Australia's Internet Filter Switches On In July

[Murray Kitson]

Thank goodness.

After a while I hope we can get this in the U.S. too so that we can phase out internet pornography and piracy.

I'm not sure I fully agree with you on that point. You see, authorities actually track those sites to find those who are taking and distributing the images or videos. It is a linked effort between Canada and the USA, unfortunately, in Canada the tracking is limited due to privacy acts. They cannot bring down the sites because they are not a crime in some countries. It's a sick sad world, but we can take measures to police our own to not add to the corruption.

Where Australia is concerned, I don't like the idea of covering your eyes to pretend there isn't a problem (as the filter would do). Why not take the same measures and follow the line. If it is one in every 10k people who visit these sites, toss them in jail.

Finally, pornography is not the problem. And piracy is getting to the point of necessity to some people (rising cost of games and movies in a failing economy). The problem is the abuse of these. Child pornography is an issue. We have defined rules of legality here, why do people feel the need to push this?

 

[Malikaw]

Mexican drug cartels have soldiers, should we just listen to them because we have a couple guns then?

Also, pornography is legal, what someone does with their own body is none of your business.

Edit: I know of course that the government has nothing to do with this filter.

Of course they should. They're powerful than we are. That's the way of things.

The people should never fear their goverment, the government should fear the people.

I believe you are just actively trying to incite a negative response to your strawman actions. If not, I fear that there are more like you and that makes me fear for humanity.

I hate it when people act entitled and think that they're more important than the government.

No, the people have every right to fear the Government. Guess who has the military? Guess who has the nuclear bombs? Guess who funds the police force? All the government. That's more than
the people will ever have. And people have good reason to fear that.

I mean seriously? < HAHA I SEE WHAT U DID THERE

 

[wadark]

Awful precedent. That's all I have to say.

 

[samsonguy920]

While the intent is noble, the action stinks. This will only create a slippery slope encouraging even more things to be censored on the internet in Australia. I really hope that there are more choices of isp's down there than just those 4, so people can tell those four to shove their censor crap up their butt and move on.
If my ISP did this, I would probably not care at first, but it would only be inevitable that something not even related would end up getting blacklisted. Not to mention the affect I am sure it would have on bandwidth.
Like how long before movie sites like Netflix get blacklisted because of movies like Children of the Corn?

 

[Dys]

You know what, fuck this censorship thing. I'm not even Australian and this pisses me off. To any Aussies that are getting hit with this crap I have something for you:

The Tor Project [http://www.torproject.org/]

For those unfamiliar think of it as an uber-proxy, it takes a bit of TLC to get running quite right, and it's slower then regular internet, but it pretty well unblocks anything that you want once you've gotten it down.

For those that do know about Tor, well, I guess I needn't tell you about it.

They really should make this kind of thing illegal if it isn't already.

The government(And organizations like this) should have every right to block websites from user access.

Should the government also have the right to determine who will sit in parliament, what food people may eat, what sport people play, business people run or how people spend their own money? If not, then to what degree of freedom should people have? And why is it acceptable for the government (or a group of private organizations) to control the flow information, effectively controlling what one can research, where one can purchase goods[footnote]Australian retailers have been complaining, very loudly, about online stores for some time. Blocking certain online stores or hindering access to them would no doubt make them happy.[/footnote]? Also, is it fair for the government (or organization) to have the authority to flat out block information without notifying the public of the content that has been blocked? Is it fair that there has been no appeal system proposed?

I am, quite obviously, flat out against this kind of organized censorship. If telstra, optus etc decide to start blocking stuff, that's up to them. But for them to be sourcing the blocked materials from the same place with no clear indication as to how unbiased that source is, with no process to appeal incorrect blocking and no effort to inform current contract holders that they are making significant changes to the service then I cannot see how it is anything less than despicable. I also don't see how it's legal.

Pornography is largely illegal in Australia. Here's a link. The laws are also unbelievably ill defined.

Child pornography is illegal nearly everywhere in the world. If a website containing child pornography is found, the relevant authorities should be notified. Sticking you're head in the sand does fuck all, and, by the time the site has been properly blocked, chances are that the website will be down and arrests will have been made.

It doesn't set a legal precedent, it does set a social precedent in that the general population will be used of a level of censorship and will be less likely to contest any future laws.

 

[samsonguy920]

Is it really so hard to grasp the idea that government officials have restraint?

Yes.

When did people get so damn cynical about politics?

Dunno. There was the time the HTML of the subpages of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_scandal topped one megabyte total.

Some time before that, there was these guys. George Washington, Ben Franklin, and a bunch of others. They were so cynical about politics and the risks of corrupt leaders they built a system with a substantial number of checks and balances in it.

Then there was this guy, Dante Alighieri, who wrote about how political power had corrupted the Catholic Church. But you can't trust him - they'd used that political power to make him a homeless exile, so he was biased.

A while before that, Roman Senator Gaius Cornelius Tacitus said "In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous."

I know it?s hard to understand but sometimes the government does know what it?s doing, sometimes they do have the peoples best interests at heart.

And sometimes they don't. Many of us feel that they don't in this case, particularly when the ACMA blacklist [http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/296161/australia_web_blacklist_leaked/] was leaked and we found that the powers that be lied about the scope and length of the blacklist.

There are laws against child pornography. Why must they ban something already illegal? They already have the laws to stop it, why do they need more?

Why am I hearing reports that some Liberal politicians think Labor is too light on this issue and need to ban things like gambling and abortion sites? (Could someone confirm that for me? I'm not in Australia.)

The amount of political power in the world is finite. The more they take, the less you have. Any time an organization grabs more power for itself, its motivations need to be scrutinized carefully.

All good arguments, but keep in mind in this case, the government played the part of Pontius Pilate and washed their hands of the matter. Privately owned ISP's are taking it upon themselves to enact this. Which in one case is commendable, for why should people always have to expect their government to do everything for them?
But on the other hand this is vigilante action, where innocents are going to end up being affected even worse than true perpetrators through ignorance and overaction that isn't restricted by rules set down over the years.
People are sick and tired of child porn existing. People are seeing little to nothing being done by their police and their government(Because big brother knows best and you don't need to know the details. Now go play with your ball, citizen). This is the reaction that people are taking. I can't hold it against these people wanting these restrictions, but it is going to end up being too much a price for too little reward.

 

[BabyRaptor]

You know what, fuck this censorship thing. I'm not even Australian and this pisses me off. To any Aussies that are getting hit with this crap I have something for you:

The Tor Project [http://www.torproject.org/]

For those unfamiliar think of it as an uber-proxy, it takes a bit of TLC to get running quite right, and it's slower then regular internet, but it pretty well unblocks anything that you want once you've gotten it down.

For those that do know about Tor, well, I guess I needn't tell you about it.

They really should make this kind of thing illegal if it isn't already.

The government(And organizations like this) should have every right to block websites from user access.

Goddess above...I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

[ResonanceSD]

A comment from an actual Australian. I'll bet you won't see that jumped up clown, Tony Abbott and his cronies complain one jot. Or the family first party, or the independants..

 

[HandsomeZer0]

Hooray, censorship and government control. Maybe i wanted to visit that dentist for my teeth! But nooooo, apparently that dentist offended them somehow.. Jerks.

 

[Damura]

What a fucking joke. The only people that would go to "child abuse websites" (a small minority I hope) will simply switch ISP's... meanwhile everyone else has to endure the bullshit.

Was anyone really asking for an internet filter? I don't really see what blocking any of this content does. What's the benefit? Even assuming that they could block everyone in Australia from seeing it...

 

[samsonguy920]

Wait wait wait. This is just blocking like child porn and other really nasty things that are already illegal. I'm all for this cause these are the truly, profoundly wrong things that just shouldn't be. And they're will still be all the regular porn sooo.... anyone who has a problem with this.... your statements are invalid. This isn't going to be a precedent either since it's a voluntary action of the isp's on something that should of been done years ago.

Now censorship like China does is to far, but this is child porn and stuff people. Anyone whos against this happening.... I don't think anyone could object to this really. (Cept, you know).

I have absolutely nothing against child porn being censored. I have absolutely nothing against child pornographers being castrated and left in a matador ring naked and smelling of 'Play with me, bull.'
What really is the fear here is the isp's are taking it upon themselves to enact this. Which means zero government oversight, no restrictions on what the isp's can and cannot have on their blacklist. There is potential here of overreactiveness culminating in content that isn't illegal and isn't child pornography being banned from many Australians being able to view it. This stifles creativity, awareness, and education.
How much longer before people have to endure having only the ability to send colorless emails and view only the news that the isp's want them to see?
How much longer before people have to pay more for their internet in order for the isp to afford the added labor and materials in order to maintain this act?
How much longer before innocent people are judged to be child molesters because they went on a movie site to see such as 'Children of the Corn?' Which many overreactionaries judge to be child porn.
Child porn shouldn't exist. Putting blindfolds on people is not the way to remove it.

 

[Formica Archonis]

Now censorship like China does is to far, but this is child porn and stuff people. Anyone whos against this happening.... I don't think anyone could object to this really. (Cept, you know).

I think child pornography is horrid. I object to internet censorship that uses it as an excuse because it is, as they say, the thin end of the wedge. It's already illegal, so they don't NEED to ban it. But they do so they can get the infrastructure built without complaint. Then they can expand it. It's trivial to add to an existing blacklist. ACMA's leaked blacklist, the US no-fly list.... Innocents find themselves on them and have no way to get off them because there's no way OFF these lists. If we stop the creation of the censorship machine we save those innocents who would be hurt, while the existing laws still protect those who would be protected by the blacklist.

You want to know why this blacklist is dangerous? The blacklist is controlled by people and hidden from view. So imagine the blacklist in the hands of the most vile person you know. Someone who hates everything you stand for. Gay? Then someone who wants homosexuals back in stocks with their genitals mutilated, like the "good old days". Female? A serial abuser who treats women like property. Male? Valerie Solanas. And so on.

And then remember that there's nothing stopping your government from appointing - deliberately or not - a person like that to control the list and add what they want to it. And because you can't see the list, you can't prove they're hurting you. Congratulations, now you're treated like a pedophile because someone with unchecked power didn't like you, or something about you because you were born that way. All you can do is pray for Wikileaks (oh, look what's banned too) or another whistleblower to call the list out.

We're not pro-child porn. We're anti-censorship. We want the criminals punished without founding the Thought Police, and this isn't the way to do it.

To quote a far better man than I am, Bruce Schneier: One of the foremost security experts [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bruce_Schneier] in the world.

It is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state.
- Bruce Schneier, Secrets and Lies (2000), p. 53

Beware the Four Horsemen of the Information Apocalypse: terrorists, drug dealers, kidnappers, and child pornographers. Seems like you can scare any public into allowing the government to do anything with those four.
- Bruce Schneier, http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/12/computer_crime_1.html

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

I don't even know why they try.

I suppose it has something to do with protecting Australian society, in particular youths, from the horrors of the internet. To that I respond: "You lost yeeeaaars ago if that's your plan.".

 

[foolish snails]

snowball effect... this scares me

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Gods help them if they accidentally remove other porn. Hell they have never seen the likes of shall find them if they do.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Ain't that a *****. Hopefully it gets dropped. Or if it doesn't, hopefully it doesn't lead to many things getting censored to "protect the children" or some other stupid-ass excuse.

Agreed, I'm all for censorship in the right places, but there needs to be a line they cannot cross.

 

[Damura]

"Privately owned ISP's are taking it upon themselves to enact this. Which in one case is commendable, for why should people always have to expect their government to do everything for them?" ~ Samsonguy920

It would be commendable if they were doing it for the right reasons. But we can't ignore the fact that no filter has any chance of working. They know this. They're doing this to bring in naive customers. That's all.

 

[spectrenihlus]

Easy solution. Get an ISP that doesn't do this sort of this. Yea the two largest might but if enough people unsubscribe to their services well they would have to change their business plan.

The only problem is that Telstra actually own the backbone in Australia and sell dial-in ports, exchange space, and ADSL DSLAM ports wholesale to other smaller ISPs...

Just wait some company will say it doesn't block websites and everyone will flock to that one at least I hope so. Bear in mind I have no idea what the situation is like in Australia however as I have never been there and only have cursory knowledge of the place. But as a supporter of the free market I am of the opinion that a company can do whatever it likes ( within reason) and if you don't like it find another company. If enough people leave Telstra they will have to change it's practices.

 

[gyroscopeboy]

What a fucking joke. The only people that would go to "child abuse websites" (a small minority I hope) will simply switch ISP's... meanwhile everyone else has to endure the bullshit.

Was anyone really asking for an internet filter? I don't really see what blocking any of this content does. What's the benefit? Even assuming that they could block everyone in Australia from seeing it...

Also, you'd have to be fucking retarded to type "child pr0n plz" into google to get your fix...most pedophiles use encrypted bulletin boards or P2P..none of which is filtered by this.