Most misleading headline EVER. Seriously, that is it for me and this 'computer news' site. I've been coming to Tom's for years, but the slide into tabloid journalism has been annoying, but this is too much.
Thanks for the good stuff over the years, but I'll be getting my tech news somewhere else from now on.
The title is nothing but typical sensationalism. STICK TO TECH NEWS! just because someone used a computer to do something DOES NOT make it tech news. Geez my 5 year nephew could do better than this. You writers and editors should be ashamed of yourselves. Pathetic.
OK, so the site founder was a child pr0n creep. Apparently (I have not visited the site) the site is educational stuff. The headline here pulls us in making us think we got some teachers that are the same kind of creeps as the site founder.
WAS the material in any way tied into recruiting children into his lair? Was the site guilty of this? Or as already asked... is this only guilt by association?
IF we were to apply the guilt by association, every lawsuit Microsoft was in and lost for some illegal code would mean we ban all Microsoft products.
Umm... IF we actually applied this to everything, we'd have almost jack.
The article makes perfect sense if you're in the UK, because the sheer hysteria over pedophiles is at flaming pitchfork levels.
As a result, simple fact that the website creator is a pedophile means the entire parent and teacher bodies will instantly block his site. It doesn't matter if the site was useful, it doesn't matter if the site was legit. Simply by being a kiddie fiddler means he's blocked. Note though he was convicted of possessing child porn - that doesn't make you a pedophile. He's never fucked children, just wanked over videos of them. Not the same thing.
Granted, without being surrounded by this hysteria you won't automatically fill in the blanks in the article, so yeah bad journalism.
I work as a Tech in schools in a county in England. I won't say which county, suffice to say we blocked Sparklebox on 5th January 2010.
Why wasn't it blockwed sooner ? Because there was an ongoing court case, and it could have jeopardised the case had it been blocked sooner, and my understanding is that the Police asked schools not to block so that attention was not drawn to the case. Remember a man is innocent until proven guilty.
Why is it blocked you are asking, when it is just a site that provides links to other sites, and contains only educational resources ? How about BECAUSE THIS MAN MAKES MONEY FROM THIS SITE, AND IT IS THAT MONEY THAT FEEDS HIS FILTHY HABIT. So you say he only looked at these pictures. That is still too much, because people like him are the market for this filth, and if there was no market for it, there would be none of it.
That is reason enough to block his sites. Don't you see the irony, that he uses a website aimed at teaching primary school children, so that he can look at primary school children ?
it is not just child porn, anything that causes you to become a sex offender (even peeing on the side of a building) is enough to ruin your life to a point that you wont get work and any website you make will be blocked, because on one simple reason, when someone is a sex offender, not all details are gives so everyone assumes child molester.
anyway about the article, because of the hysteria over anything that has to do with children, no matter what that person does, the public will see it as some way to get a hold of some child porn and will then treat it as such.
If the different government put even half as much effort into catching people who rob other people for their belongings, as they do into catching people who download child porn, the streets would be much safer and no longer would you have to be scared to answer call on your cellphone in public or do any other normal things.
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]On that reasoning, if he makes money from anything, such as stacking shelves, sweeping up leaves or washing cars he would use the money to feed his habit. What would you suggest? Preventing this person from working and contributing something to society and paying taxes?My understanding is that criminals are not allowed to profit from their crimes, such as murderers writing books about who they killed. This site was not related in anyway to childporn so was not related to his original crimes.One simple question, despite schools blocking the site anyway, has the CPS or the Police issued any information that says the site itself is illegal, has illegal content, is the site owner to profiting from illegal activities or has the site been issued with a takedown order?If the answer is no then the site should stay up and this person can keep running it (albeit from a prison). If a school wants to self block then they are just being panicky scaremongerers who are being browbeaten by some ridiculous political-correct bandwagon.[/citation]
All the content available on his site has been made available elsewhere, and links should be available on the local authority's schools website. The teachers and kids are missing out on nothing, and these are the people who we should be concerned with. Are our children getting access to what they should have access to? Not concerning ourselves with the rights of a vile criminal. I really don't understand why anybody on here is defending this guys rights. You commit a crime (especially this type), then you do the time, and lose the priviliedge of providing useful info to our schools.
You are reading into this too much. A website run by a pedophile with a slew of information teachers use to manage small children in a class. Now can you understand how this is so dangerous? (my vote goes to no)
On the website to access better resources you are encouraged to download the 'sparklebox toolbar' and by doing so allow him access to your personal files i.e. photo's!!! If anyone has this toolbar go to control panel, add/remove programmes, find it on the list and uninstall it!!!