The only hope we have of preventing revenge porn from being uploaded is to make the punishment so severe it hinders people from being tempted to do it in the first place. Of course, that still wouldn't stop people from seeking it out, because ...

What's truly amazing is that, despite no advertising being done on Ternovskiy's part, Chatroulette nearly exploded overnight, going from 500 daily visitors to 50,000 in just a month. We were inexplicably drawn to its innovativeness, then jumped at the chance to turn it into voyeur porn. Even more disturbing is that the dick-exposers of Chatroulette apparently aren't under some delusion that everyone loves a fat guy's tiny dong -- they actually enjoy knowing they are inflicting their salami swords on non-consenting eyes.

And if you think the trend of latching onto something and turning it into voyeur porn was a fluke with Chatroulette, prepare to be disappointed: It happened again. The PlayStation 4 has many exciting, new features associated with its built-in camera, one of them being the PlayStation Playroom, which had the intended use of recording gamers as they play while being watched by a small robot for some reason. Guess how people used it instead.

kotaku.comThey could at least have the decency to pass the poor robot a beer.

Naturally, it didn't take long until some asshat turned the Playroom into revenge porn, undressing his unconscious wife for anyone who happened to be watching their livestream to see. Of course, this news story took off like a wildfire, becoming an even bigger story than the Playroom itself. The outcry that followed brought even more attention to revenge porn, which brings us to ...

Of course you do, specifically because she tried to have her lawyers take those pictures down, causing the media and public to only want to view and circulate them more. Hell, we're doing it right now. Once someone tries to avert attention from something, a little thing called the Streisand effect comes into play -- trying to have something removed after the fact only draws more attention to it, especially if you're famous, and especially if it's on the Internet.

With revenge porn, the problem becomes even worse, because the sites are actually going out of their way to create a Streisand effect and cash in on it. For instance, the creator of revenge porn website Ugotposted.com, Kevin Bollaert, didn't just post nude images and videos of women sent in by ex-lovers, he also included their real names, Facebook pages, and sometimes even their home addresses. When the women tried to have their images removed, he would oblige, but only after charging them a fee of $350, because that's the type of stand-up guy he is.

ABC 10 NewsNow everyone knows his address, too.

Another webmaster who is intimately familiar with this effect is Craig Brittain, creator of the revenge porn site IsAnybodyDown.com, which also extorted women. After being arrested and exposed as an absolute jerk, Brittain felt like his privacy was being invaded and sent Google takedown notices for the sites that published images of his face. Like this one:

Colorado Springs Police DepartmentMan, the gritty Eddie Munster reboot sucked.

Unfortunately, the fact that both these guys have been charged with crimes provides little reparation or comfort to the victims who already had their lives ruined. Once the offending images or videos are online, the damage has been done, and deleting the sites doesn't mean they're gone forever -- as we all know, the Internet never forgets. Of course, this is assuming you even manage to get the asshole convicted in the first place ...

So we know the only way to catch revenge porn criminals is after they've already posted it, but hey, at least we can catch them, right? Unfortunately, navigating the law when it comes to revenge porn is about as simple as ... well, navigating the law under any other circumstances.

Simply put, things get murky as fuck. While Reddit now claims they will take down any instance of revenge porn that is posted on their site, the rules as to what can be taken down and under what circumstances are unclear. What lengths will the victim of the revenge porn have to go to prove it was uploaded without consent and have it removed? Will they have to provide boob shots to prove it's even them?

moodboard/moodboard/Getty Images"Does she have any weird birthmarks down there? That would help a lot."

And while in 2013 California took a small step by enacting a law that deems any distribution of nude videos or pictures with the intent of causing harm as disorderly conduct, First Amendment advocates were worried it would hinder their right to bear lawful nudes. Other people wonder: What is the exact definition of revenge porn? Would a teenager who tweeted a picture of Kate's Uptons from the nude celebrity hack count? People fear that having the law too broad, without precise lines, will lead to over-criminalization and in turn no one will end up being prosecuted because then nearly everyone would be guilty. And then we might as well legalize The Purge.

While California is the first state to take a stand against revenge porn, we shouldn't get too excited about other states following suit or any federal laws coming into play. For example, the Supreme Court struck down a law banning crush porn, citing free speech. If you've never heard of "crush porn," consider yourself a lucky bastard. Let's just say it involves women's high heels and very small, vulnerable animals.

Jupiterimages/Stockbyte/Getty ImagesThose shoes were white.

The law, which would have banned the trafficking of any videos that depicted the bloodshed and torture of animals, was deemed too "broad." Some people were afraid it would outlaw bullfighting or hunting videos, and what would the Internet be without those?