Nice post. I'd never heard of TOTSE or the regulars' exploits.

Man i fuckin loved totse, good times and good people. Yea we talked about bombs and overthrowing the government and shit but I never felt like there were truly bad people on there. Bad ideas, night ops, highlighters in people's asses, lol so many memories of that site. Also the guy with all the spiders was cool. It was a real shame when it shut down and nothing has really replaced it for me.

I'm gunna need to know more about the spiders...

It was called SHARP's spider megathread, this guy had a whole room in his house with all different kinds of tarantulas and he would catalog them and just generally knew a fuck ton about spiders. He knew all the latin names. He would post pictures of them all and pictures of his spider room with just the whole wall filled with terrariums.

He actually convinced me to get a rose hair tarantula that I had for 3 or 4 years.

Dope! I love spiders.

totse was the first internet forum I ever joined, as a teenager. Tons of fun on that site, and lots of trolls and extremists of all stripes. Sad to see it go

Also that Bill Keller stuff was hilarious.

[deleted]

Too busy not mowing your daddies lawn.

Somehow, this comes to mind:

http://www.oldtimeradiodownloads.com/sci-fi/x-minus-one/a-logic-named-joe-1955-12-28

It's a prescient vision of the internet from 1955

I always loved the article on how to make a nook because it made me laugh so hard. Picturing someone waving a bucket around over their head, attempting to simulate a centrifuge to separate the U-238 from the U-235 just sounded ridiculous.

...good shit

Lol i never saw that one.

I loved &totse, I spent as much time on it as I do on Reddit. Living in the arse end of no where in England it gave me a cultural education. Pointing me to Vonnegut and Thompson and got me to jump on my bike to go to the library to see what PKD books they had (Man in the High Castle).

It was a mystery as to why it shut down, especially after the servers were updated and the big hooha about them.

There's so much to be said about totse, from the amazing text files to the mayhem of spurious generalities. I stopped visiting as much when there was that karma/points thing. I got frustrated that I couldn't seem to make an impact.

This is the true story -> http://www.totse2.com

...Jeff Hunter... Is that you?

Damn -- I always find out about cool shit way too late.

Damn, wish I knew of TOTSE before it shut down..

Is it dangerous to be on TOTSE? Will the FBI start keepin an eye on me?

No more dangerous than being on here, or Facebook.

Well it seems like if you went on that site the gov't would think you're trying to take an actual, serious approach.

"Jeff Hunter"(not his real name, which was never revealed..) Dfg or whatever your name is (since you feel you were the first to come up with "totsean" as plural .. Jeff Hunter is in fact his real name. He had a PO Box in walnut creek california, he went to "2400 bps" meet-ups (often held at Cafe Italiano) his wife at the time was Dr Alice Hunter (since remarried) his best friend was JC Stanton, he ran a ethernet company up the street from the Walnut Creek BART station, and ran a computer repair shop on Main street in Walnut creek, Lived in Lafeyette california, born in San Jose California, Worked for companies like Seagate and CEO for Manpower Temp Agency and finally worked for EA games and Bridgewater Associates Hedgefund. he can be seen on youtube. He left Bridgewater around the time that John Comey left Bridgewater. and Wikipedia just changed out the page making sure that Contra Costa Times connection was removed from 1993, right at the time Contra Costa was closed down. Also Harper Reed who claims he and his friend blew up some hay stack, was hired to run Obama's 2012 campaign.; but that last part can't be 100 percent confirmed.. could be a joke. but if he really did, then it's really documented. So you lived in Pakistan? are you the guy who wrote one of the first computer virus and ran "Down the Well" or whatever that dialup board was called? people like Julian Assange I believe were apart of the late 80s and early 90s schemes. stuff like black boxes and blue boxes and brown boxes and all kinds of boxes. whistle into it. Cute story though. We had fun talking with this "Lawyer" today. such a kid.. he couldn't keep his nervousness controlled.. seemed to lack the ability

You know, I'm not sure that a site with "hacking, drugs, bomb making, scamming, phishing, anti-gov't ideologies" is a good thing. And I am really not surprised it got taken down. I will be downvoted for saying that I think this is a good thing.

Free speech.

Yeah man but I don't see how you can argue that scamming and phishing aren't a bad thing. Bomb scares too.

There is no such thing as bad information or knowledge. There are bad ways to use information and knowledge, but in the same way as guns are not dangerous by themselves, neither is any knowledge. Simply understanding how to build or how a bomb works is not dangerous. Building one and using it to hurt people is.

</two cents>

Well given that plans to make bombs only enables people to make bombs and detonate them, and serves for not much else. It is much better to stop that information getting into the wrong hands. It can only do bad so really banning it makes perfect sense.

That's silly. That's like saying that knowing that mixing ammonia and bleach is incredibly dangerous. It can only do bad, so we shouldn't know it? Or like knowing if I put dry ice and water in a bottle and put a lid on it, it will explode. Saying that any given piece of knowledge should be censored or have access to it limited is against all academic theory and also very much the basis of how to restrict freedom of speech.

If you can start taking specific pieces of information and deem them dangerous, how long until criticizing authority is considered dangerous and therefore not allowed? Yeah, I get it, I don't want my local maniacs building bombs or making cyanide, but I'd rather take the chance than live in fear of knowledge, you know?

Yes but in this case it can ONLY do bad. There is no upside. Also you seem to be employing the "slippery slope" arguement, which is also silly. We could carry your logic and say that there shouldn't be laws outright, as each one is a basis to restrict our freedom. How long until we can no longer do X, Y and Z? I don't think the information should be banned outright, just that this forum was spreading it in a bad way. From OP's post I gather they created a few bomb scares, really disbanding this community by banning the website is pretty good. Ideally the resources to make this should be banned.

I don't think the information should be banned outright

really disbanding this community by banning the website is pretty good. Ideally the resources to make this should be banned.

Yeah... let's ban everything that you're afraid of.

thoughtcrime, yay.

I think is a good thing? Do you want a society constantly menaced with bomb threats?

So you want to quell the seeking of information with threats of violence and kidnapping?

Hmm I thought you were against violence... guess I was wrong.

A) Who said anything about threats of violence and kidnapping? Or did you just make that up?

B) It's different because TOTSE would be an on-going threat, but making threats(If they did) would be a one time thing to stop TOTSE. So you have to ask yourself do you want to make one threat to TOTSE or do you want to let TOTSE make many threats to the world?

C) Why does everyone brand TOTSE as just a website with information, when clearly it was a place for this community to do illegal things such as scamming and bomb threats(And I don't see how you can argue that scamming and bomb threats should be legal)?

A) Who said anything about threats of violence and kidnapping? Or did you just make that up?

No, actually you brought it up. By banning something, it implies that something will happen to you if you still try to access it. The act of "banning" something is completely meaningless unless you are threatened with arrest or a fine (or even death in some cases). Therefore, by being a proponent of banning something, you are essentially saying "If you want to look up this information, we will come to your house, take you away from your family, and put you in a cage for it."

B) It's different because TOTSE would be an on-going threat, but making threats(If they did) would be a one time thing to stop TOTSE

It wouldn't be just one time. It would be a constant, always standing, threat. Like say, seat belts. In most states there is a constant threat from the government that if you don't wear your seat belt, then they will steal a certain amount of money from you. When that statue was introduced, it wasn't a one-time threat. It was an ongoing, ever-present threat.

You can't ban information for one group, at one specific point in time.

C) Why does everyone brand TOTSE as just a website with information

I had never even heard of totse before this post. My point is that banning information is silly. Knowing how to do things should never be illegal. Actually taking action and doing those things is vastly different. You can bet that not every single person that went on that site was involved in the bomb threats and vandalism. Should everybody who ever visited the site get in trouble, or only the people that actually went out and turned their thoughts and emotions into actions?

"If you want to look up this information, we will come to your house, take you away from your family, and put you in a cage for it."

Definetly implied this, you are definetly not taking this to the extreme.

You can't ban information for one group, at one specific point in time.

They just did punk.

Should everybody who ever visited the site get in trouble, or only the people that actually went out and turned their thoughts and emotions into actions?

That is how most laws work. I'm sure some people would be able to drive while drunk but they aren't allowed to do it because of some people who have killed others while drink-driving. You can't honestly expect different laws for different people.

"If you want to look up this information, we will come to your house, take you away from your family, and put you in a cage for it."

Definetly implied this, you are definetly not taking this to the extreme.

Well, what would you expect to happen when you ban something? If you don't expect somebody to be fined or arrested, then what are you trying to accomplish by banning the information? There is no in-between. Let's be honest here. This is an important point. Laws are just words on paper until there are guns in your face.

You can't ban information for one group, at one specific point in time.

They just did punk.

No, they didn't. All of that information is still freely available on the web.

Should everybody who ever visited the site get in trouble, or only the people that actually went out and turned their thoughts and emotions into actions?

That is how most laws work. I'm sure some people would be able to drive while drunk but they aren't allowed to do it because of some people who have killed others while drink-driving. You can't honestly expect different laws for different people.

You are all over the pace here, man. Is it illegal to google "how to drive drunk"? No. Is it illegal to drive drunk? Yes. I don't know where you pulled in this "different laws for different people" stuff. This isn't that difficult of a concept.

It's different from simply googling stuff. This website was a community and a place to organise illegal activities. This website wasn't just information it was a community.

Bomb threats are a social problem, not a problem of free information.

It is the suppression of free thought and information in a society that leads to people wanting to change things in the only way they have left, with violence.

You think that teaching people leads to bad things happening, when ignorance is the true villain here. Ignorance of how the world actually works leads people to thinking they know what is best for everyone individually when it would be detrimental to mankind as a whole.

Thinking that knowing how to make a bomb makes someone a potential bomber is dangerous and ignorant. Most people who blow things up with malicious intent are doing it without much planning or forethought and will go for the simplest possible method. Re-use of un-exploded military ordinance (ISIS etc) or commercial blasting equipment (IRA etc), liquid gas bottles with an incendiary (Al Qaeda in UK), black/smokeless powder from shotgun shells (Graham Backhouse). These methods take next to no thought and can be put together by anyone with intent to harm people, no instructions needed.

Conversely there are chemistry books available at public libraries that detail how to make Nitroglycerin, Trinitrotoluene, even C-4 / RDX or any Nitroamine based explosive, and they sit there gathering dust. Anyone intelligent enough to want to know how and be able to make them is smart enough to know blowing people up is not an answer to anything.

Education, not Prohibition.

ITT: Chemistry has no upside.

Yeah man that's EXACTLY what I said.

On numerous occasions, totse, grouped up, in real life, and on the internet, to cause mayhem. They put neon signs on Bridges in the USA, causing a nationwide bomb scare. They repetitively called people, harassing them(Bill Keller's Liveprayer is example). They would go around in groups, spraypainting totse graffiti all over(not to mention hacking government traffic signs, and displaying pro totse messages). Combine this with the fact that there was recipes for all kinds of explosives, and how to properly lead an uprising against the US gov't(or how to hack into its telecomm systems), you can see why the FBI, and Australian Gov't were seriously threatened by Totse.

So they're basically a bunch of assholes doing stuff that can actually endanger people? Jesus Christ, folks - wanting limited sensible government by/of/for the people and less corruption doesn't mean taking all the stop signs down arming yourself to the teeth and being paranoid. These are the last idiots I would want in charge.

Let's upvote this stupid shit to the top of the sub, though.

Do you really think the establishment will let themselves lose control through the ballot?

Isn't that exactly what happened with Trump* in the republican primaries? I thought Jeb was going to lose his shit in his last few debates and speeches.

These actions do more than threaten government, they threaten you and me.

^* Con-artist and liar

What makes you think they don't have him under their finger? After all, he was a Democrat not too long ago.

I already said that. The Bush family is the embodiment of establishment, and the republican party spent the last two months being pissed off that they couldn't figure out how to combat him.

It turns out the republicans simply didn't realize that they had a large demographic of nascar/reality tv watching types in their constituency that go for guys like him.

You think the establishment lost control to Trump, a billionaire and well known establishment player?

Totse was a lot more than just a few idiots practicing civil disobedience in public. Reddit has plenty of like examples, should we bury it to irrelevance because of the acts of a few?

Civil disobedience means groups of people making a nuisance of themselves for the purpose of getting arrested bogging down the system.

This is vandalism and screwing around with public safety.

No charge for this lesson.

Straight concern trolling, aren't you? Sounds like a great community if I can avoid statist fucks like yourself.

No, just educating people. That last guy didn't know what civil disobedience meant so I clarified it for him.

"I dont always 'educate' people, but when I do, I use completely made up definitions to suit my argument."

It's a much more general term than you'd like to pretend, and it was used here in a general context.

That there are trolls like you on reddit is a free lesson everyday, but thanks anyway.

I can only explain it to you why what they're doing is not civil disobedience. I can't understand it for you.

Maybe if I arranged to have thousands of people call your phone repeatedly then the government would really think I'm sticking it to them.

Your explanation is wrong, but thats ok. Its the internet, youre allowed to be wrong here.

Never mind that you completely evaded the meat of the argument to bicker about definitions.

The willfully indoctrinated both fascinate and scare the fuck out of me.

I'm not sure what everyone's definition of "statist" is, and I'm no more willfully indoctrinated than you are willfully belligerent against the windmills you see as adversaries (see also: Second option bias).

I'm just a guy who thinks living in a society is better than living in the "libertarian workers paradise".

Funny. You must be replying to some of those imaginary windmills of yours then, because nowhere in my post did I even slightly hint anything against society or in favor of libertarian anything.

Let's upvote this stupid shit to the top of the sub, though.

Too busy not mowing your daddies lawn.

A) Who said anything about threats of violence and kidnapping? Or did you just make that up?

B) It's different because TOTSE would be an on-going threat, but making threats(If they did) would be a one time thing to stop TOTSE. So you have to ask yourself do you want to make one threat to TOTSE or do you want to let TOTSE make many threats to the world?

C) Why does everyone brand TOTSE as just a website with information, when clearly it was a place for this community to do illegal things such as scamming and bomb threats(And I don't see how you can argue that scamming and bomb threats should be legal)?