care of your kids, it's the job of Society.

Eh...I've used IRC since the age of, oh, 14 or 15, so...

What a horrific load of horseshit. As I recall, growing up there was RARELY, if ever adult supervision at various neighborhood parks, and I daresay the internet is quite a bit safer than THAT! If you ask me, microsoft wants people to show them the money. MORE money. as if Bill Gates needs to bo worth more than 46BILLION dollars.

Yeah do note, that you'll still be able to PAY for the chatrooms.

Keevan_Colton wrote:Yeah do note, that you'll still be able to PAY for the chatrooms.

Unsupervised ones. They'll still have some just moderated. Which makes sense considering the massive liability should some parent sue over a chatroom arranged kiddy rape.

I think Messanger is better anyway; you don't have lot's of people spammin things up. ICQ is better than chatrooms because you need a bit of research before you can log on.

So will people in europe etc stil lbe able to access global chats, just not make local ones?

...










That was the sound of me not giving a shit.

.




That was the sound of me not giving a shit either. We need more p33pz in IRC anyway!

What a bull-shit rip off operation
Now you have to pay to use an unmoded chat room fucking bull-shit.
What next you have to pay out your ass to use an unmoded BBS
I mean what the fuck if people where so worried about there kids then they should get off there fat fucking asses and make sure there kids are doing something that they should not be doing.
MSN
MSN

Pity, I rather like those rooms, good to talk on with people my age from the same area as me.

If 13-year olds are allowed to go out to the mall unsupervised to meet someone they met on the internet after answering a series of personal questions, I don't think they are going to contribute much to the gene pool.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:If 13-year olds are allowed to go out to the mall unsupervised to meet someone they met on the internet after answering a series of personal questions, I don't think they are going to contribute much to the gene pool.

And that is a good thing there are way to many dumb fucks in the world anyways

DPDarkPrimus wrote:If 13-year olds are allowed to go out to the mall unsupervised to meet someone they met on the internet after answering a series of personal questions, I don't think they are going to contribute much to the gene pool.

They're kids. Give the break jeez. Not every kid is as suave and sophisticated as you undoubtedly were.

Lets see what might have motivated this:
Cost of Chatrooms:
Huge bandwidth cost
Revenue:
Minimal at best
Potential Hazard:
Lawsuit from parent of abused/sexually assaulted minor

In other words they shut down an oepration that was genrating traffic through their site but almost certainly NOT turning a profit PLUS they can now claim they are protecting the children. I wonder why they didn't think of this ploy earlier: it costs you next to nothing (a few irate customers who will probably still use Messsenger or other services of yours) and you get a big payoff.

I have to say I have some sympathy. I used to work on corporate IT infrastructure and I always suffered a pang of conscience when I found that the systems I'd made were being used to transmit what on a couple of occasions I thought were pretty nasty things. I know for certain that if I had made a chat-room and then found that my creation was being used for kiddy-fiddling purposes I'd shut it down straight away, no question about it. Credit-card subscription could even be defended as an effective way of ensuring that a service is only used by adults.

Stormbringer wrote:They're kids. Give the break jeez. Not every kid is as suave and sophisticated as you undoubtedly were.

They may not be brilliant, but their parents need to at least keep an eye on them. I know there are a lot of apathetic parents out there, and frankly, society shouldn't have to cover the ass of all the dweebs.

I do see problems with letting thirteen year-olds go out alone on dates; they should at least be with a few friends, if not an adult. After 16 it's not that big of a deal anymore, because hopefully they'll have gotten the idea by that point, but really.

LT.Hit-Man wrote:

DPDarkPrimus wrote: If 13-year olds are allowed to go out to the mall unsupervised to meet someone they met on the internet after answering a series of personal questions, I don't think they are going to contribute much to the gene pool.

And that is a good thing there are way to many dumb fucks in the world anyways

Could you guys clarify this please? Because it sounds a bit like you're suggesting that it's a good thing for a child to presumably die, presumably after a brutal rape, at the hands of an adult, in order to enhance the purity of your precious gene pool, presumably by somehow eliminating a "naivety gene". I'm sure that's not what either of you mean to imply, so again, please clarify just what you are saying.

Crayz9000 wrote:They may not be brilliant, but their parents need to at least keep an eye on them. I know there are a lot of apathetic parents out there, and frankly, society shouldn't have to cover the ass of all the dweebs.

I do see problems with letting thirteen year-olds go out alone on dates; they should at least be with a few friends, if not an adult. After 16 it's not that big of a deal anymore, because hopefully they'll have gotten the idea by that point, but really.

I'm with you on the parenting. I think that at thirteen the lion's share of responsiblity still lays with the parent for the well being of their child. Parents out to be parents. I'm with you 100% on that.

What I decry is DPDarkPrimus's stance that because the kid got lured in and raped/molested or killed they deserve it for being stupid.

The thing I don't get is if MSN chatroom where such havens for peadofiles and such scum why didn't MSN pass on the information to the authoraties. Why have we never seen news reports of the MSN spyware, and we all know it exists, being used to find these people and stop them?

I, frankly, never cared for such things unless I wanted a laugh at some poor sod's expense, I always use IM services like ICQ or MSN Messenger or IRC chat. These rooms were essentially places where there was a very measurable decrease in IQ levels, it's funny for a bit, but then it just gets scary these are real people.

My point was that now MSN has taken such actions, will others follow suit? And if they do, these kids will either a) try and give out their proper contact details to supposed "friends" before they lose contact or b) move to unmoderated and smaller chat rooms that are far worse.

There's no doubt in my mind that this wasn't done for altruistic reasons by Microsoft.

Lord Pounder wrote:The thing I don't get is if MSN chatroom where such havens for peadofiles and such scum why didn't MSN pass on the information to the authoraties. Why have we never seen news reports of the MSN spyware, and we all know it exists, being used to find these people and stop them?

There are legal difficulties with that, the spyware in MS operating systems can't be used in a court of law as it isn't properly recognised by the law.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:My point was that now MSN has taken such actions, will others follow suit? And if they do, these kids will either a) try and give out their proper contact details to supposed "friends" before they lose contact or b) move to unmoderated and smaller chat rooms that are far worse.

I doubt they'll follow suit. For one thing some services like AOL rely on those chat rooms for customers. With out them they go bust. And it's not all the chatrooms, it seems to be primarily foriegn ones.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:There's no doubt in my mind that this wasn't done for altruistic reasons by Microsoft.

I doubt it. Probably combination of legal liability and increased profit. That doesn't mean it matter much in the long run.

Yeah, that's what I meant, MS did this because eventually there will be a lawsuit involved and money lost. So I can safely say it wasn't because they really care for kids that go off and meet strangers.

Incidentally, some guy on Sky News today was urgings parents to take legal action against the "groomers" that own the chat rooms.