Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FTC Shuts Down Calif. ISP For Botnets, Child Porn

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the child-porn-world-needs-more-suicides dept.

The Courts 224

An anonymous reader writes "The Federal Trade Commission has convinced a federal judge to pull the plug on a 3FN.net, a.k.a. 'Pricewert LLC,' a Northern California based hosting provider. The FTC alleges that 3FN/Pricewert was directly involved in setting up spam-spewing botnets, among other illegal activities, the Washington Post's Security Fix Blog writes. From the story: 'Pricewert hosts very little legitimate content and vast quantities of illegal, malicious, and harmful content, including child pornography, botnet command and control servers, spyware, viruses, trojans, phishing related sites, illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams, and pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest.' The story quotes a former Justice Dept. expert saying the FTC action may be a smoke screen for a larger criminal investigation by the federal government in 3FN's activities."

cancel ×

224 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Paging all "first posters"... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213313)

...with their links which are suddenly broken.

Help me Rob Malda, you're my only hope! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213337)

Slashdot I need your help desperately! Me and my gay lover Steve Jobs were dildoing each other's asses with our iPhone 3Gs while jerking each other off. The problem is that when I came my iPhone slipped up and got stuck in my rectum. Steve ran out after this happened and isn't returning my calls. I'm so scared and I don't know what to do. Can you help me?!?!?!

Re:Help me Rob Malda, you're my only hope! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213571)

how are you able to call him with your phone up yer bum?

Re:Help me Rob Malda, you're my only hope! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213617)

Precision flatulence.

Re:Help me Rob Malda, you're my only hope! (-1, Troll)

Maldas Cock (1569671) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213923)

All child porn found was promptly forwarded to Richard Stallman by email for him to "dispose of".

Re:Help me Rob Malda, you're my only hope! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28214009)

Posted by timothy on Thursday June 04, @12:00PM
from the child-porn-world-needs-more-suicides dept.


Posted by GNAA on Thursday June 04, @12:00PM
from the greedy-Jews-need-more-suicide-bombers dept.

TROLLKORE LIVES (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213607)

_ MM MM MMNMMMM MMMMMMMMM MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM MMMMMM MMMNM MM M Fuck your mother and your father
_ M_M_r'_.',._.',.',._.__________________.',._.',.', ___r_@MM Fuck your mother and your father
_MM_W_M'_.',._.',.'---|Trollkore forever!|---,_'_._`__7M_X_M Fuck your mother and your father
_M,___M'_.',._.',.', _'------------------'_,_'_.',____M__B_0 Fuck your mother and your father
_M_W__M'_.',._.',.',._.',.',._.', ',._.',._,_'_.',___WM__0_MX Fuck your mother and your father
_M2_S_M_;_,_Xi'_.',. .',.',._.',.',._.', ',._.',.',___M7__ii@ Fuck your mother and your father
_MS_@MM_X0'_.',._.',.',____S_____;i'_.',._.',.',__ ____MM__M_M Fuck your mother and your father
_MWMMM'_._`__a0BMMMZ.',._`__XB_rS___.MMMMMMMMMB'_. ',___M__M_M Fuck your mother and your father
_MM_MM____MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMr'_._`_:MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM MW___MM_MiS Fuck your mother and your father
_ MMM2__MMMM.____.MMMMMMMMMM __ XMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM._BM:MX Fuck your mother and your father
_ MMM__MMMMM|._. |MMMMMMMMMMM _ MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM__MMMM Fuck your mother and your father
_MMZ__BMMMMM||o| |MMMMMMMMMMM _ MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMB____MM Fuck your mother and your father
_M____MMMMMM'----'MMMMMMMMMMM _ MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMW_WM__M Fuck your mother and your father
WM__i_MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM _M MMMMMMMMMMM.____.MMM,_____M0 Fuck your mother and your father
MX__r_MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM'_._` MMMMMMMMMM|._. |MMM'_._`_MM Fuck your mother and your father
MZ____7MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM __._Z_ MMMMMMMMM||o| |MMM__X___ZM Fuck your mother and your father
MM__Z__MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM; __MM_MM_ WMMMMMMM'----'MM__a____M0 Fuck your mother and your father
_M__,r___XMMMMMMMMMMMMM ___:MMM_MMM:_ MMMMMMMMM MM____7____M Fuck your mother and your father
_MM'_.',____,M0'_.',_____,,MMMB_MMMM_,____ZMMM:___ raW_____MM Fuck your mother and your father
_ M_____ii_X___7__S_,2____SMMMM_MMMM'_.',______2:r'_ .',___M Fuck your mother and your father
_ MM'_.',._.',._,_'_._`_8:MMMMM_MMMMM_;__;ii.',._,_' _._`_MM Fuck your mother and your father
__ MM'_.',._.',.',______;WMMMMM_MMMMM_M'_.',._.',.',_ __.MM Fuck your mother and your father
____ MMM'_.',._.',.',_____MMMMM_MMMMM'_.',._.',.',___XM MM Fuck your mother and your father
____ 0MMMMr'_._,_'_.',____BMMM@_ZMMM;'_._,_'_._`__aMMMM M Fuck your mother and your father
'_._` MMMMMM_M_,__;'_._,_'_._`_i'_._,_'_._`_i____MMMMaMa Fuck your mother and your father
'_._` M__BMMMM_2_ZM__@r___Z'_.',___,,__._'___M__;M@___M Fuck your mother and your father
'_._` MM___M2MMM8M___Z___XM___X,____M._r_____MMMM@____M Fuck your mother and your father
'_._` MM___M___ZMMMMMMMMMMMiMMM_____WMSMMMMMMM_ZM____MM Fuck your mother and your father
'_._`_ MW__MM__W__X___M___iMaXMMMMMMBM_S__7__:_MM____MX Fuck your mother and your father
'_._`_ MM__XMM2MM_M___M___,r__M' ._`_r__B_aMBM_M2___iM Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',__ M2__M__@__MMMMMMMMMr _M__M._MM_ZMZMM_;MM____MM Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',___ M___MMM0_Z___M_ _MMB7MM2MM_M__S_____MW_____M Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',___ M_____SMMMMWSM_ __i__M___a_M___M:MMB_S____MM Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',___ MM'_.',___2XMMMWMMMM0MMMMMMMMMMMM__r_____2M Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',____ MM_:'_.',______;_____8'_.',._.',.',____MM Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',_____ XMMM'_._`_.aM'_._`__, ____;;:'_._`__MMM Fuck your mother and your father
'_._,_'_.',__ WMM'_._,_' ._`_B__M__ _a.',._`_MMMr Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',._.',.',__ MMM_:__,____M.__XS2,_____ZMMMX Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',._.',.',___ rMMMZMM___;____B_____rMMMM Fuck your mother and your father
'_.',._.',._,_'_._` irXS2MMMMMMB8ZMMMMX: Fuck your mother and your father

TROLLKORE HEAD, I'M IN YOUR BED
I'M FIZZY FIZZY WIZZY, I'M OFF MY HEAD

Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213315)

Christopher Barton, lead research scientist at McAfee, said a number of 3FN domain name servers already have popped up at new locations online.

"The rats are running," Barton said.

Oh, that's a shame, maybe next time we should hand this matter over to the USAF or at least the FBI. You know, someone capable of exterminating or prosecuting the 'rats'?

Leibowitz said his agency would continue to pursue other ISPs that "provide a haven for Internet criminals."

"This is a signal that we're going to go after you, and you're not going to be able to hide behind the shroud of the Internet and be immune from enforcement action," Leibowitz said.

A signed copy of the FTC's complaint is available here (PDF).

Ahahah, is that a joke?

FTC Chairman Leibowitz: Let this very strongly worded complaint be a clear message to those that escaped yet again! We will not falter until we have lodged very strongly worded complaints against each and every one of you at least four times!
Botnet Leader: Jesus Christ, I think I just shit myself! My god, you just shut down one of like 50 ISPs we use! We might even have to go to another country to run our lucrative operations! Oh the horror of operating out of the Cayman Islands! Laying on the beach, raking in cash! Will you show us no mercy?!

So tell me, when will all the court cases be launched from the data you collected from the servers you confiscated in this coup de grace? They were operating out of Northern California, surely you contacted the appropriate law enforcement agencies, gathered a massive stack of warrants and cunningly orchestrated a perfect storming of all facilities to capture servers with juicy financial, IP, personal and foreign data? And then surely you froze the assets in these accounts and entered all this as evidence in a mounting trial against business and individuals foreign and domestic? Oh you didn't? Oh, you just warned their ISPs and strutted around waving a complaint and acting like you saved the day? Well done.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (5, Insightful)

epiphani (254981) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213485)

Oh, that's a shame, maybe next time we should hand this matter over to the USAF or at least the FBI. You know, someone capable of exterminating or prosecuting the 'rats'?

And this is what I was thinking. I'm very confused, but I'm also not an American. What does the Federal Trade Commission have to do with acting on illegal material such as the crazy stuff suggested by the article? Where are the criminal charges here?

Or is this a bit like the Environmental Protection Agency investigating a murder because... they feel like it....

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213677)

Well, the body was found in a park ...

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (1)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214173)

Somebody was testing a new fertilizer but apparently they didn't know murdering is illegal.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213683)

I'm also puzzled as to why EldavoJohn mentioned the USAF, but it comes as no surprise to me that a seemingly unrelated government agency is going after these guys.

After all, what does Immigration and Customs have to do with this [ice.gov] and this [ice.gov] ?

We might as well assume that any "Federal" agency can go after whomever they want, "compartmentalization" be damned. After all, what ever became of that whole illegal NSA wiretapping thing?

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213739)

I'm also puzzled as to why EldavoJohn mentioned the USAF ...

You know to exterminate them ... with extreme prejudice ... with bombs?

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (3, Informative)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213747)

but it comes as no surprise to me that a seemingly unrelated government agency is going after these guys.

The FTC has the authoring to go after people running "illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams". That's part of their mission.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (5, Funny)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214165)

but it comes as no surprise to me that a seemingly unrelated government agency is going after these guys.

The FTC has the authoring to go after people running "illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams". That's part of their mission.

Looks like somebody at the FTC found out that those penis enlargement pills don't work at all.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28214231)

They overstepped their bounds in regulating companies here in that they shut down an ISP. An ISP that was NOT behaving irresponsibly to its customers. The fact that their customer's customers were involved in criminal activities is NOT their problem beyond complying with legal orders. They are NOT responsible. Certainly you could go after the programmer here-but that would require evidence in a court of law with proper jurisdiction. Shutting down the entire ISP goes way beyond the authority of the FTC.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (5, Informative)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214299)

They overstepped their bounds in regulating companies here in that they shut down an ISP.

They didn't shut down an ISP. They shut down a hosting company of these websites that is alleged to be directly involved in helping set up these illegal operations.

'Pricewert LLC,' a Northern California based hosting provider.

An ISP that was NOT behaving irresponsibly to its customers.

Sure, only if they aren't directly involved in helping to setup the illegal activity which is what is alleged in this case. Did you even read the summary?

The fact that their customer's customers were involved in criminal activities is NOT their problem beyond complying with legal orders.

Of course it's not. It becomes their problem because it's alleged that "3FN/Pricewert was directly involved in setting up spam-spewing botnets, among other illegal activities". Do you happen to see a difference?

They are NOT responsible.

If they were directly involved as it is alleged they are responsible.

Certainly you could go after the programmer here-but that would require evidence in a court of law with proper jurisdiction. Shutting down the entire ISP goes way beyond the authority of the FTC.

Again, they didn't shut down an ISP. They shut down a hosting company that was directly involved in helping to set up a whole host of illegal operations including illegal pharmacies and investment scams (which would fall under the FTC's regulating authority).

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (1)

gnick (1211984) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214045)

I'm also puzzled as to why EldavoJohn mentioned the USAF...

Nuke them from orbit - It's the only way to be sure.

Also, since this involves illegal trade, I could see involving the FTC at some level. But kiddie porn? FBI. Botnet control? FBI/CIA/maybe FCC. Illegal pharmacy? FDA/FTC/FBI(?).

This should certainly be an inter-agency operation, but for some reason they have a very poor record of playing nicely with each other...

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (5, Informative)

lordofthechia (598872) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213707)

"What does the Federal Trade Commission have to do with..."

From the article, they were dealing with (among other things):

"illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams"

and:
"the FTC's authority gives it the power to shut down companies that appear to be engaged in unfair and deceptive practices"

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (4, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214013)

and:
"the FTC's authority gives it the power to shut down companies that appear to be engaged in unfair and deceptive practices"

Deceptive practices? Well, we've all heard about the crackwhore complaining to the cops about being sold bogus rocks. I can just imagine how this went.

perv: Dude, I paid mad money for this CP and it turns out the girl was 18. They ripped me off!

ftc: Gee, how awful. What was that url again? We'll look into this immediately.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213865)

It makes sense if there is an economic criminality of considerable scale.

Pornography and money-laundering is not that far apart.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213919)

I think the FTC has less restrictive rules they operate under.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (5, Interesting)

Coolfish (69926) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214255)

Or is this a bit like the Environmental Protection Agency investigating a murder because... they feel like it....

Funnily enough, for crimes like negligent homicide committed by a corporation, they usually face insignificant penalties. So instead, the government might use the EPA and those various laws to go after the company. Frontline had a great episode on this with regards to a foundry that was polluting like crazy, and also killed a few employees by having extremely lax safety standards and negligent management. The death of the employee? Punishable by like a $7000 fine. Dumping crap in the nearby river? Millions.

Watch the program online: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/workplace/ [pbs.org]

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213737)

It's got to be a joke, there are plenty of sections of the law that make ISP's not liable for such things. So unless some magic law passed that none of us knew about which would have been publicized worldwide, there's really not a whole lot of sense from the article.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (4, Informative)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213953)

It's got to be a joke, there are plenty of sections of the law that make ISP's not liable for such things.

Sure if they were unaware of the activity, but that is not the alleged case here. In this case the company gone after is alleged to be directly involved in the illegal activity.

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213769)

+1 for letting the USAF bomb the botnet leaders' houses!

Re:Hand It Over to Someone More Capable (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213837)

Oh the horror of operating out of the Cayman Islands! Laying on the beach, raking in cash! Will you show us no mercy?!

Jokes on them, I just delete the spam, and they'll probably get a melanoma from all that sun.

OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work in? (0, Offtopic)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213335)

Being that slashdot looks and acts differently in Chrome, Firefox and IE, could someone please tell which damn browser slashdot has decided to target so that I know which one is most likely to actually work when I click something.

As a second note, do you think it would be possible to roll your new changes out to something other than front page articles until you actually get them working properly?

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213397)

I'd like to know too.
Also, why does following links require cookies to be on?

Dear Slashdot, (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213821)

+----------+
| FIX YOUR |
|  FUCKIN' |
|   CODE   |
+----------+
    |  |
    |  |
  .\|.||/..

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (3, Insightful)

MrMista_B (891430) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213417)

I can tell you for sure, it sure as hell isn't Firefox. I'm about to give up, and my karma rating has been 'Excellent' ages.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214195)

It looks fine with Adblock.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213427)

Looks like the Slashdot clowns are "targeting" all browsers. Everything sucks.

Their Web 2.0 hard-on must be draining the blood from their brains. Slashdot is now slow, bloated, and fucked up.

Just try getting that asinine slide-bar to show ALL posts. No can do, because the script kiddies coding it up are too stupid to handle boundary conditions properly.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1, Offtopic)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213481)

Just try getting that asinine slide-bar to show ALL posts. No can do, because the script kiddies coding it up are too stupid to handle boundary conditions properly.

You used to be able to scroll the bar all the way over when the button to move it to the top middle also worked properly. Now when you hit that button in the top right it just gives it a border and nothing else.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213559)

Just try getting that asinine slide-bar to show ALL posts. No can do, because the script kiddies coding it up are too stupid to handle boundary conditions properly.

You used to be able to scroll the bar all the way over when the button to move it to the top middle also worked properly. Now when you hit that button in the top right it just gives it a border and nothing else.

Meaning Slashtard "coders" broke it, and can't be bothered to fix it.

I'd honestly be ashamed to post code that bad to a public web site.

"Test" is what you do with software before you claim to be finished. It's not something that pairs with "Icles" and pops off after three seconds, even given your slapdash coding.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

lavacano201014 (999580) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213621)

I had it that way once. Then I accidentally clicked, and now I can't set it back

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213665)

That's because you were never able to scroll the bar all the way to the bottom if it was on the left-hand side. You could only do it when it was at the top middle position but since the toggle position button no longer works you can't do it anymore.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213443)

It doesnt work right in IE7 either lol

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (3, Insightful)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213455)

Slashdot doesn't work in any browser.

Also, they have a policy of launching new, untested, broken features mid week during peak usage.

In addition, they have a policy of "belittle and close" when you submit a bug to sourceforge.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213701)

Before, you used to be able to enter your login information with a reply when you are not logged in. Now, it just gives you a link above your reply section to "log in now" and when you click on that it takes you to a different page and when you finish logging in it takes you back to the main page and you have officially lost the post that you intending to reply to.

This is long and far the most annoying thing about new slashdot. Frequently I just don't even post a reply that I may otherwise want to. Or I post as Anonymous Coward, as I'm going to do right now.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0, Offtopic)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213975)

Way too much of Slashdot 2.0 seems to be designed by people who only use/test slashdot in one specific manner. Its as if they've forgotten that there are many ways to skin a cat.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0, Offtopic)

Sethus (609631) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214025)

You mind if I borrow your signature?

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

paazin (719486) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213755)

Slashdot doesn't work in any browser.

Also, they have a policy of launching new, untested, broken features mid week during peak usage.

In addition, they have a policy of "belittle and close" when you submit a bug to sourceforge.

So they're pretty much like everywhere else, then.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213497)

Agreed.

When I am near the bottom of the day's list of articles, Firefox re-renders of a full 30 seconds every time I go back to the main page from reading an article.

PITA.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

MooseMuffin (799896) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213503)

What doesn't work? I've been using the firefox 3.5 betas and I haven't noticed anything overly broken.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (2, Informative)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213545)

Well the commment slider doesn't move when you click the "Toggle window location" button. White bars where the titles are so you can't see anything. Pages taking forever to render. That's just a few.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (2, Informative)

greed (112493) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213615)

Turn off the new crap. Then it works.

I forget how I did that, though. Classic Index in Preferences?

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213639)

Turn off the new crap. Then it works.

Yes, but then you get all the problems with the bad pagination that comes with the old style discussion.

I forget how I did that, though. Classic Index in Preferences?

Classic index, which I am using, doesn't fix the problems I mentioned which happen within the article comments themselves.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28214215)

Are you referring to the thing where pages 1-6 of a discussion will be the same, then finally on page 7 you get page 2? At least that seems to be what is happening.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214319)

Are you referring to the thing where pages 1-6 of a discussion will be the same, then finally on page 7 you get page 2? At least that seems to be what is happening.

Yep. It's a well-known bug that has plagued Slashdot for years that they now refuse to fix since they went to the new Web 2.0 dynamic discussion.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

MooseMuffin (799896) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213789)

My toggle button now either pins it to top of your screen, or just leaves it at the top of the comments and lets you scroll past it. It used to go over to the left, but I guess they tossed that out. No problem with white title bars or rendering speed.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213809)

Mine is now stuck on the left-hand side and when I click it I just get a black border around it.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

eleuthero (812560) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213593)

I went for six months using firefox 2 (the company I work for would not let us upgrade) with horrible broken page notices for half of slashdot. They recently lifted the ban and /. now works

Turn off Beta! (2, Informative)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213623)

Turn off the damn stupid "beta" index.

I wish they'd just frozen the interface about three years ago, but at least you CAN disable most of the gratuitous Javascript crap.

Re:Turn off Beta! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213973)

That only works on the front page and in the stories, try going to one of your journals (depending on browser i guess). I tried to see one of my journals today and almost deleted the damned thing by mistake!

I tried getting to slashdot on my phone (Motorola i776) and couldn't get to a single subject - slashdot is too bloated for a phone (at least for mine). CNN works, though. Google's no problem. I can even get to Yahoo mail, but not slashdot.

The trouble with slashdot is the trouble with a lot of new tech - the designers are trying too hard to impress people, instead of designing a simple, useable, useful interface. It's the curse or the web 2.0 cloud (which is IMO a cloud of crack smoke)

Re:Turn off Beta! (1)

Taevin (850923) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214071)

As long as we're having a Slashdot gripe-fest, anyone know why I seem to have "lost" the majority of my comments? I was trying to find a comment I made a long time ago and it seems like everything before January 8, 2009 is just gone. WTF?

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213627)

Looks justfine in IE 6! Just have to enable Active X and set your security settings to "low".

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213765)

i recently got ahold of an old laptop with low specs and i have been trying various browsers, firefox-2.0.0.20, dillo-2.0, lynx, links, and i am afraid that 99.9% of the internet does not care for anything other than the top two or three browsers = IE, mozilla's firefox & seamonkey and opera, yeah it sucks to see decent but older hardware obsoleted like that...

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (5, Interesting)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213851)

Read between the lines.

Slashdot doesn't render properly on ANY browser.

The reason for this is because slashdot doesn't have a proper webdev writing their site. The may have a webdev, but obviously the person they have is not capable of meeting their needs.

Since the corporate overlords are cutting back on expenses, there is no room in the budget to hire a proper webdev. So the slashdot team has decided to purposely bork the site, keeping it just-good-enough-for-content-to-be-available, in the hope that some skilled webdev will offer their services for free to fix the site.

Or, possibly, the slashdot editors are playing passive-aggressive with the corporate overlord's demands that slashdot become more like a social networking site, and less like a news aggregator with comments. I think this has been hinted at by Rob & Jamie in the past.

Finally, the third possibility -- it's summer, which is kind of like the Septembers of yore on usenet. Maybe they're hoping to preserve the community by driving off the shambling hordes of idiots who belong on Fark or 4chan instead of here, while the slashdot core sticks around, knowing that things will simmer down in October. But that's probably wishful thinking.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (2, Insightful)

shentino (1139071) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214199)

I'm using browsers that get 100/100 on Acid3 and those don't have trouble.

Re:OT: Which browser is slashdot supposed to work (1)

nmb3000 (741169) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213933)

Being that slashdot looks and acts differently in Chrome, Firefox and IE, could someone please tell which damn browser slashdot has decided to target so that I know which one is most likely to actually work when I click something.

Classic Index + Classic Discussion = works great.

Sure you miss out on the few worthwhile features they've added, but I'd much rather be able to read the summaries and comments (never actually tried reading the articles -- do they work?) than have shiny new (broken) widgets all over the place.

One caveat though: even classic views are broken in IE6 now :(

Holy FUD Campaign Batman! (0, Flamebait)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213361)

'Pricewert hosts very little legitimate content and vast quantities of illegal, malicious, and harmful content, including child pornography, botnet command and control servers, spyware, viruses, trojans, phishing related sites, illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams, and pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest.'

What? There weren't any terrorists or WMDs? Won't anyone think of the WMDs?

Re:Holy FUD Campaign Batman! (1)

Emb3rz (1210286) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214269)

I love that they separated all of the other vile forms of pornography and put them at the end, while child pornography got first billing. It's amazing what being a poster-child (no pun intended) of online criminality can do for an activity's reputation.

What the article leaves out (5, Funny)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213375)

'Pricewert hosts very little legitimate content and vast quantities of illegal, malicious, and harmful content, including child pornography, botnet command and control servers, spyware, viruses, trojans, phishing related sites, illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams, and pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest.'

Yes but how much were they charging per month? It doesn't say. You probably get all this stuff with the "premium" package.

Smoking (0)

phissur (1285832) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213403)

may be a smoke screen
Forget the illegal pharmacies and scams. They're promoting smoking!
Think of the children!

Quite a list (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213429)

Pricewert hosts very little legitimate content and vast quantities of illegal, malicious, and harmful content, including child pornography, botnet command and control servers, spyware, viruses, trojans, phishing related sites, illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams, and pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest.

But what makes it different than any other ISP?

Re:Quite a list (3, Funny)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213527)

But what makes it different than any other ISP?

Their bribe was late.

Re:Quite a list (1)

cboslin (1532787) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214063)

Their bribe was late.

But what makes their lobbyists any different than any other telcos?

Re:Quite a list (1)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213569)

But what makes it different than any other ISP?

This one wasn't paying its dues to the local politicians?

Re:Quite a list (2, Insightful)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213591)

But what makes it different than any other ISP?

You mean other than this quote from the second sentence?

The FTC alleges that 3FN/Pricewert was directly involved in setting up spam-spewing botnets, among other illegal activities

I'm pretty sure Verizon, Time Warner, AT&T, Comcast, Cablevision, Cox, Suddenlink, just to name a few ISPs, aren't directly involved in any illegal activities on their network.

Incest? (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213437)

Um, how did they know that?

If these guys are as creepy as it sounds, you shouldn't take their word for it!

Re:Incest? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213493)

Pics or it didn't happen.

Heh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213467)

I didn't know 12chan had its own ISP.

Re:Heh (1)

lavacano201014 (999580) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213675)

I didn't know /b/tards of any sort had their own ISP...

Only diff this will make is in some DA's resume. (2, Interesting)

d474 (695126) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213499)

This is like removing a telephone from the street corner in an attempt to thwart phone scams: Endless supply of phones for the evil-doers to move to.

Re:Only diff this will make is in some DA's resume (3, Informative)

creimer (824291) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213891)

You do realize that the reason why you can't find public phones was to discourage drug dealers with pagers from doing business? Not that that matters anymore since evil-doers have cell phones.

Props to NASA too, for this! (4, Interesting)

AMuse (121806) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213585)

Yet another thing that NASA has done to help society, that people don't know. NASA's Inspector General (IG) played a large role in helping shut this den of crap down.

"including child pornography..." (5, Insightful)

Evets (629327) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213625)

Anytime I see something referencing child pornography, I immediately think it's a smear campaign.

I don't know anything about 3FN.net, but generally...

ISPs don't host porn, they host websites. Some people put up websites that have porn or other content that someone might object to. Some websites have illegal content.

Sometimes people get frustrated because it's difficult to stop whatever activity it is they are trying to stop. Because an ISP provides its customers with anonymity, or because it doesn't log certain things, or because they are not cooperative with whatever branch of the government wants their cooperation does not make them bad. There are plenty of legitimate, good, positive-for-society reasons that anonymity or partial anonymity is necessary. There are ways of enforcing the law and bettering society that don't strip rights away from free people doing ordinary things.

Re:"including child pornography..." (1)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213689)

ISPs don't host porn, they host websites.

And by hosting those websites they also host the contents of those websites and in the case of it being a porn website they would be hosting porn. Your semantic game fails to work.

Re:"including child pornography..." (1)

flandar (639569) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213767)

Yes, but by providing network connectivity to your home computer that is hosting a web site, the ISP is not hosting anything. Just acting as a gateway for your computer to connect into the internet. Now if we were talking about a hosting company. That might be a different thing. If they are talking about hosted computers, this is a different matter. But an ISP should be a communication provider not a content provider and it should not matter what I provide as content on their network. The content I provide is my responsibility.

Re:"including child pornography..." (3, Informative)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213833)

Now if we were talking about a hosting company. That might be a different thing.

And they are. Did you even read the summary at all?

'Pricewert LLC,' a Northern California based hosting provider.

Re:"including child pornography..." (2, Interesting)

Xaositecte (897197) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213807)

You think this might be one of those "sending a message" things?

Y'know, shut down one ISP under a justification that could, potentially, target any ISP in the Untied States? Start with a small one that nobody has ever heard of, and won't ruffle many feathers. Then, whenever an ISP is getting too uppity, politely bring up the topic of 3FN, and oh, wouldn't it be a tragedy if that happened to a larger ISP?

Re:"including child pornography..." (1)

tobiah (308208) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214017)

Totally, I think if it was truly child porn, they'd do more than shut down the website. They'd find some names and throw them in jail. The fact that there is so little prosecution and so many accusations in this case makes me think there is little substance to the allegations.

Shutting down a last bastion ISP (1)

k-zed (92087) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213645)

... because "pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest" is very illegal, right?

ISPs that don't do the mandatory spying on citizens, storing of logs, keeping tabs on the copyright-protection evading, crippleware-breaking terrorists, they have to be eliminated! For the sake of our civilization and of our children.

Re:Shutting down a last bastion ISP (1)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213719)

... because "pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest" is very illegal, right?

Nope, but botnets, illegal pharmacies, child porn, spyware, viruses, trojans, and phishing related sites (you know those other things listed beyond the snippet you posted) are.

ISPs that don't do the mandatory spying on citizens, storing of logs, keeping tabs on the copyright-protection evading, crippleware-breaking terrorists, they have to be eliminated!

Actually this was about the ISP being accused of being directly involved in the illegal activities on it's network. Not because of the nonsense you posted.

So we get child porn, where is terrorism? (1)

Seth Kriticos (1227934) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213673)

No, really, if they did something illegal (proven by court) and got shut down: fine!; but come on, most of you read (blah) ISP (blah) shut down by FTC (blah) child porn (blah) <small print> incest </small print>. WTF?

Please, anything you say, "child porn" and "terrorism" == "censorship" in current times. Any article that has it as topic is either BS or Troll (or both).

Now I'm open for argumentation, but please use contemporary English and proper establishment / critic slang if you do so.

Re:So we get child porn, where is terrorism? (1)

Seth Kriticos (1227934) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213787)

Oh, sorry, I hate to reply to myself, but I forgot another thing. Pricewert is nor English, nor British nor proper German. If you want to make a British Nazi reference, the please use the proper German grammar and say "Preiswert".

(I just see my Karma dropping, but what the hell, it's irony, can't help it. You could also argue that criminals suck at grammar)

Re:So we get child porn, where is terrorism? (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213819)

Now I'm open for argumentation, but please use contemporary English and proper establishment / critic slang if you do so.

Ewe muss bee knew hear!

Reckless language? (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213685)

From the summary:

... and pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest ...

Isn't that particular stuff still considered legal? And if so, does it have an rightful place in an appeal by the government to a judge?

Re:Reckless language? (1)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213987)

From the summary:

... and pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest ...

Isn't that particular stuff still considered legal?

Depends who you ask. Oh, did you say illegal? I thought you meant immoral. I forget sometimes what we're persecuting these days.

Re:Reckless language? (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214033)

From the summary:

... and pornography featuring violence, bestiality, and incest ...

Isn't that particular stuff still considered legal? And if so, does it have an rightful place in an appeal by the government to a judge?

In most places no, those acts are not legal. Simulating those acts is legal. Maybe some wiggle room on the "violence", depending on what exactly they mean. Incest laws, like sodomy laws, are rarely prosecuted, or at least I've never heard of such prosecution. Rape and bestiality are. IANAL

Alex Kozinski (2, Informative)

Doug52392 (1094585) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214235)

Well, if you ask Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (United States v. Issacs [wikipedia.org] ), I'm sure he'd have a few words to say about this.

ISP != Hosting Provider (1)

schwinn8 (982110) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213695)

Since when does "ISP" = "hosting provider"?
I thought they actually shut down a SERVICE provider... not just some dumb web host.

Wack-a-mole? (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213813)

Or is this more than that?

Re:Wack-a-mole? (1)

bughunter (10093) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213997)

Considering the amount of kinky pr0n allegedly being served up, I'd say more than the moles will be getting whacked off...

What's left? (1)

argoth (21958) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213873)

Is there any other content on the internet apart from those items listed?

shI7? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28213887)

benefits of being ME! It's official ass of them all, to foster a 6gay and

ISP? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#28213901)

Or web hosting service?

Seems like a hosting service to me.

bastards (1)

binaryseraph (955557) | more than 5 years ago | (#28214073)

Really I could care less what kind of content was found on the drives of the server- On the fact that they were running Botnets alone, these guys should have their balls put on display at the local batting cage.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>