On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:58 , Barry Shein <b...@world.std.com> wrote: > On November 29, 2012 at 11:45 patr...@ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore) wrote: >> On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:17 , Barry Shein <b...@world.std.com> wrote: >> >>> It's funny, it's all illusion like show business. It's not hard to set >>> up anonymous service, crap, just drop in at any wi-fi hotspot, many >>> just ask you to click that you accept their T&Cs and you're on. Would >>> they raid them, I was just using one at a major hospital this week >>> that was just like that, if someone used that for child porn etc? But >>> I guess stick your nose out and say you're specifically offering anon >>> accts and watch out I guess. >> >> Do you think if the police found out child pr0n was being served from a >> starbux they wouldn't confiscate the equipment from that store? > > I dunno, has it ever happened?
No idea. However, I would not be the least bit surprised. In fact, I would be surprised if they failed to do so, after having "proof" that child pr0n was served from one. > I mean confiscated the store's > equipment, I assume that's what you mean. Is that because no one has > ever been involved with child porn etc from a Starbucks? Does that > seem likely? I don't know, really. > > And why would confiscating it from one location address the issue if > they offer anonymous hotspots (I don't know if they do but whatever, > there are plenty of others) at all locations and they're one company? > > It would seem like they'd have to confiscate the equipment at every > Starbucks in their jurisdiction, which could be every one in the US > for example. They didn't confiscate every Tor exit node in the US once they found something nefarious emanating from one. -- TTFN, patrick
