Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Dream » Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:36 am UTC

22/7 wrote:
Hawknc wrote:
22/7 wrote:Wow. When did this happen? When I was there, I didn't notice anything like that.

Just in the last couple of months, I think. Advertising and classification standards have never exactly been progressive here, but it just seems like they're getting worse.

Oh, and if you really want to know why you shouldn't visit Australia, I have two words for you: drop bears. Fuckin' scary creatures, those.
Too true. I have a friend who lives in Sydney who worked as a shooer for awhile and he always said that the drop bears were the worst.

You don't shoo drop bears. You give them a wide berth, and hope they wander off of their own accord.

And yeah, those censored signs appeared about six weeks ago, or that's when I noticed them. To be honest, I've always genuinely thought less of Australia for having what is literally spam on actual billboards. Are the people so dumb? Do the landowners have such low standards?
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby GhostWolfe » Sun Nov 16, 2008 7:10 am UTC

Dream wrote:To be honest, I've always genuinely thought less of Australia for having what is literally spam on actual billboards. Are the people so dumb? Do the landowners have such low standards?
That, and the treatment is expensive, the "doctor" consults you over the phone, and it probably doesn't even work.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Hawknc » Sun Nov 16, 2008 7:15 am UTC

I have no doubt about that, and I think it's an insult to the medical profession for the company to associate themselves with it. I'd be happy to see those billboards taken down permanently, but I'd like it done for the right reasons, not because a small minority takes offence to the S word.

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby psyck0 » Sun Nov 16, 2008 3:37 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:What a terrible reason not to visit a country. Fine, when you do visit, I'm not telling you where you can go to find essentially the best burger in all of Australia*.


*I am absolutely qualified to make judgments like these.


How is that a bad reason? I am making a conscious decision not to support a government I dislike by not giving them my tourist money. The capitalists in the room should applaud my good consumer behaviour.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby 22/7 » Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:14 pm UTC

That has little to nothing to do with capitalism. The government is not a business vying for your money as a tourist, and you're not punishing them directly for their perceived transgressions, you're punishing all the people who live under that government and their local economies, businesses, etc., which only very slowly and very slightly trickles up to government coffers. So basically, you're slapping an Australian and claiming to have told Australia what you think.

Also, if that reason is indeed good enough to decide to not visit a country, what country holds up to your idyllic standards? Does a country have to be the very pinnacle of civilization before you're willing to grace it with your tourism dollars? A shining beacon of civil rights, fair trade, etc?
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Amarantha
Posts: 1638
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Amarantha » Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:53 pm UTC

Yay for the Greens and the Sex Party.

Also, British place names FTW :mrgreen:

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby psyck0 » Wed Nov 26, 2008 10:31 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:That has little to nothing to do with capitalism. The government is not a business vying for your money as a tourist, and you're not punishing them directly for their perceived transgressions, you're punishing all the people who live under that government and their local economies, businesses, etc., which only very slowly and very slightly trickles up to government coffers. So basically, you're slapping an Australian and claiming to have told Australia what you think.

Also, if that reason is indeed good enough to decide to not visit a country, what country holds up to your idyllic standards? Does a country have to be the very pinnacle of civilization before you're willing to grace it with your tourism dollars? A shining beacon of civil rights, fair trade, etc?


Well, some of my tourism dollars go directly towards the government in the forms of duties and taxes. By your logic, anyway, the boycott of South Africa shouldn't have been done either (the example is more extreme there, but the same basic thing: protesting a (dickwad, censoring vs racist) government by not giving the country any money.

As for my "idyllic standards", they include not supporting the Iraq war and not being a bastion of bigotry. Most first-world countries fit these standards.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Dream » Wed Nov 26, 2008 10:59 pm UTC

Amarantha wrote:Yay for the Greens and the Sex Party.

Also, British place names FTW :mrgreen:

Sex Party: Even their name is a double entendre. Hopefully the anti-censorship thing is a real grassroots movement that people will care about.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
cataclysmic
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:18 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby cataclysmic » Thu Nov 27, 2008 5:42 am UTC

For anyone who is interested, there are more protests being planned for all Australian capital cities:
The WeAreChange website wrote:Protests are planned in several states, details are as follows:

Melbourne:
13th of December
12pm-5pm
State Library
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=46838735931

Brisbane:
13th of December
11am-3pm
Brisbane Square
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=42526399601

Sydney:
13th of December
11am-4pm
Town Hall
Check http://www.nocensorship.info forums for Sydney updates

Adelaide:
13th of December
12pm - 4pm
Parliament
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=39343300875

Hobart:
13th of December
11am - 1.
30pm
Parliament Lawns
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=39329861995

I think there is also one in Canberra, not sure about Perth or Darwin.
Belial wrote:
Noc wrote:I direct ire at the English Language, the bastardized and half-French monstrosity it is, for not distinguishing between singular and plural second-person possessives.
"All y'all's moms."

You're welcome.

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby jestingrabbit » Thu Nov 27, 2008 7:58 am UTC

Amarantha wrote:Yay for the Greens and the Sex Party.

Also, British place names FTW :mrgreen:


The register completely beside the point as usual. Like the greens were maybe thinking about the opposite position... and as someone who grew up in Canberra at the time when Fiona Patten was first coming to what little notoriety she has, I've gotta say that her coming up with another single issue party is scarcely surprising. At least the greens aren't just shills for the sex/porn industries.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Dream » Thu Nov 27, 2008 8:54 am UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:The register completely beside the point as usual. Like the greens were maybe thinking about the opposite position... and as someone who grew up in Canberra at the time when Fiona Patten was first coming to what little notoriety she has, I've gotta say that her coming up with another single issue party is scarcely surprising. At least the greens aren't just shills for the sex/porn industries.

Where should I go for a career summary of this woman? (Trying to avoid wikipedia for forming political opinions.)
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby jestingrabbit » Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:26 pm UTC

Dream wrote:Where should I go for a career summary of this woman? (Trying to avoid wikipedia for forming political opinions.)


Wish I could tell you. I first became aware of her when she led a pro sex worker party in the first, and possibly second, ACT elections. Then she was a lobbyist with the Eros foundation. I haven't heard about her in a while. She always seemed more interested in publicity than getting the message across to me. And now here she is again, with some publicity but no substance that I can see.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Dream » Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:49 pm UTC

You see, I wish that there were some kind of pro-sex and sexuality lobby that would stand up for everything that is dismissed as sordid, obscene and otherwise unworthy of a place in the political discourse.It's not like sex is a small part of everyone's lives. But no matter how many brothels exist, or how many sex shops, porn sites and swingers parties and whatever else people are up to these days, the politicians still think Australia Wants Porn Censored. It's beyond my comprehension how two faced voters can be when they worry about perceptions of their moral upstandingness. But this woman seems not to be the way forward. Not at all.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
The Rumpled Academic
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 8:34 am UTC

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby The Rumpled Academic » Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:16 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:Also, has anyone ever pointed out to Family First that not everyone in Australia is living in a house with a family?


I tried, once. I figured out that they're all suffering from an unnamed medical condition -- they literally can't see unmarried or childless people. Now, it's easy to judge them harshly when they try and move in to occupied homes (the kiddy pool and baby monitors jangling along behind them, crushing the agapanthuses), but think how nightmarish it must be for them to walk through a crowd!

Dream wrote:You see, I wish that there were some kind of pro-sex and sexuality lobby that would stand up for everything that is dismissed as sordid, obscene and otherwise unworthy of a place in the political discourse.


That would be stunning. Truly. A party that could stand and proclaim the hitherto only furtively-whispered opinion that the dissemination of pornography and the propagation of sexual freedom is actually a good thing for the health of a nation. I hope I live to see it.

To address the topic on hand, I heard about this for the first time only about a week ago, and find myself extraordinarily motivated to do what I can to block this nonsense from ever passing. I've written a letter to my local MP, and have sent out an immflamatory email to my entire addressbook urging everyone else to do the same. I'll almost certainly be at the next Melbourne protest on the 13th ~ hopefully it will fizz a little louder than it sounds like the last one did.
I hearily concur with what Dream said (in a post a few pages back) about how the anti-filter message should be constructed. Ideological tuggers of the heart-strings don't really get too far with the bulk of the Australian electorate, but "colossal waste of taxpayer money" makes immediate sense to everybody.
So, for that matter, does "won't even work anyway". ;-)

User avatar
The Rumpled Academic
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 8:34 am UTC

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby The Rumpled Academic » Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:58 pm UTC

Oh, and also ~ just because the putting up of letters here is quite nice ~ here's a transcript of the one I wrote to my MP.
(Some bits lifted from other people's writings ~ hope y'all don't mind.) :)

Spoiler:
Dear [MP’s name]

I write this letter to express to you, in the strongest terms, my opposition to the mandatory filtering of the internet access of all Australians, recently proposed by the Rudd government. The through-the-core rottenness of the proposed scheme can be summed up in three central points:

It won’t work. According to the government’s own tests, they stand no chance at blocking all of the ‘inappropriate’ and/or ‘illegal’ content on the vast expanse of the the internet, and are certain to block many innocent websites besides. To put this in perspective, a “false positive” rate of just 3% (the average figure of the early trials) would translate to more than thirty billion innocuous website unjustly blocked. I understand that the idea is to prevent access to child pornography, and I sympathise with that goal – but the proposed filter will not even come close to accomplishing this. Any paedophile with even a modicum of knowledge about peer-to-peer filesharing networks will be able to bypass the filter with absurd ease, and the Australian public shall be left with a costly, obligatory, and entirely useless obstruction for their trouble.

It will slow down the internet of all Australians. The Rudd government has made numerous public promises to modernise Australia’s lagging internet capabilities; yet, given that the government’s own tests determined that even the filters inevitably slowed internet speeds by 22-87%, it’s difficult to understand how the filter could possible by an initiative of the same government.

It will cost money that should be directed elsewhere. Given the current economic crisis, it is beyond ludicrous that a reported $125.8 million of our tax dollars will go to waste on this misguided initiative. How about hospitals? Roads? Schools? Add to this the inevitable hike in internet prices should this nonsensical plan be passed (given the amount it would cost ISPs to implement such a filter), and it is clear that this filter is as economically wasteful as it is generally uninformed.

There are other arguments, of course – the potential for systemic abuse, the slippery slope into deeper censorship, the easy potential of the system to destroy a small, internet-based business with just one of the many inevitable mistaken blacklistings – but the three basic argument outlined above should be enough without any of the “hysterical” arguments Minister Conroy has expressed such derision for.
Every single person I’ve spoken to about this issue (and I assure you that they have been of a diversity of ages, demographics, and political orientations) agrees that this filter is, plain and simple, a terrible idea.
Please: oppose it – and use your position to do it loudly.

My thanks,

[Mah name]

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby psyck0 » Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:35 pm UTC

The Rumpled Academic wrote:
Dream wrote:You see, I wish that there were some kind of pro-sex and sexuality lobby that would stand up for everything that is dismissed as sordid, obscene and otherwise unworthy of a place in the political discourse.


That would be stunning. Truly. A party that could stand and proclaim the hitherto only furtively-whispered opinion that the dissemination of pornography and the propagation of sexual freedom is actually a good thing for the health of a nation. I hope I live to see it.


Here in BC, Canada, we have the Sex party who does just that. Unfortunately, they are rather fringe, along with the Work Less party, the Rinocerous party, the Marajuana party, and about 30 other oddities.

User avatar
Amarantha
Posts: 1638
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Amarantha » Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:55 am UTC

^ :P

Someone created a More Beer Party for our republican referendum a few years back.
omgryebread wrote:...if I'm watching a fantasy, I want my princess to stab some motherfuckers, claim the crown herself, then invade the prince's kingdom and sleep with his sister.

Ashbash
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:46 am UTC

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Ashbash » Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:38 am UTC

For those of you who don't know, the official GetUp petition has been up for a while.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby 22/7 » Mon Dec 01, 2008 2:39 pm UTC

psyck0 wrote:Well, some of my tourism dollars go directly towards the government in the forms of duties and taxes. By your logic, anyway, the boycott of South Africa shouldn't have been done either (the example is more extreme there, but the same basic thing: protesting a (dickwad, censoring vs racist) government by not giving the country any money.
My logic says nothing of the sort. It might claim something about the effectiveness of such a boycott, but says nothing about whether or not it should have happened. I happen to think that if you get a chance, you (general, not you specifically) should travel to Burma, North Korea, China, and the Sudan, all of which have significantly higher crimes to answer for than internet censorship. I personally think that not visiting a country because of a national firewall is petty and that you're going to be missing quite a bit of the world if your threshold is that low, but that's just my personal belief.
psyck0 wrote:As for my "idyllic standards", they include not supporting the Iraq war and not being a bastion of bigotry. Most first-world countries fit these standards.
Australia arguably doesn't meet either of those criteria. Once the Iraq war is over or once all of a particular country's troops are out, are you willing to revisit those countries or are they no-fly forever? And a number of first world countries either don't currently or previously didn't fit the Iraq standard including the US, the UK, Denmark, Spain, Japan, Portugal, The Netherlands, Italy and Norway.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Meowgan
<3 Everyone [...] Especially Gordon
Posts: 2300
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:30 pm UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Meowgan » Thu Dec 04, 2008 4:37 am UTC

http://www.banthisurl.com/2008/12/heres ... rewritten/

Here's a blog some of my friends are maintaining on the subject.
<L> dude. she made a motherfucking stargate.
<L> you need to keep this girl. do whatever it takes.

User avatar
mrbaggins
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:23 am UTC
Location: Wagga, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby mrbaggins » Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:24 pm UTC

Quote stomped from me trying to raise this in SB...

I wrote:Two days ago, the senator posted on the online blog that he uses for public comment about this internet censorship trial. This left less than 48 hours for public comment on the matter before the blog was closed. It was also brought up, for the first time in the entire discussion of this issue, that the filter is set to block P2P traffic.

The actual trials of this filter were originally scheduled to begin on the 24th December (Merry Xmas Aussies!) but have now been postponed to the middle of January.

My whole belief on this thing is rather than enact a filter on this stuff, why not log peoples activities, and use the evidence to score convictions? I realise this is akin to waiting for an armed man to shoot before taking him out, but in this case, the first step isn't potentially fatal. If a person goes looking for child pornography on the internet, and finds all his bookmarks are blocked, isn't he then more likely to look for real world satisfaction of his cravings? With a logging system in place, the moment someone goes looking for or directs themselves in such a direction, log the attempt, and have a police officer come knocking.

There are then no doubt a collection of privacy issues that will be raised. Personally logging of my activity is far more preferable to outright censorship, but again the issue could end up escalating unpredictably. And of course then credibility of what happens to that information becomes an issue.

The underhanded technique of the last couple days by Senator Conroy shows just how much they think the public really wants this filter. There has been extremely minimalist coverage of the issue on TV (I personally have seen nothing), and it's only on the internet itself that information can be found, and only if you know to look. As a result, a vast majority of the Australian public don't know this is occurring.

The fact that P2P is now going to be included on the mandatory list shows that the government is prepared to add content that THEY deem unsuitable that isn't necessarily illegal to have or transfer to this list. It shows that they are prepared to actively institute a governmentally issued censorship of material decided by a select few as offensive, immoral and quite possibly of material that is unfavorable to themselves.
Why is it that 4chan is either infinitely awesome, infinitely bad, or "lolwut", but never any intermediary level?

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Hawknc » Thu Dec 25, 2008 11:44 am UTC

Do you have a link for that online blog post? I'd be very interested to know how, from a technical point of view, he plans on blocking specific illegal P2P traffic. Or am I misreading this and the filter will enact a blanket ban on ALL P2P traffic? Cuz if we're going that far, I think we should ban paper too. Do you know how much illegal material is put onto paper? Lots, that's how much. Clearly the medium for transmitting information is the TRUE problem that needs to be resolved here.

User avatar
mrbaggins
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:23 am UTC
Location: Wagga, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby mrbaggins » Thu Dec 25, 2008 11:49 am UTC

All p2p, as the technology that the linked post below speaks of does not analyse data. And you obviously see the flaw with it.
This is the blog
This is the answer to "It can't filter p2p traffic, so why bother", and in typical politician speak, doesn't answer your question.
Why is it that 4chan is either infinitely awesome, infinitely bad, or "lolwut", but never any intermediary level?

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Hawknc » Thu Dec 25, 2008 12:10 pm UTC

Right. It's Christmas (for another hour), so I'll keep the bad words to myself for the moment. :P

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7572
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby phlip » Thu Dec 25, 2008 1:06 pm UTC

Arriving in the mail sometime over the past week (while I was away on holidays) was my reply from Senator Conroy to the letter I sent however many months ago. It's clear it took this many months for him to reply because he needed that much time to read through my letter and ponder deeply on all the points raised... it's obvious that a lot of thought went into the decision to send me a generic form letter that doesn't answer even one of my questions.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at this point, but I'm going to send in a reply. With essentially the same questions in it, but with a more direct tone ("The proposal will do x, and what're you going to do about it?" instead of "x is bad, so be careful, yeah?")... I don't expect anything different to happen, probably just get another copy of the same form letter, but I'm a glutton for punishment.

Perhaps the most offensive part of the form letter I received was conveniently right up the top of the letter:
Senator Conroy, or (more likely) one of his minions, wrote:I am aware that the issue of ISP filtering has attracted criticism from people who are concerned that it will lead to censorship of the internet.

Freedom of speech is fundamentally important in a democratic society. For many years however, most Australians have accepted that there is some material which is not acceptable, particularly for children.

The genesis of this is in civil society where social conflict is governed by the imposition of rules that restrain citizens from harming one another and society as a whole accepts that the public interest requires that those rules be enforced.

Yes, that's right. In three short paragraphs, the senator has collected every single argument from the angles of censorship and freedom-of-speech, and lumped them all together as people who don't understand the social contract, and think that child porn should be protected speech. Clearly there's no other reason why censorship or freedom-of-speech could be a concern, as child porn is the only thing that could possibly be affected by the filtering. Fuckers.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

User avatar
mrbaggins
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:23 am UTC
Location: Wagga, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby mrbaggins » Thu Dec 25, 2008 11:09 pm UTC

Politicians live in a world of buzz words. They need to make the greatest impact and in the process piss off as few people as possible.

The people they are pissing off here are the tech-savvy ones who realise just what is likely to happen.

The buzz words are 'block child porn' 'stop terrorists' 'not stopping freedom of speech'

Those three paragraphs nail the buzz words.
Why is it that 4chan is either infinitely awesome, infinitely bad, or "lolwut", but never any intermediary level?

nazlfrag
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 2:54 pm UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby nazlfrag » Fri Jan 02, 2009 5:00 pm UTC

The Rumpled Academic wrote:
Dream wrote:You see, I wish that there were some kind of pro-sex and sexuality lobby that would stand up for everything that is dismissed as sordid, obscene and otherwise unworthy of a place in the political discourse.


That would be stunning. Truly. A party that could stand and proclaim the hitherto only furtively-whispered opinion that the dissemination of pornography and the propagation of sexual freedom is actually a good thing for the health of a nation. I hope I live to see it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Sex_Party

The Rumpled Academic wrote:To address the topic on hand, I heard about this for the first time only about a week ago, and find myself extraordinarily motivated to do what I can to block this nonsense from ever passing. I've written a letter to my local MP, and have sent out an immflamatory email to my entire addressbook urging everyone else to do the same. I'll almost certainly be at the next Melbourne protest on the 13th ~ hopefully it will fizz a little louder than it sounds like the last one did.
I hearily concur with what Dream said (in a post a few pages back) about how the anti-filter message should be constructed. Ideological tuggers of the heart-strings don't really get too far with the bulk of the Australian electorate, but "colossal waste of taxpayer money" makes immediate sense to everybody.
So, for that matter, does "won't even work anyway". ;-)


I'll be at the protests, but make sure to contact your local, state and federal MPs via email and snail mail as well. Just push the message that it's impossible, 'simply not feasible' as they'd say, they won't understand the detail but it sends a clear message.

towerofturtles
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:14 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby towerofturtles » Sun Jan 04, 2009 2:10 am UTC

Things are rolling on. First half of 2009 will be the Communication Department's "live pilot" of internet filtering, using ISPs who volunteered. You might think "great, maybe my ISP's going to test it on me" but apparently they're not using real customers. Instead, they'll "test" it in some weird unnatural environment apparently simulating the real internet experience. They've tried and failed at this before. A good article sums up the many problems with this approach, here:

https://www.howtobeasystemsengineer.com/blog/?p=37

Looking forward to the realistic and accurate results of this trial. Just seems like another step in this process where the results are predestined; typical of a Government with a plan.

User avatar
mrbaggins
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:23 am UTC
Location: Wagga, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby mrbaggins » Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:17 am UTC

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

Here's an interesting thought that hadn't occured to me... (And is in the above article)

The black list that the government is going to hand out to each of the ISP's is going to be handled by heaps of people, both within the government and within the ISPs themselves. This means that there is going to be a fully indexed (probably alphabetical) 'yellow pages' of content that is illegal (and probably mostly child porn).

With that many people handling it, it is going to be leaked. Australia will single-handedly be providing every child porn addict in the world with a very handy, 10,000 strong, alphabetised index of child-porn websites.
Why is it that 4chan is either infinitely awesome, infinitely bad, or "lolwut", but never any intermediary level?

towerofturtles
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:14 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby towerofturtles » Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:20 am UTC

mrbaggins wrote:http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24876765-5006301,00.html

Here's an interesting thought that hadn't occured to me... (And is in the above article)

The black list that the government is going to hand out to each of the ISP's is going to be handled by heaps of people, both within the government and within the ISPs themselves. This means that there is going to be a fully indexed (probably alphabetical) 'yellow pages' of content that is illegal (and probably mostly child porn).

With that many people handling it, it is going to be leaked. Australia will single-handedly be providing every child porn addict in the world with a very handy, 10,000 strong, alphabetised index of child-porn websites.


Hmm, and even if it isn't leaked, it's not uncommon for official people themselves to be busted for child porn offences etc - bureaucrats, federal police etc. Hopefully they're really keeping that list secure, and have some good protocols in place. I wonder if there's been any official policies about how they'll make sure this yellow pages of evil' is kept as secure as possible?

Joeldi
Posts: 1055
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:49 am UTC
Location: Central Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Joeldi » Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:12 am UTC

towerofturtles wrote:Hmm, and even if it isn't leaked, it's not uncommon for official people themselves to be busted for child porn offences etc - bureaucrats, federal police etc. Hopefully they're really keeping that list secure, and have some good protocols in place. I wonder if there's been any official policies about how they'll make sure this yellow pages of evil' is kept as secure as possible?


I don't know about you, but I'd much rather this damned filter not happen at all, and for the list to be kept in police hands, for the tracking down of child abusers only.
I already have a hate thread. Necromancy > redundancy here, so post there.

roc314 wrote:America is a police state that communicates in txt speak...

"i hav teh dissentors brb""¡This cheese is burning me! u pwnd them bff""thx ur cool 2"

User avatar
mrbaggins
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:23 am UTC
Location: Wagga, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby mrbaggins » Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:34 am UTC

So I'm NOT the only one that thinks rather than filter the net, just monitor it and catch anyone who actually GOES to the blacklisted sites?
Why is it that 4chan is either infinitely awesome, infinitely bad, or "lolwut", but never any intermediary level?

towerofturtles
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:14 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby towerofturtles » Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:39 pm UTC

Joeldi wrote:
towerofturtles wrote:Hmm, and even if it isn't leaked, it's not uncommon for official people themselves to be busted for child porn offences etc - bureaucrats, federal police etc. Hopefully they're really keeping that list secure, and have some good protocols in place. I wonder if there's been any official policies about how they'll make sure this yellow pages of evil' is kept as secure as possible?


I don't know about you, but I'd much rather this damned filter not happen at all, and for the list to be kept in police hands, for the tracking down of child abusers only.


Oh hey, I agree with you about the stupid filter. I was just wondering if they've even considered the problem of creating this big leakable list as they forge on blindly with their plan.

User avatar
Emu*
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:47 am UTC
Location: Cardiff, UK
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Emu* » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:03 pm UTC

mrbaggins wrote:So I'm NOT the only one that thinks rather than filter the net, just monitor it and catch anyone who actually GOES to the blacklisted sites?


Only works if you can tap into every known route to the site, which would require cooperation from at least the webhosting companies who would probably be happy to clear out the accounts concerned if they knew anything about it.
Cosmologicon wrote:Emu* implemented a naive east-first strategy and ran it for an hour, producing results that rivaled many sophisticated strategies, visiting 614 cells. For this, Emu* is awarded Best Deterministic Algorithm!

User avatar
Big Brother
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 8:36 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby Big Brother » Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:12 pm UTC

Well, whichever of those happens, I'LL STILL BE WATCHING YOU.
War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength.

towerofturtles
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:14 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby towerofturtles » Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:49 pm UTC

towerofturtles wrote: Hmm, and even if it isn't leaked, it's not uncommon for official people themselves to be busted for child porn offences etc - bureaucrats, federal police etc. Hopefully they're really keeping that list secure, and have some good protocols in place. I wonder if there's been any official policies about how they'll make sure this yellow pages of evil' is kept as secure as possible?


Here, it happened again - a public servant working with the federal police used their special privileges to access child pornography. I wonder how much this will happen when the Govt's 'yellow pages of evil' listing all the bad sites is distributed to thousands of workers, contractors etc. Pretty bad.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/man-faces-jail-over-child-porn/1405352.aspx

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7572
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby phlip » Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:59 am UTC

phlip wrote:I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at this point, but I'm going to send in a reply. With essentially the same questions in it, but with a more direct tone ("The proposal will do x, and what're you going to do about it?" instead of "x is bad, so be careful, yeah?")... I don't expect anything different to happen, probably just get another copy of the same form letter, but I'm a glutton for punishment.

When I said that, I thought I was joking, overstating how little the senator cares about my opinion...

Nope. A second copy of the form letter arrived today. Yay?

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

DanielCopelin
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 12:45 pm UTC

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby DanielCopelin » Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:44 am UTC

I haven't seen much news on this topic recently. As far as I know the trials were delayed?

A couple of interesting articles from EFA:
http://www.efa.org.au/2009/01/14/filtering-wont-deliver-for-aussie-kids/#more-334
http://www.efa.org.au/2009/01/08/brooklyn-law-school-study-highlights-net-censorship-problems/#more-323

The second one sounds particularly good. It's a report on Australia's foray into censorship by an American from the Brooklyn Law School.

User avatar
mrbaggins
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:23 am UTC
Location: Wagga, Australia

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby mrbaggins » Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:38 pm UTC

whirlpool.net.au has a lot of news articles on this topic running through. Notably one yesterday about netspace users being overwhelmingly against it.
Why is it that 4chan is either infinitely awesome, infinitely bad, or "lolwut", but never any intermediary level?

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Australia, No Opt-Out Filtered Internet?

Postby EmptySet » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:21 am UTC

phlip wrote:
phlip wrote:I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at this point, but I'm going to send in a reply. With essentially the same questions in it, but with a more direct tone ("The proposal will do x, and what're you going to do about it?" instead of "x is bad, so be careful, yeah?")... I don't expect anything different to happen, probably just get another copy of the same form letter, but I'm a glutton for punishment.

When I said that, I thought I was joking, overstating how little the senator cares about my opinion...

Nope. A second copy of the form letter arrived today. Yay?


Please hold. Your vote is important to us. A senator will take your inquiry as soon as one becomes available. Please hold. Your vote is important to us...

Every time you get a form letter back, you should send a form response complaining about the form letter, and see how long it takes someone to notice.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests