12 replies to this topic

[ΓΛPTΘΓ]

Australia intends to introduce filters which will ban access to websites containing criminal content.
The banned sites will be selected by an independent classification body guided by complaints from the public, said Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.

A seven month trial in conjunction with internet service providers found the technology behind the filter to be 100% effective.

However, there has been opposition from some internet users.

Twitter users have been voicing their disapproval by adding the search tag "nocleanfeed" to their comments about the plans.

"Successful technology isn't necessarily successful policy," said Colin Jacobs, a spokesperson for Electronic Frontiers Australia, a non-profit organisation that campaigns for online freedom.

"We're yet to hear a sensible explanation of what this policy is for, who it will help, and why it is worth spending so much taxpayers' money on."


Mr Conroy said the filters included optional extras such as a ban on gambling sites which ISPs could choose to implement in exchange for a grant.

"Through a combination of additional resources for education and awareness, mandatory internet filtering of RC (refused classification)-rated content, and optional ISP-level filtering, we have a package that balances safety for families and the benefits of the digital revolution," he said.

The filter laws will be introduced in parliament in August 2010 and will take a year to implement.

'noble aims'

"Historical attempts to put filters in place have been effective up to a point," Dr Windsor Holden, principal analyst at Juniper Research, told BBC News.

The "noble aims" of the filter could be lost in its implementation, he warned.

"Clearly there is a need to protect younger and more vulnerable users of the net, but one concern is that it won't just be illegal websites that will be blocked," he added.

"You have to take extreme caution in how these things are rolled out and the uses to which they're put."


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: http://news.bbc.co.u...ogy/8413377.stm




You thought on this?

I am totally disappointed of such a suggestion can be made? In this world are we getting monitored more and more? What is the balance of safety and our very own freedom? This really sound worse than China's blocking, how can this happen in a well developed country.

[Ion Cannon!]

As long as it only blocks criminal content, its fine. However if it starts to block non-illegal websites, then you have the right to be a bit worried.

[BeefJeRKy]

Well then you get the problem of drawing the line at certain websites. Which sites would be considered legal or not? Also, aren't you impeding people's right to information?

[Wizard]

There goes freedom of speech/expression and all the rest...

Not a smart move. Me thinks Auuuuuustraaaaaaliannnns need to realise that the internet is not a force of evil and neither are computers.

[Waris]

The idea of Internet censorship in the Down Under has been around for years, though just recently it has been green-lighted by the Fed Govt as, apparently, "filtering a blacklist of banned sites was accurate and would not slow down the Internet."

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technolog...tml?autostart=1

Read the collective response from them chundering men: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-repli...335671&p=45

I for one won't contemplate on how badly the average Australian netizen want their ISP-level filtering shot down in flames, but it's all now up to them to stop it from being implemented, the question is how?

[deltaepsilon]

I remember hearing a while ago that this idea gradually died down due to lack of (government) interest. Guess not.

[Major Fuckup]

That shit will never fly there and by the odd chance it does people will all ways be able to find away around it

[Golan]

Quote

He who sacrifices security for freedom deserves neither.

Seriously, if you don't allow your legal system to take action against criminal activity, why have it in the first place? If they overstep the border and prosecute you for no reason, take legal action against them. If that doesn't work, your country isn't a proper constitutional state in the first place and you are free to use any amount of guillotines and napalm you deem necessary.

Freedom needs to be guaranteed by something, else it's void. Security is a good guarantor for freedom.

Edited by Golan, 16 December 2009 - 13:11.

[SquigPie]

The problem Golan, is that "banning of Criminal Websites" quickly will turn into "Banning of Slightly Non-Familyfriendly Websites". One thing quickly leads to another, once you start running down a hill its hard to stop.

[SorataZ]

If they start at 'illegal' sites, they will sure not stop at government critical sites. I cannot understand Australia, freedom of speech is not even a basic right there

[CJ]

Seeing as how the Aussie government already tends to ban violent games, you could assume they're now willing to ban the websites of said games, they could even end up blocking video files sharers like Youtube because they contain some improper content which can't be controlled by the government...

[Golan]

SquigPie, on 16 Dec 2009, 16:06, said:

The problem Golan, is that "banning of Criminal Websites" quickly will turn into "Banning of Slightly Non-Familyfriendly Websites". One thing quickly leads to another, once you start running down a hill its hard to stop.

Well, uhm, no it won't.










*listens to the clock ticking*











Oh right, arguments besides "Yes it is, No it isn't, Yes it is, No it isn't, Yes it is, No it isn't, Yes it is, No it isn't, Yes it is, No it isn't, Yes it is, No it isn't"...
Look at what the government/police is already allowed to do in light of criminal activities. Imprisonment, confiscation, use of physical force, use of deadly force, eavesdropping, lots of other stuff. Oh yes. Yet, last time I was looking at Australia, there weren't any concentration camps for government-critical persons, no roundups of civil-rights activist, no "fatal accidents" in arrest attempts of porn stars and what have you. The few things that did cross the line were properly prosecuted. Oh yes.
So, why should it be any different now?

[Major Fuckup]

KamuiK, on 17 Dec 2009, 0:49, said:

If they start at 'illegal' sites, they will sure not stop at government critical sites. I cannot understand Australia, freedom of speech is not even a basic right there

Well we have a bunch of old senile farts running the place like in almost every country but our polichickens are taking to way to much omega 3 to come up with the stupid shit they do