THE PROOF

This lady goes on and states that “Plaintiff alleges that she can prove all of the causes of the action alleged in this petition”. Allegedly; not conclusively.

Allegedly = supposedly or reportedly (or so says the dictionary)

And which “proofs” or exhibits does this lady offer?

Exhibit A

A technical explanation from the Tor website explaining how it works. Yeah… that’s damming… allegedly.

Exhibit B

A copy of page from the Pinkmeth website stating:

“Pink Meth: where your stat laws don’t apply”

So, a statement, that it? So, the judge is supposed to condemn Pink Meth based on their layman’s opinion. That it? Apparently yes. Allegedly.

Exhibit C

Another statement from the Pinkmeth's website:

“Pink Meth is a Tor Hidden Service (https://www.torproject.org /docs/hidden-services.html.en) that allows you to post anyone's nudes and info. Everything except CP and fakes is allowed. No entries will be removed.”

So, yet another statement of company policy. To our knowledge it is not a criminal offense stating that a company won’t comply with laws as long as they comply with them (at least not in the civilized world, but it may be otherwise in Texas, allegedly). So far there is no evidence that Pinkmeth did not comply with them. Furthermore, and this is very interesting, the term “CP” means Child Pornography. In other words, this lady accused Pinkmeth of distributing child pornography while it is explicitly forbidden by company policy!!!

We guess the lady can’t read too good, allegedly.

Followed by a collection of anonymous posts in Pinkmeth by anonymous users expressing their personal (and anonymous) opinions. Yeah… that’s solid proof. So now the judge is supposed to consider anonymous third party heresy, allegedly.

Followed by a bunch of web articles about the old Pinkmeth.com website that was injunctioned and shut down some time ago. Yeah… more solid proof. Third party opinions about a website that does not exist anymore … yeah… nothing but the truth.

Exhibit D

Why bother. This section is called PLAINTIFF’S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO PINKMETH.

It is a long list of wishes that this lady is presenting to the judge and asking him (not Pinkmeth) to admit as true. Based on the “solid” evidence provided in Exhibits A through C. However, since we are at it, why not include that Pinkmeth was part of the conspiracy to kill Kennedy? What the heck! With such solid "evidence" she should have no problems “proving” this one too! OK. Whatever.

The missing proof

Did she submit a sworn testimony stating that she did not upload the pictures? No.

Did she submit a sworn testimony from the ex-boyfriend stating that he did not upload the pictures? No.

Did she submit proof (or even a hint) that her or her ex-boyfriend's e-mail, upload service, social site, PC, etc, etc, etc, were hacked? No.

Did she submit proof about who or in which circumstances those photos where uploaded to Pinkmeth? No.

The entire proof comes down to this:

Iiiitttttssss nnnnoooooo fffffaaaaiiiiirrrrr!!!

Followed by a legal tantrum. From a criminal major. OK. Got it.

WE, THE DEFENDERS OF PORNOGRAPHY

Are we indeed defending pornography? Well, no.

Being in favor or against pornography is a personal choice, motivated by personal beliefs, ethics and morality. We are all for personal responsibility because without personal responsibility, there cannot be personal beliefs, ethics and morality because they will be replaced by somebody else’s, namely the state. This is simply not acceptable.

THE EROSION OF PRIVACY

This was our title but we did not mention the issue so far. How is it possible that privacy has been eroded? Because Tor was attacked. Most people are indeed brain dead or brain washed. They don’t understand the fact that privacy is a personal responsibility and initiatives such as Tor actually enhance our privacy by allowing for unhampered and anonymous communications between people without the fear of repercussions (mainly by the state).

Tor has been linked with pornography and allegedly child pornography. This is something that it is almost impossible to undo. In an Absolute Austro-Libertarian system these kinds of allegations would have no effect whatsoever since there would not be political powers capable of imposing arbitrary restrictions to freedom. However, in our current political (i.e. democratic) system, such powers do exist and they will (eventually) find it politically expedient (i.e. to buy votes) to “do something about this”.

The fact that this time Tor was “let go” and even if it would have been sued, the lawsuit may have been thrown out (because of the Telecommunications Act of 1996) only serves to highlight the fragility of a system where such momentous privacy tools such as Tor can be banished and erased by the simple will of a few selfish, egotistical and egomaniac politicians. This is scary indeed.

But there is something worse. Democracy allows for people such as this lady to get away with not being responsible for her own acts. It’s like the old joke:

Doctor, it hurts when I do this!

Then stop doing it!

Our privacy is eroded and diminished every time when we do not take responsibility for it in our own hands. Passing the problem to “society” (as if “society” would actually exist) is simply feeding political power and politicians. The entire democratic system is based on passing the problem to “society”. The keystone principle is: majority rule. And what do majority rule? It rules imposing arbitrary duties and obligations on “other” people. And how does majority rule? Through politicians. And who do politicians answer to? Nobody but themselves. Game over.

CONCLUSION

The erosion of our privacy occurs because we refuse to take responsibility for our own acts. However, the big enabler, the monster that allows us to get away with irresponsibility is the state. Without Democracy and without the state we would be forced to take care of ourselves instead of blaming others for our laziness and carelessness. Democracy is the true “moral hazard” of humanity, not freedom.

You always have a choice. This one is clear. Take responsibility or do not and lean and then on “society”. Your choice.

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.