[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 59905)
File  []
>> No. 59905 Paedofag
26th February 2018
Monday 6:10 pm
59905 spacer
>A young charity shop worker tracked down a pensioner to hand over a $10,000 wad of cash she inadvertently left in a purse she'd donated, that was being sold for just £10. The massive stack of $100 bills was found in the lining of the purse which was given to the charity shop for sale.

>Sophie Condren, the assistant manager of the Shelter boutique in Hampstead, north London, found the huge stack of cash while cleaning out the purse. The 23-year-old is more used to discovering dirty tissues and two pence coins.


To be honest lads, I don't really give a shit about the story. I would, however, pollinate this woman and I thought you would all like to know about it.
36 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown. Expand all images.
>> No. 59962 R4GE
3rd March 2018
Saturday 7:32 am
59962 spacer
Nah, you're thinking of his dark materials.

I can't even remember what the dark materials even were in those books. Probably coal or molten slag or something because the books were a bit steampunky.
>> No. 59964 Paedofag
3rd March 2018
Saturday 8:43 am
59964 spacer
I just can't get over the shitty ending to the trilogy.

The majority of the 3 books were brilliant, then you get to the last few chapters and it's suddenly: Kill god. Have sex. Angel appears, explains all the plot-holes then tells the main characters they can't ever ever have sex again because of this totally convincing technicality.
>> No. 59965 Auntiefucker
3rd March 2018
Saturday 9:17 am
59965 spacer
>have sex

U wot? It's been about 15 years since I read the book, but I thought they just kiss. Raging hormones and that, but still just a kiss.
>> No. 59966 Anonymous
3rd March 2018
Saturday 1:56 pm
59966 spacer
It's been a long time since I last read it too, but I'm sure it was heavily implied at the very least.
>> No. 59975 Anonymous
4th March 2018
Sunday 4:56 pm
59975 spacer
Her Instagram even says 'Harlot'. Reckon the Mail gave he a makeover to make her look like a girl next door type in order to get a rise (of the trouser variety) from filthy old gits like you lot. All of your multiple incognito mode visits are good for ad revenue.
>> No. 59976 Ambulancelad
4th March 2018
Sunday 5:00 pm
59976 spacer
I bet she's well proud of herself for being a disgusting munter in real life and all.
>> No. 59977 R4GE
4th March 2018
Sunday 5:55 pm
59977 spacer
Quit slut shaming. It's so antiquated.
>> No. 59978 R4GE
4th March 2018
Sunday 6:53 pm
59978 spacer

The concept seems fairly new given the terminology is probably about a decade old.
>> No. 59979 R4GE
4th March 2018
Sunday 7:37 pm
59979 spacer

I'm definitely not shaming anyone, pal. I love a slut sexually liberated woman.

I don't particularly want anything to do with a non-slutty woman.
>> No. 59980 Paedofag
4th March 2018
Sunday 7:38 pm
59980 spacer

I prefer the mail's more overt porn, like pictures of sixth form girls jumping in the air, ascot slags and of course geordie lasses wearing bras in the snow.
>> No. 59987 Are Moaty
4th March 2018
Sunday 11:05 pm
59987 spacer

Agree though, this is a creepy thread.
>> No. 59992 Ambulancelad
5th March 2018
Monday 7:35 pm
59992 spacer

anyone else miss page 3 back when it was full of schoolgirls who looked like your mid 40s auntie karen?
>> No. 59993 Moralfag
5th March 2018
Monday 7:57 pm
59993 spacer
What's creepy about it?
>> No. 59997 Ambulancelad
5th March 2018
Monday 10:05 pm
59997 spacer

People younger than me have a very hard time believing that you used to be allowed to put 16 year old girls topless in page 3 and Max Power etc.

When I was 13 or 14 there were even entire website networks dedicated to 16 year old girls with their norks out, they changed the law around then I think. What a time to be alive.
>> No. 59998 Anonymous
5th March 2018
Monday 10:29 pm
59998 spacer

As long as it didn't breach any other laws (obscene publications act etc) then it wasn't just topless, Mayfair had a 16 year old girl doing full frontal nudity at one point. The dutch, being a much dirtier bunch than us, were still making porn of 16 and 17 year old girls pissing on each others' arses until the EU standardized the age for being in smut to 18 in 2003.
>> No. 59999 Billbob
5th March 2018
Monday 10:32 pm
59999 spacer
Daily Sport had a weekly countdown in the 1990s with the fifteen year old 'glamour model' Lindsay Dawn Mckenzie until her sixteenth birthday when she could be seen topless in newsprint.
>> No. 60000 Anonymous
5th March 2018
Monday 10:35 pm
60000 spacer

I think 13 year old me missed out then, I only remember boobs. It's all I really needed at that age, mind.

I don't really think there was necessarily a problem, if the age of consent is 16 then it shouldn't be at all troubling to let 16 year olds record the sex they're allowed to have.

Will this be the silver lining of brexit? A return to the good old days?
>> No. 60004 Crabkiller
5th March 2018
Monday 11:28 pm
60004 spacer

> I don't really think there was necessarily a problem, if the age of consent is 16 then it shouldn't be at all troubling to let 16 year olds record the sex they're allowed to have.

this was basically the law in the UK until 2003, although afaik anything racier than topless was over 18s only. I don't actually know if that was for legal reasons (OPA deeming a 16yos fanny more obscene than an 18yos one or something) or simply because while builders across the country delighted in showing their mates their daughters baps in the morning, they would have been outraged if she'd had her snatch out too. Also googling for the answer to that kind of question would get you put on the very very naughty list indeed these days.
>> No. 60006 Anonymous
5th March 2018
Monday 11:45 pm
60006 spacer
> this was basically the law in the UK until 2003, although afaik anything racier than topless was over 18s only.

and by this I obviously meant within my own living memory of page 3 and wank mags - as mentioned there was at least one known example of a 16 year old doing full nudity in Mayfair (with her school uniform involved no less) in the 60s. I have never seen the photos in question so I can't really conjecture on how they would have been viewed vis-a-vis the OPA.

Honestly, lads, I really wish I had a better degree than an internet phd in pornography and pornographic history.
>> No. 60007 Auntiefucker
5th March 2018
Monday 11:46 pm
60007 spacer


Exactly. I understand it was more of an EU thing, but fundamentally the age of consent and the age to be in porn should not have a disparity.

I couldn't care less whether they lower the porn age or raise the age of consent, I'm too old for teenagers either way. But it does seem like an odd little moral quirk. I always found it odd that there were different consent ages for gay sex and hetrosexual anal when I was in school. I wonder if that contributed to an abundance of arse based pornography in the 90s. Everything back then seemed to be about the back passage.
>> No. 60008 Crabkiller
6th March 2018
Tuesday 12:07 am
60008 spacer

it all comes down to the way UK common law was more or less cobbled together as we went along. You could smoke, get married, have sex, and join the army at 16. You could drive at 17, and you could drink and vote at 18 (or 21 before 1970). You'll find similar messy situations all over europe where, for example, you could drink buy and wine at 16 but not "strong drink" until 18 in the netherlands.

Honestly I just live for a world where all sixteen year olds are presented with a twenty four hour jaunt in the royal harem, a henry of coke, a bottle of smirnoff and the keys to a shitty Fiat Uno by the queen on their birthday, and are expected to have used them all by the next day. It could be like a citizenship ceremony but with less flags and more prince phillip saying things like "stick it right up her polish arsehole old chap, the dirty cow loves it what" and "I remember when one had to colonize a country to get drugs as good as that".
>> No. 60009 Auntiefucker
6th March 2018
Tuesday 12:19 am
60009 spacer

I feel like the age requirement for purchasing pornography has become somewhat irrelevant at this point. Teenagers are just as capable of using the internet as anyone else, smart phones also mean they can do it basically anywhere, not like in my day when your mates mum goes out 30mins you all rushed into action and slowly manage to download half a jpg of tit on the 56k before she gets back. Any law restricting access to pornography is essentially unenforceable now. Not that I don't remember how much that pissed me off at that age that 16-18 year olds were basically treated as second class citizens.

It's now just one of those archaic laws that won't be taken off the books as there is no call for it, and the moral brigades (the right wing ones of old, not the new-fangled left wing ones) might kick up a hornets nest if anyone sensible tried.
>> No. 60013 Searchfag
6th March 2018
Tuesday 6:50 am
60013 spacer

The mail have used the russian spy poisoning as an excuse to publish loads of pictures of Anna Chapman. Here she is, "showing off her figure."
>> No. 60021 YubYub
7th March 2018
Wednesday 9:01 am
60021 spacer
What even happens to someone who 'gets caught' on a porn site when they're underage?

Do sites even do age gate checks anymore? I can't remember ever telling pornhub my age.
>> No. 60022 Samefag
7th March 2018
Wednesday 12:29 pm
60022 spacer

Nothing probably. But if an adult is exposing them to it they will be punished and possibly the child taken into care Think of it the same way as underage drinking in that respect.
>> No. 60023 Paedofag
7th March 2018
Wednesday 12:36 pm
60023 spacer
Fucking nanny state.
>> No. 60025 Ambulancelad
7th March 2018
Wednesday 5:59 pm
60025 spacer

Porn sites used to have age verifications, but they kept your IP logged as verified, so consequently no site has ever needed to do a check since 2004 or so.
>> No. 60029 Ambulancelad
7th March 2018
Wednesday 7:35 pm
60029 spacer

If that's actually how they do it that's hilarious, considering everyone has a dynamic-ish IP on Openreach these days.
>> No. 60031 Billbob
7th March 2018
Wednesday 9:16 pm
60031 spacer
>>60021 >>60022 >>60025

>> No. 60033 YubYub
7th March 2018
Wednesday 10:12 pm
60033 spacer
Well shit, guess it's finally time to buy a VPN after all
>> No. 60034 R4GE
7th March 2018
Wednesday 11:13 pm
60034 spacer

I'd actually forgotten about that.

I might just go back to torrents out of principle. I could VPN but fuck them.
>> No. 60057 YubYub
8th March 2018
Thursday 7:41 pm
60057 spacer
There are no decent search sites left though.
>> No. 60060 Crabkiller
8th March 2018
Thursday 9:07 pm
60060 spacer

Some student type with too much time on his hands will work out a way to adapt a freenet type p2p system purely designed for sharing torrent magnet links.
>> No. 60061 Anonymous
8th March 2018
Thursday 9:39 pm
60061 spacer

skytorrents.in is tolerable if you know what you're looking for.
>> No. 60062 Searchfag
8th March 2018
Thursday 9:50 pm
60062 spacer
Died about a week ago

Skytorrents 2017-2018 RIP in peace
>> No. 60063 R4GE
8th March 2018
Thursday 10:32 pm
60063 spacer

Actually if he's a really little fucking smart ass he'll do what the french pedo who made Freenet is probably kicking himself over not doing right now and implement the whole thing on some kind of blockchain. And then become a multi-millionaire after getting bought out by google or something.
>> No. 60064 Paedofag
8th March 2018
Thursday 10:45 pm
60064 spacer

>> No. 60092 Samefag
11th March 2018
Sunday 7:10 pm
60092 spacer


>> No. 60097 Moralfag
11th March 2018
Sunday 8:15 pm
60097 spacer

Fucking hell, sorry lad. I've never had that before.

I'll just go ahead and delete my post
>> No. 60099 Searchfag
11th March 2018
Sunday 9:17 pm
60099 spacer
When you're on the darker side of the web, assume that any warning for an unnamed threat is a false positive.
>> No. 60100 R4GE
11th March 2018
Sunday 9:25 pm
60100 spacer

Probably, right? It's definitely a real, working site.

It didn't install any rootkits on my laptop yet. I checked and everything.
>> No. 60103 Billbob
11th March 2018
Sunday 9:52 pm
60103 spacer
A big problem tends not to be the sites themselves, but rather the dodgy advertisers they use.
>> No. 60105 Samefag
11th March 2018
Sunday 10:47 pm
60105 spacer
That's how most of them end up shitlisted. Even when it's a transient thing, the site owners don't bother getting it reviewed and the vendors rather prefer not to delist them. The latter is why even vendors who accept anonymous samples keep flagging up keygens as trojans. The ones that actually contain trojans will be flagged up as a named threat, whereas if it's detected as something like "Trojan/Generic.405976987432" it's probably fine.
>> No. 60119 YubYub
12th March 2018
Monday 9:54 pm
60119 spacer

"Infected with HTML:Script-inf"

Meta-meta-meta /IQ/
>> No. 60123 R4GE
13th March 2018
Tuesday 11:26 am
60123 spacer

more like /Darkangels/ am I right? If I am getting that hidden board name right.
>> No. 60124 YubYub
13th March 2018
Tuesday 11:51 am
60124 spacer

I think it got deleted. Terrible shame.
>> No. 60125 Ambulancelad
13th March 2018
Tuesday 7:23 pm
60125 spacer

I looked for it a couple of months or maybe a year ago; it's been gone for a while. Last time I tried to run a simple /<random word>/ scan on britfa looking for the secret boards I got a server at work IP range banned. Which was nice. At some point I might still have a go at trying to remotely index the archive .... there are some absolute classic threads in there. I'm guessing the original ambulance lad thread is, for example, ( hint, hint mod, mod, take the hint and post the link).
>> No. 60126 YubYub
13th March 2018
Tuesday 7:38 pm
60126 spacer

I'd definitely love to see some archived threads. AFAIK though the mods don't have a way to browse this archive either.
>> No. 60130 YubYub
13th March 2018
Tuesday 8:27 pm
60130 spacer

You can find a few via google, just a few mind, and some that were there before no longer are. This means that at some point a mod, or are purpz himself, has pasted an /arch/ url into a post they made and those links got spidered by google ..... so basically some fucker has access to them.

Indexing them remotely would be an absolute doddle but would probably end up with pm may's storm troopers kicking my shed door down at 5am demanding to see my tcp pack license. or something.
>> No. 60132 R4GE
13th March 2018
Tuesday 9:25 pm
60132 spacer

It's definitely just whoever has actual access to the server, so purps and the other one.

They're probably hiding something. Trust no one.

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]

Delete Post []