

4Chan Flooding YouTube with Childrens' Clips Containing Porn - ComputerGuru
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8061979.stm

======
thomaslee
While I can sort of see the funny side, I think this sort of crap is going to
be the end of the Internet as we know it. It's just begging for the political
and commercial powers that be to stamp down on the web with a great, big boot.

Media corporations have already started demanding more control over the
"distribution channel" that is the Internet. When the lobbying steps up,
politicians aren't going to have to look very far for justification to give
the corporations exactly what they want.

</twocents>

~~~
ComputerGuru
(Update, posted here: <http://bit.ly/l1Lvh>)

 _What_ funny side is that?

I have never taken one of the attacks, defamations, etc. by people online
personally nor felt in the least inclined to put an end to it all, but 4Chan
strikes a nerve - what they do is pure, raw evil.

I know I'm doing them a favor by posting this, that these are the very
feelings they intend to elicit by their actions, but honestly, enough is
enough. This is the 2nd time I am so appalled by their behavior, and one of
the few times I am ashamed of the internet's privacy and the power of its
denizens to do evil.

The last time (<http://bit.ly/qcWDC>) was when 4Chan attacked an epilepsy
forum frequented by people susceptible to photosensitive seizures, causing a
dozen epilepsy attacks by uploading rapidly-moving images and flashing colors
to the forum, triggering a dozen attack.

Willfully bringing about seizures in handicapped people and exposing children
as young as 6 years old to wholly-explicit films of adult sex are E.V.I.L.
.... and more importantly, punishable by law.

I hope someone wises up in the legal community and takes action against this
site. Like I said, I know this is the sort of self-righteous anger that 4Chan
is looking forward to receiving after these attacks, but there's a line and
they crossed it a _long_ time ago.

So, do tell, where's the funny side in this?

~~~
sho
I was going to try to explain but seeing you use phrases like "pure, raw evil"
to describe a couple of internet pranks makes me wonder if it's even possible.

The epilepsy thing was going too far, I agree, and they haven't done anything
like that since. But I don't see why this one is so bad, in fact when I saw
the headline I grinned and thought "good old 4Chan, creating drama for the
rest of us .."

When I think "pure, raw evil" I think of nazi concentration camps and pleasure
killers, etc. I cannot even begin to put these pranks into the same category.
I don't see any reason whatsoever why it should be illegal. I just don't
understand your reaction at all, basically. What is the problem?

~~~
davidw
This: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Rose_Bowl_Hoax>

is a prank that's actually funny and clever. Most of the 4chan things aren't
particularly clever or entertaining, and things like targeting people with an
illness, or children, are just lame, and not funny. Things that make for
entertaining pranks are focusing on the powerful, the famous, and especially
those who are full of themselves.

~~~
sho
Honestly, I found that prank (précis: college A sabotages college B's
materials to mistakenly spell college A's name at a football game) to be quite
profoundly un-funny, reminiscent of those awful "kids at camp" movies where
the "hero" kids would do something to make the "enemy" kids all fall into the
water, or something.

I guess my idea of funny pranks would be something like The Chaser (Australian
TV Show), not sure what the US equivalent would be.

------
Herring
> _In one video titled Jonas Brother Live On Stage, a user posted a comment
> saying: "I'm 12 years old and what is this?"_

ah, bbc...

------
dtf
This happened nearly a month ago. It's strange how breaking stories go away,
then suddenly reappear at the top of the BBC most read list (sometimes months
or even years later)... where they get picked up and recycled by social news
sites or bloggers, only to cause a second wave of outrage. I wonder what the
dynamics of it all are.

Also note that the "I'm 12 years old and what is this?" troll - successfully
swallowed up by many of the major news outlets - has now become somewhat of a
meme.

~~~
CGamesPlay
This also happened today, with lots of /b/-style "publicity" and "planning"
i.e. it was copypasta'd in every thread.

~~~
dtf
I'm confused. The BBC link in the title of this thread is to an article dated
21 May 09 (the original attack). Then ComputerGuru posted a link to an
"update" (<http://bit.ly/l1Lvh>), which is dated June 13, and goes on to spout
"this time, it's not the Church of Scientology they're attacking, but innocent
children. As the BBC reports, members of 4Chan have been uploading videos
containing explicit sexual content in droves to YouTube today, specifically
targeting children". Yet the source of this post - the linked BBC report - is
the still the old one dated 21 May 09. If it also happened today, then it's
odd to link to an old news article about a current event (at least without
noting that it's old).

------
Dilpil
200 Years from now we'll all have a good laugh at how ridiculous it was that
videotaping sex and tricking kids into seeing it used to be thought of as an
intensely evil crime.

~~~
robotron
Or as funny

------
jrockway
I am confused that YouTube didn't catch this in advance. I only casually keep
myself informed of Internet memes, and I knew 4chan was going to unleash a
bunch of porn on June 12th. If I know... everyone knows :)

~~~
dimitar
How did you find out?

~~~
CGamesPlay
Honestly it's been copypasta'd throughout /b/ for the past few weeks. And
yesterday especially, it was in every thread!

It's not like /b/ is some walled garden ::)

~~~
jrockway
I only rarely read /b/, so I must have heard about it here.

------
darwinw
I don't think this is funny at all. They've now managed to be a real asshole
by sabotaging childrens' clips

