This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Internet Filtering: Australia heads further towards totalitarianism

Jump to new
Julia said:
Prawn, I imagine the government would be very careful to ensure that any so called Bill of Rights did not mess up their capacity to interfere with your life if they felt the faintest interest in so doing.

Perhaps I'm just sadly lacking in trust.
Click to expand...

You have every right not to trust the Government Julia. Just look at this latest example.

"Fatal flaws in website censorship plan, says report

TRIALS of mandatory internet censorship will begin within days despite a secret high-level report to the Rudd Government that found the technology simply does not work, will significantly slow internet speeds and will block access to legitimate websites.

The report, commissioned by the Howard government and prepared by the Internet Industry Association, concluded that schemes to block inappropriate content such as child pornography are fundamentally flawed."

"The report, based on comprehensive interviews with many parties with a stake in the internet, was written by several independent technical experts including a University of Sydney associate professor, Bjorn Landfeldt. It was handed to the Government in February but has been kept secret."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technolo...lan-says-report/2008/12/22/1229794328860.html

So they have been sitting on this report since February and in the mean time are pushing ahead with trials. It makes me angry that they know its not workable yet the govt insist on pushing ahead with trials and wasting millions of dollars. Just what we don't need to be doing, wasting money when there are thousands of other worthwhile projects. Why doesn't the govt listen to their own reports and the wishes of the people instead of panding to the vocal interest groups.
 

I'm not at all surprised. I wonder if they are pushing on because of some sort of deal with Senator Fielding? They need his vote in the Senate for most of their legislation.
 
I finally got a response from Conroy, it was in the post and 4 of the same multiple paged letters came. Im guessing it was for the 2 emails and 2 blog posts i made.

Talk about inefficiences, i thought the gov was trying to cut back on spending and carbon footprint...
 
Prawn, it seems to have been a standard response sent out to everyone who had contacted his office. I received it about a week ago.
As you suggest, that's a helluva lot of paper and postage, not to mention work time for his staff. Good to see our tax dollars at work, huh!
 
I started to read it and by the 2nd paragraph it was virtually saying "think of the children" so i lost all faith in the rest of the letter.

Any totalitarian regime that uses children as their excuse to implement things isn't worth my time. Once i finish my degree i can move overseas...
 

Wasn't it Goebbels from the Nazies that said if you use the protection of children as an excuse to implement tough new laws you won't get any resistance from the population.

His responses are typical, pretending to address your concerns when if fact he doesn't give a toss what you or I think. I hope he gets punished in the next election and gets thrown out of office. He will probably than just return to his safe Union/labor party job.
 
Julia said:
I'm not at all surprised. I wonder if they are pushing on because of some sort of deal with Senator Fielding? They need his vote in the Senate for most of their legislation.
Click to expand...

You probably hit the nail on the head there Julia, typical government back handing going on.
 

This filtering thingy will almost certainly be forced upon us all. Because the Gummint knows best. So there.

Remember Ruddock? Reith? :dunno: Conroy will be the same a few years down the track - another "faceless" party hack that will retire in luxury on a mountain of moolah after stuffing some part of our lives up. These men in black all have one thing in common - NO REAL ACCOUNTABILITY (I'm sure we can all think of a few who should really be doing time after being stripped of their taxpayer sponsored wealth).

Accountability? Most politicians hide like cowards behind the fake altruism "but voters hold us accountable". Total BS! Nothing they ever do ever ends in anything worse than a massive, taxpayer funded golden "retirement" handshake after a virtual guaranteed 4 years minimum "full time" employment. Gee, that must REALLY, REALLY hurt!

Their laugh is on us.
 
Well, perhaps we will in fact have the last laugh.

Senator Conroy has announced that the filtering trial which was to have started by now has been delayed, at least until mid January.


Maybe the article by the SMH, on top of the flood of objections Mr Conroy has received, might eventually make this stupid idea go away.
 

Technically it is feasible, with negligible impact on the speed. We don't have high speed to begin with. Secondly this has been implemented on a large scale in China, you do the math.

The problem is not technical as some people seem to think. One solution as proposed by the said senator is to block all the P2P or peering traffic. You blcok peer-to-peer like Kaza or bittorrent, you reduce the piracy and illegal p*rn issue. Then you block the website which is also a trivial matter.

Internet is not as distributed as it once was. Most of it is now centralized, with controlled management. The next evolution of internet will be more controlled, and marketing wise. It is good for business and that is what ISPs care about.

Don't underestimate the technology, if you want it to fail use political power.
 
Sun Herald article today -

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24848641-5005961,00.html

LOL.

I wonder what rating ASF might attract? "AO" due to the adult nature of the content? :arsch:

Or "PG" for the sometimes childish humour? :bananasmi


aj
 

Further musings on this Big Brother weirdness....

What happens to the official "rating" of a PG rated site if it gets hacked with pr0n?

Does it then get banned?

Imagine if Commsec got pr0n-hacked and was auto kicked from the Gummint's "acceptable websites" list?

*sigh*

This must be the silly season. I bet Conroy takes this idea up anyway.

:arsch:
 
Julia said:
I'm not at all surprised. I wonder if they are pushing on because of some sort of deal with Senator Fielding? They need his vote in the Senate for most of their legislation.
Click to expand...


Hi Julia, you took the words out of my 'cybermouth'. Could well be shades of Harridine, when they used to throw him similar bones for support in other areas.
Prawn, it's certainly predictable. I expect more rhetoric along the lines of "if you disapprove of internet filtering, you must approve of child pornography" and similar tripe. It won't effectively block the nasties, it will block kosher sites (someone mentioned LJHooker being blocked, lol) and will slow internet speeds.
Adult pr0n and goodness knows what else will no doubt be next on the "inapprpriate" list . Really and truly, if the highlight of some poor b*ggar's day is watching wiggly bits and the bumping of uglies, good luck to them. I doubt it would spell the end of civilisation, but the internet malfunctioning in the middle of a trade could well spell the end of someone's hard earned or perhaps interfer with making some more. Daft, really, really, daft!
 

Oh, but what about all that awful ancient Greek, Roman & Egyptian pr0n that was painted in murals and on "artistic" objects and even crafted into public statues and displays that *gasp* even children could see? Surely that development led to their inevitable downfalls? *tut, tut*

We must applaud Messrs (Messiah's?) Conroy and Rudd for wanting to save us from our durty, durty selves (yuk).

 
Hahaha! We all knew this one was coming.... where will the madness stop?

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24858770-5005961,00.html

LOL.

So, the US is full of uptight wowsers who gag at the durty, filthy, obscene sight of a breastfeeding mum?

It figures..... :silly:

I wonder what our Messiah's Conroy & Rudd think about this? Supportive of the ban? Maybe all male bared chests should be banned next - all those bare footballer's torsos being flashed around in the media can't be good for the morals of young girls?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Australia secretly censors Wikileaks Internet censorship list
Replies
2
Views
5K
doctorj
A
Proposed New Website Blocking Laws
Replies
4
Views
4K
Kimosabi
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...