(Norway) OP INFINITY - 36 men have been arrested for having participated in sexualized chats where they downloaded or shared abuse material against children. (pizzagate)

submitted ago by Anonj456

Among those revealed in Operation Infinity is a lawyer, a hospital doctor, a politician, and an artist.

https://imgur.com/FmLa7R8

The small green dots in this green circle show the 20,000 user accounts Operation Infinity attaches to sexualized chatting and downloading and sharing of sexual representation of children.

Last year, the E-track section at the Oslo police registered that nearly 4400 unique IP addresses downloaded abuse material in the Oslo area.

Together they downloaded and shared at least 11.7 million files with abuse material.

Thumbs up for those Norwegian investigators!

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

fusir ago

Congratulations implementing a copyright policy for child abuse imagery.

D = CV*min(1,FR/FV)-CR, in any media market. Increase FR, risk of a non-paying interaction, you increase the production rate.

This idea that it produces demand is like if walmart was selling snow shovels. But one bright employee figured out how to duplicate the shovels in stock for free. So walmart started selling more shovels, and then we pretended this would place a lot of demand on the original manufacturer. This theory of demand doesn't make any sense. But the theory of competing means to obtain a media is as proven as proven gets. People will select whatever they think gives them the most benefit for the cost. It takes a lot for Free with zero risk to be beat with not free and not zero risk. But you start applying risk to someone who doesn't pay and a minority of the distribution finds that a commercial interaction is worth while. This is how copyright works.

Anonj456 ago

I didn´t understand anything of this.

fusir ago

Yeah, it's a little dense.

So the idea is that in a media market people have a choice between downloading something for free or paying for it. They are going to weigh the cost vs benefit. People are comparing the value of having gotten it by torrent or paying vs the risk and money of using torrent or paying. This is true for all media markets.

So we say that someone pays if:
CV/(P+CR) > FV/FR

C means commercial, V means value (what they get out of it), P means price, R means risk, and F means non-commercial.

P+CR is what someone pays for a commercial interaction. If purchasing music obviously there is no risk, so P+CR=P. But in the case of something illicit then the CR is a part of the cost. So if you get more bang for the buck for a commercial interaction you will pursue a commercial interaction.

Well on the other side of the inequality we see FV/FR. That will have an infinite bang for buck in all cases if the FR is zero. That means no one will ever engage in a commercial interaction. Another way of saying this is the P necessary to satisfy the inequality would have to be less than zero. That P becomes the demand curve, because a demand curve is asking at what price would someone pay for something.

So that's the main point but I can derive that formula for you really quick if you want to read on.

So there is one more condition of there being a commercial interaction that we need to factor in.

CV>CR+P

That is if a commercial interaction has less value than its cost it obviously won't happen independent of what is going on with FV/FR.

So lets combine these two facts to solve for P.

P<CV-CR
P< CV*FR/FV-CR

So maximum P that anyone will pay is less than both of those figures on the right.

Pmax=min(CV-CR,CV*FR/FV-CR) which we will now call D because we have a demand curve.

So that min statement is kind of complicated but we can simplify it.

First off we have a -CR in both cases.

D = min(CV,CV*FR/FV)-CR

Now we have a CV in both

D = CV*min(1,FR/FV)-CR

So obviously different people see different value in each kind of interaction and different risk. So each variable is a distribution. But the important thing is that if the FR distribution is universally zero then the demand curve is universally zero. Also what is interesting is no amount of CR will offset the effect of even the tiniest amount of FR, because of the effect of subtracting a distribution form a distribution vs the multiplication of a distribution with anything beside zero.

Also what is interesting is that cap of 1 on FR/FV. Basically what this says is that a media market cannot exceed a conventional market. If FR/FV were infinite basically you would just have a conventional market. This is of course what most media companies would like to achieve. You can't download a toothbrush and if FR/FV were infinite people would have to buy music like it were a toothbrush. One purchase for every instance out there.

But oddly the anti-cp laws are trying to achieve the same FR/FV ratio.