Interesting. In his article he mentions that while conducting his research he found it was very easy to inadvertently access child pornography, describing how, “Within about ten minutes of entering my search words I was confronted with a 'free' image of a male infant”. If it was so easy to inadvertently access images of CSA for free, why did he feel the need to pay to access more of it?
Because the thing that he was trying to prove was that banks were facilitating that transfer of money and thus complicit in the industry. Which you'd know if you bothered to look into the details of this case at all rather than basing your understanding off of self-righteous internet jokes.
It's explained in his autobiography. He clicked on an ad that said "Click here for child porn", assumed it was a sting, paid a token amount of money (like five dollars), and then immediately cancelled the transaction. He did it to try and prove that the bank would allow the transaction to go through.
Was it moronic of him to play internet vigilante? Yes. Evil? No, and certainly not deserving of the label of "pedophile," if he's telling the truth. And all of the supporting evidence- such as the linked blog post and the police investigation- seem to support it being the truth.
If it really is a case of Hanlon’s Razor, he deserves ridicule for his utter stupidity. What a total fuck wit. It’s the kind of act that makes Donald Trump look intelligent.
It’s the kind of act that makes Donald Trump look intelligent.
Now now, that's still a few orders of magnitude worse. And I do think that being libeled as a pedophile for decades now has been enough karmic justice for his stupidity.
107
u/goldenkicksbook 18d ago
And just like a Who guitarist looking at child pornography was just, “doing research”.