Internet Censorship in Australia

C

Challenger78

Valued Senior Member
Apparently, the Australian government is trying to set up a filter to screen out what it deems "illegal content".

I wouldn't mind if it was to screen child porn. But I'm surprised its from a fucking labour government. And that they've avoided the topic completely.

The programs been interrupted, but the funding's still there, and as far as I know, It's still on.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24568137-2862,00.html

I do not want to live in China, and neither should any western citizen. The Internet is a great way to learn from multiple sources, this only gives the government control over what sources we see.
 
The system they want to implement is idiotic and naive, at best.
The proposed system would likely be exceedingly easy to circumvent as it only stops people from accessing sites on a blacklist. Proxy sites are plentiful and easy to use.
Also the system will slow many/most people's collection to a crawl, some peoples connections may be reduced by as much as 87%.

Not to mention the fact that they are essentially trying to censor the internet.
 
EntropyAlwaysWins said:
The system they want to implement is idiotic and naive, at best.
The proposed system would likely be exceedingly easy to circumvent as it only stops people from accessing sites on a blacklist. Proxy sites are plentiful and easy to use.
Also the system will slow many/most people's collection to a crawl, some peoples connections may be reduced by as much as 87%.

Not to mention the fact that they are essentially trying to censor the internet.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm really surprised this happened in a western country, I know Australia's a little more restrictive than others, but really. Were they really expecting to get away with this ?
 
this is old news my friend, its sad but its still better than the howard goverment. We dont always get what we want, just look at the same sex bill debate if you ever had an ideal about getting a perfect goverment
 
Asguard said:
this is old news my friend, its sad but its still better than the howard goverment. We dont always get what we want, just look at the same sex bill debate if you ever had an ideal about getting a perfect goverment
Click to expand...

just made the school rumor mill.
 
Censoring the internet for people who haven't asked for censorship is a stupid idea, quite apart from the fact that it won't work.
 
Censorship = bad
Slows down your internet connection.
Wastes public money.
Easily circumvented and therefore pointless.
There is no good evidence to suggest that children happen upon CP by chance whilst surfing the net.
Sets a bad precedent of internet censorship

enough reasons for you?
 
i wrote to my local member against this, i will post the responce when i recive it (assuming i do recive one but i do expect to) but concidering it will be by post it might not be till after christmas before i am home to get it
 
i just want to say one thing though, if taken to the extreme as has been reported in the media it would block at least 1 portion of the parliamentary website. This is because it has been reported that sites dealing with euthanasia could be included. The federal parliament as well as the NT and SA parliament's all have euthanasia bills before them and listed on there websites
 
EntropyAlwaysWins said:
Censorship = bad
Slows down your internet connection.
Wastes public money.
Easily circumvented and therefore pointless.
There is no good evidence to suggest that children happen upon CP by chance whilst surfing the net.
Sets a bad precedent of internet censorship

enough reasons for you?
Click to expand...

I don't need convincing here, I just didn't want to panic over nothing..

On a side note: Why is it that nearly every western country has had extreme student activism instead of us ?
 
Challenger78 said:
I don't need convincing here, I just didn't want to panic over nothing..

On a side note: Why is it that nearly every western country has had extreme student activism instead of us ?
Click to expand...

There was a bit of student action going in the early to mid 70's. Even 77 when I went to uni first there was the odd strike/demonstration by student unions. On the whole, we are an apathetic bunch though...:eek: Is that why we've let ourselves become over regulated, we get what we deserve?

I'm not happy about Kev's censorship either. As yet I haven't officially express my distaste (see above:rolleyes:)
although I have written to him over other issues.
I think that filters at the user end should be enough to protect young kids, as in parent's responsibility.
It is a real concern sometimes. I'm a parent and wouldn't like my kids stumbling across some of the things that surface after an innocent Google search! My youngest likes watching Thomas the Tank Engine videos on You Tube, but we can't leave him unattended because eventually some pretty dark, violent or perverted clips turn up in the play list!:eek:

Regards,
Bric
 
Good question, although that depends on how you define 'extreme'.
Possibly because Australia is quite conservative by comparison.

edit:

Bric,
Youtube are upping their standards, at least in regards to suggestive content at the moment.
Also, when using google you can set strict filtering on in search preferences.
 
Last edited:
Bricoleur said:
I think that filters at the user end should be enough to protect young kids, as in parent's responsibility.
It is a real concern sometimes. I'm a parent and wouldn't like my kids stumbling across some of the things that surface after an innocent Google search!
Click to expand...
I agree with you.

Not only is the Government's new filtering system down right stupid, it is also insanely expensive and doesn't really work. Having it at the user end, whereby people can select to have it enabled on their computers or not would have been the best thing.

I too am a parent and I view it as my responsibility to monitor my children and what they access online.. when they are old enough to go online that is. Unfortunately, the Government does not seem to think that Australian parents are up to the task of teaching our children and shielding them from the unsavoury aspects of the internet. Had it been for just child porn, for example, then I doubt anyone would have an issue with it. Sure those who are into having sex with little kids might have been a bit put off, but since that is illegal in and of itself, I suspect they would have remained quiet about it.

What gets me is that they have made it so broad.. We still do not know the extent to which "inappropriate materials" would apply..

The Australian Communications and Media Authority’s (ACMA) blacklist stands at 1300 websites. Most of these contain child pornography, violence, terrorist-related and other illegal content.

Senator Stephen Conroy, Minister of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, wants to add another 10,000 to the list, including sites about euthanasia, anorexia and online gambling.

The list of banned websites will not be made publicly available.

http://en.epochtimes.com/n2/australia/australia-internet-censorship-filter-7719.html
Click to expand...
 
Bells said:
I too am a parent and I view it as my responsibility to monitor my children... Unfortunately, the Government does not seem to think that Australian parents are up to the task of teaching our children and shielding them from the unsavoury aspects of the internet.
Click to expand...

Interesting that you feel that way, Bells. 'Cause aren't you the one that screams bloody murder when some parents "abuse" their children ....and demand that the government do something to protect those kids?

So is't this Internet thingie just one more thing the government is trying to do to fulfill your wishes to protect the kids? I would think you'd be happy with it.

If I have you confused with someone else, please forgive me.

Baron Max
 
Baron:
Theres a difference between protecting children and being downright stupid.
If the government wanted to protect children, then they'd make this free to any parent that wants to use it. Forcing it on children only makes more children wonder about things that are blocked, and then go and seek them.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=tH35CVig3fQ

Good to see some good old Aussie humor, with a healthy dose of plagarism.
 
Bells said:
I agree with you.

Not only is the Government's new filtering system down right stupid, it is also insanely expensive and doesn't really work. Having it at the user end, whereby people can select to have it enabled on their computers or not would have been the best thing.

I too am a parent and I view it as my responsibility to monitor my children and what they access online.. when they are old enough to go online that is. Unfortunately, the Government does not seem to think that Australian parents are up to the task of teaching our children and shielding them from the unsavoury aspects of the internet. Had it been for just child porn, for example, then I doubt anyone would have an issue with it. Sure those who are into having sex with little kids might have been a bit put off, but since that is illegal in and of itself, I suspect they would have remained quiet about it.

What gets me is that they have made it so broad.. We still do not know the extent to which "inappropriate materials" would apply..
Click to expand...

i dont know too much about this so i will post my general feeling on this. i believe the government has an obligation to protect children living within their borders.

why leave it up to the parents? i dont pay taxes and support politicians lifestyles for nothing.
 
Challenger78 said:
Baron, Theres a difference between protecting children and being downright stupid.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is ....but where that line is crossed varies from person to person. So, ...."we" still don't know! ...even with your silly statement!

Challenger78 said:
If the government wanted to protect children, then they'd make this free to any parent that wants to use it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but then those parents who don't give a shit about their kids ...wouldn't be protected, would they. Now what? Ooh, see, now we're back to force of some kind, right? See? It ain't so easy, is it?

Baron Max
 
John99 said:
.... i believe the government has an obligation to protect children living within their borders.
Click to expand...

First, I don't think that's what government is for. Aren't the people, the neighbors, the friends, etc, supposed to help each other and care for each other? Whatever happened to the quaint old idea of "family"?

But more importantly, how do they know which kids to protect? Do they spy on all parents all the time? Do they have "kid monitors" in all the kids rooms/homes? Do they send cops or child welfare people around to check on the parents and kids all the time?

See? How ....How can government protect all the kids?

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
Yeah, there is ....but where that line is crossed varies from person to person. So, ...."we" still don't know! ...even with your silly statement!



Yeah, but then those parents who don't give a shit about their kids ...wouldn't be protected, would they. Now what? Ooh, see, now we're back to force of some kind, right? See? It ain't so easy, is it?

Baron Max
Click to expand...

Not everyone can have caring parents, and not every caring parent wants this firewall.
Inequality is a fact of life today, and probably will be. Some people will turn out good, and others will turn out downright bad, most will be in the middle. It's up to our education system, social environment and the tools we offer to young people, to ensure that they have the opportunity for a stable life, that is different from forcing it on people. Some will turn out bad, thats accepted.

I don't see why you think I'm trying to cure the world of evil through force and in the process support psuedo communist/ Authoritarian government. You can't rid the world of "evil" because it's nature changes every time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top