Again - a filter to stop ONLY CHILD PORN is fine. I have no moral problems with that.
But.... can you guarantee that the government would stop at that? I can't. I don't trust the government, I don't trust business, I don't trust just about anyone in power. Period.
Why make the blocking process secret, so secret that we don't even know who is on the censorship board? Why make EVEN THE CRITERIA for blocking sites secret? Why so much secrecy? Again, of COURSE you don't want to publish the child porn sites to the public, but why can't civil liberties lawyers or regular politicians look at the list?
I'm worried at the fact that there is no accountability, and that Stephen Conroy is a moral control freak. The man has said that he would ban even regular pornography if he could. I don't trust him.
Right now, there is no need to "freak" out. The filter is still voluntary and can be legally bypassed (although, rightfully, visiting child porn sites is still illegal, and always should be). But at the same time.... this could lead to bad things. The Government of Australia has, in the past, banned a lot of things. It was only till recently that the book "Lady Chatterley's Lover" was unbanned here. Yep, you heard that right - until the 19-freaking-80's, a completely tame book about an extra-marital love affair in England was deemed "obscene" enough to be banned completely. Not only that, books MENTIONING the ban were themselves BANNED! They banned all mention of the fact that the book was banned, that's some Orwellian crap right there! Eventually a copy of the book was smuggled into the country and it embarrassed the government enough to reverse the ban.
The Australian government bans a lot of things that are of no harm to anyone. Books discussing euthanasia have been banned as well - not books telling people how to kill themselves, but books discussing the matter AT ALL (except in a negative light). Now, I don't know about you, but I think I have the right to decide when and where I end my life, and I think that Australian society should have a fair discussion on this topic. The Government (both Labour and Liberal, which means conservative down under), think there shouldn't be a debate.
Hell, the previous Conservative (Howard Government) administration tried to ban pornography which starred women with small breasts, under the idea that "if they've got small breasts, they look a little bit like kids and a pedo could get an erection by watching it! Ban it! Ban it, it's evil!". The law didn't pass, because it was incredibly stupid (adult women with small breasts are NOT children for god's sake), but it highlights how warped and stupid our government can be.
It is for those reasons that I don't want the government to implement a filter. I do not trust them to use it responsibly, and I don't like the secrecy attached to it. Mark my words, in the coming months, you'll hear about non-child-porn sites that have been banned by this filter. And, mark my words, the government will do everything in it's power to stamp out any discussion of any potential wrong-doing on its end.
But.... can you guarantee that the government would stop at that? I can't. I don't trust the government, I don't trust business, I don't trust just about anyone in power. Period.
Why make the blocking process secret, so secret that we don't even know who is on the censorship board? Why make EVEN THE CRITERIA for blocking sites secret? Why so much secrecy? Again, of COURSE you don't want to publish the child porn sites to the public, but why can't civil liberties lawyers or regular politicians look at the list?
I'm worried at the fact that there is no accountability, and that Stephen Conroy is a moral control freak. The man has said that he would ban even regular pornography if he could. I don't trust him.
Right now, there is no need to "freak" out. The filter is still voluntary and can be legally bypassed (although, rightfully, visiting child porn sites is still illegal, and always should be). But at the same time.... this could lead to bad things. The Government of Australia has, in the past, banned a lot of things. It was only till recently that the book "Lady Chatterley's Lover" was unbanned here. Yep, you heard that right - until the 19-freaking-80's, a completely tame book about an extra-marital love affair in England was deemed "obscene" enough to be banned completely. Not only that, books MENTIONING the ban were themselves BANNED! They banned all mention of the fact that the book was banned, that's some Orwellian crap right there! Eventually a copy of the book was smuggled into the country and it embarrassed the government enough to reverse the ban.
The Australian government bans a lot of things that are of no harm to anyone. Books discussing euthanasia have been banned as well - not books telling people how to kill themselves, but books discussing the matter AT ALL (except in a negative light). Now, I don't know about you, but I think I have the right to decide when and where I end my life, and I think that Australian society should have a fair discussion on this topic. The Government (both Labour and Liberal, which means conservative down under), think there shouldn't be a debate.
Hell, the previous Conservative (Howard Government) administration tried to ban pornography which starred women with small breasts, under the idea that "if they've got small breasts, they look a little bit like kids and a pedo could get an erection by watching it! Ban it! Ban it, it's evil!". The law didn't pass, because it was incredibly stupid (adult women with small breasts are NOT children for god's sake), but it highlights how warped and stupid our government can be.
It is for those reasons that I don't want the government to implement a filter. I do not trust them to use it responsibly, and I don't like the secrecy attached to it. Mark my words, in the coming months, you'll hear about non-child-porn sites that have been banned by this filter. And, mark my words, the government will do everything in it's power to stamp out any discussion of any potential wrong-doing on its end.
