Talk:IP address

I don't believe I have enough experience with editing this wiki (or any wiki for that matter) to properly address this, but I did want to bring this up: the following Supreme Court case basically says that pedophiles can get away with what they do so long as their IP address can't be traced to a single computer. I apologize for what I'm about to say but did the Court really just protect child fuckers? I'm enraged. --Pious 01:32, 16 July 2016 (CDT)

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1561P-01A.pdf

It sounds that way, I'm afraid. Unfortunately, IP addresses can sometimes be tricky in this sort of case. If one of the co-owners used his computer, malware piped a connecting through it, the ISP changed the address (some do this periodically, to make web hosting on private connections more difficult) or any number of other things happen, an innocent person could conceivably be framed. However, in this case, that is very unlikely since in this case they sized his computer and found proof. Additionally, it is possible to mask and IP address, so they are not a sure-fire way to catch someone. The MAC address is more reliable, since it never changes, but it is also harder to get from a user.

As far as your experience with wiki editing, everyone who edits, had to start without any. I'm sure you could, if you wanted to, make some great contributions. I'm sure there are people here (including myself) who would be happy to help you. If nothing else, you could write something, then ask for someone else to proof-read it. It's up to you, but I and I'm sure others are happy to help if you wish. --David B ^(TALK) 23:58, 16 July 2016 (EDT)

Thank you. I've tried my hand at editing the Rastafari page; I'd like constructive criticism. --Pious 23:24, 16 July 2016 (CDT)

I looked it over, and posted some minor thoughts on that talk page--I didn't see any major problems. Let me know if/when you'd like my thoughts on anything else. I'm happy to help, if possible! With subjective topics like these, feel free to do differently that I would. I'm just offering my opinion to give you ideas. --David B ^(TALK) 01:07, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

That's actually not a Supreme Court decision. That's the First Circuit Court of Appeals. And actually, the court seems to be saying the opposite....that the finding that an ISP was used for illegal material provides probable cause to get a warrant for all the people who regularly--Whizkid (talk) 01:12, 17 July 2016 (EDT) use the ISP.