Pervert wanks in front of child while on Internet

mdoneil writes "Some disgusting scumbag masturbated while using a public Internet computer at the Portsmouth, New Hampshire library. This brazen act of public lewdness was done in the presence of a child who reported that she was afraid and did not know what to do.
It is obvious that the child can't trust the adult employees of the library to protect her. The child witnessed the perverted public sex act on Monday but was too scared to report it to anyone until the next day when her parents assisted her in contacting the police.
The library director Mary Ann List has said that the library has unfiltered access and that children using the library after school are exposed to (apparently she meant that literally) "a cross-section of the city's population." It seems that the director is OK with perverts and sex offenders in the public's library. Didn't the librarians see the material the man was looking at on the Internet, didn't they see his penis, didn't they see him masturbating?
Free access apparently means to your sex organs as well to some librarians."


If librarians are going to be forced to monitor internet access in some way, shape, or form then there needs to be some better way of doing it. Our library has state mandated filtering, but there's easy ways around filters whether you use proxies or a more simpler method of going outside the country for your porn. Filters have a real knack for missing any porn site not rendered in a standard ASCII "ABCD" alphabet. So Israeli, Japanese, or Korean sites, for instance, usually make it through.So in the end, even with filters, we get complaints about people viewing porn. And with over 50 some odd computers, it's hard to staff enough people to keep an eye on things without being too intrusive or obvious.The question is, is there a programme out there that does for computers what base stations do for security cameras? In other words, is there something out there I could use to view multiple computers at the same time on the same monitor like a security guard does when he/she monitors several cameras at the same time on the same monitor? It'd be kind of nifty because, if you're viewing twelve or so monitors at the same time, you're really not going to be able to read what patrons are viewing.That way, you maintain some privacy for them.But when you've got three rows of four monitors on your screen and you see Hotmail, text, Gmail, YouTube, word processor, big tits, flash game, MySpace -- wait a sec...There's a reason they do that with secguards, so they can have one guy or gal easily watching several things at once. So why have two or more library staff wandering around checking out the monitors to make sure everybody complies with the TOS when you could have a single person behind a desk and totally out of the way do the same thing?So is there software that does this?

Having worked in a public library with active filters, I can add:"Masturbation in public libraries is rather common if the libraries filter the Internet."

Safe,Is 0.00013% of patrons common? By that definition I was "commonly" having sex in high school.

But not as frequently.

It's all this "the porn made him do it". If he didn't look at some porn in the library something else was going to set him off. I guarantee that if there were the best filters in the world on these computers this would still happen.

What attracts the perverts? I did blame him, heck I called him a pervert, a scumbag, and disgusting. How much more do I have to do before you notice I blame him for his actions.

That's almost exactly what I had in mind! I haven't had a chance to search for it yet but you did me a favour by finding this!You win a free internet!

What about this? No experience or affiliation with it - was just the first results on "computer lab" monitoring multiple screens instructor - search: are other products also - but not having any luck turning them up - there was a company that was marketing pre-packaged laptop labs to libraries and part of the solution was a monitoring product, but my searches are not turning up anything useful.

I'm not sure why mondeil and Safelibraries are so willing to given cover to the offender by blaming the library. Shouldn't you blame the pervert? Why won't you assign the blame where it belongs?

We use SynchronEyes in our school library. I can monitor every computer (over 50) that is logged on. I can capture screenshots to prove students are breaking rules. I can log them off if they are misbehaving or forgot to log themselves off. I can even take control of their computers and operate them remotely. However, the county has strict rules about usage of the computer network (educational purposes only, absolutely no games, no proxies, no email). I don't think patrons in a public library would be inclined to let you look over their shoulders or have the same level of control over their activities. You would need strict guidelines on what was appropriate for staff to do with the software.

Masturbation in public libraries is rather common if the libraries do not filter the Internet. Some news reports even have the perp in action.

There is software that exists that allows you to have several of the patron computers up on your monitor at one time. I used it about 7 years ago when I worked in a school media center. We used it for the sole purpose of seeing who was looking at porn. I'm sorry I can't remember the name of the software, but I know it exists!

Back in November 2006 it was reported:At Library Connection's Newington Connecticut affiliate "Police arrested a man who was allegedly caught masturbating". []It does not appear other details of the event were ever published.  Politically active Library Connection was perhaps able to squelch the publicity.

There is no such thing as a computer program that can make subjective judgments about the data it processes.Exactly. So the reality is that the only way a library can truly cover its ass is to have some kind of living, breathing person looking in on what the patrons are doing online.Since most of us, including me, are into the whole "patron privacy" thing; if we monitored through a programme displaying multiple patron monitors on a single monitor, we could pretty easily see if they're breaking the rules without getting too intrusive. I don't care if patron John D. is writing a letter to his mistress, all I need to see is that he's using Gmail and that's okay. Patron Buffel O. is watching something on YouTube. Fine, they don't really have tonnes of porn on that particular site.Oh but look, I'm not sure exactly what patron Alan G. is looking at, but apparently it involves nudity and acrobatics. Now that might be a problem.If I could code worth a damn, I'd programme something like this and sell it to libraries for some cheap-ass price. Even libraries who don't filter would probably be interested in something like that.

There is no such thing as a computer program that can make subjective judgments about the data it processes.The sooner some of us stop pretending otherwise, the better off all of us will be.By the way, here's something else Bill O'Reilly didn't tell you. The "child" is a 16-year-old. Probably more disgusted and embarrassed than traumatized by this, I'll bet. Too bad she wasn't like some of the girls that age I knew back in the day. Had she been, that clown likely woudn't have gone home in one piece.Nonetheless, when they find him-lift jail up, slide scumbag under jail, set jail back down. Problem solved.

You know what they say: "ASCII a silly question, get a silly ANSI"

Long live Unicode!

Sad, isn't it? I even know of a library where they keep around hazmat kits to clean up the juice afterwards instead of taking action to stem the flow.