Yes, NCMEC maintains a database of hash codes for verified child porn. These are virtually unique like fingerprints. In these cases the photos don’t even need to be viewed. The files are run through the computer, a hash value is calculated for each and compared to the database. That is a useful function provided by NCMEC which really does minimize viewing.

No need to get your dander up, Bob. I suspect FAC was just making that statement to be cautious as to accusatory information it can’t verify. I personally would be very interested in seeing the proof. It would be valuable ammunition to use in arguments against NCMEC. Perhaps FAC could arrange to post it in the resources section?

Veritas.

Thank you for adding NCMEC.

Yes, it is all about prevention, but we live in a society that prefers incarceration over prevention.

I sent NCMEC the research on the 95% of future offenses that will be committed by people NOT on the registry.

(NOTICE: UNVERIFIED CLAIM)
Also someone wrote in regarding the “unverified claim” label.

In the past, I recall FAC would reply to and question posts that appeared to provide poor advice on legal compliance (such as, the state requires you to do x, or, you’re not required to do y), or sometimes posts that made a false claim about FAC. I think that might have been done by the Legal Committee. Flagging an “unverified claim” about NCMEC is a little broader, I recognize, and I’m confident it’s not FAC’s intention to anger any members. Moderating a forum such as this, and keeping it safe, I imagine is tough for the volunteers that do so. It’s complicated because we here (myself included) make a number of unverified claims that are nevertheless harmless, so it’s a judgement call. As to the characterization of NCMEC “keeping files on people,” I’m inclined to believe there’s something to that— like maybe what it is, is that NCMEC tracks IP addresses from which known images are downloaded. Whether the claim about them keeping personal files is 100% or not I have no idea, but the observation strikes me as harmless, and I will defer to the individual’s personal experience with NCMEC, which is well worth sharing. In the meantime, I’ll try not to take it personally next time FAC flags my post with, “unverified claim!”

This is educational for me as I lack experience in media outreach.

It happens that NCMEC does both bad things and good things. For example, they maintain some sort of database that catalogues and codes a huge volume of known child exploitation pictures, helping to minimize the number of times those pictures need to be viewed during an investigation and tracking whether the victims have been identified yet. I think.

But at the same time, NCMEC regularly perpetuates harmful nonsense regarding who is doing the offending and their profile. This nonsense, I assume, helps NCMEC attract grant money, so it is the sources of that grant money, and THEIR respective constituents, that need to be educated before NCMEC will correct themselves and knock it off, and maybe this effort can be a part of that. A lot of the battle seems to be, getting the right message to the right place.

I have to agree with Derek L. instead and say what NCMEC is really “all about” is cash. As he said, they are the National Center for Missing and Exploited Cash.

Why do you think NCMEC are interested in protecting children? There aren’t any informed people who are interested in protecting children who support the Oppression Lists and NCMEC does. So they are not informed?

No, I think they are informed and they are immoral. They are interested in money.

Big government continues to dump money on NCMEC. Let’s do everything that we can to stop that. Never vote for any politician that supports NCMEC. People must stop voting for bigger government.

When did FAC start putting up notices stating “Unverified Claims”? Do you want to see the proof of what I posted? I can arrange that! Notice on my contributions ceasing until this matter is cleared up.