The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: Hazcat on July 09, 2010, 11:24:50 AM
-
SYDNEY (AFP) - – Australia put its disputed Internet filter plan on hold for up to a year Friday to allow for an independent review of what content would be banned, in a move to mute controversy ahead of elections.
Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said that introduction of the "Clean Feed" filter would be delayed for consultations over what material should come under the initiative, which is to be administered by service providers.
"Some sections of the community have expressed concern about whether the range of material included in the Refused Classification category, under the National Classification Scheme, correctly reflects current community standards," Conroy said in a statement.
"In order to address these concerns, the government will recommend a review... be conducted at the earliest opportunity. The review would examine the current scope of the existing RC classification, and whether it adequately reflects community standards."
Conroy said the mandatory filter would not be imposed until completion of the review, which could take up to a year, buying the government a reprieve as it prepares to call an election in the coming weeks.
In the meantime, he said Australia's three largest internet service providers had agreed to voluntarily block a government-compiled list of child abuse webpages, which he described as featuring "abhorrent" content.
"I welcome the socially responsible approach taken by some of Australias largest ISPs," he said, adding that they jointly account for around 70 percent of Internet users in Australia.
Canberra's ambitious plan to block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse has drawn criticism from global giants including Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft.
Angry user groups launched an online campaign accusing the government of censorship, while cyber-activists succeeded in jamming key government websites in a concerted campaign of protest hacking.
User advocates, the pornography industry and others have likened Australia's proposed system to official firewalls operating in repressive regimes such as China and Iran.
Google has led criticism of Conroy's plan, with warnings it could damage the nation's reputation as a liberal democracy and set a dangerous global precedent.
The minister countered by accusing the web giant of hypocrisy, saying it had committed the "single greatest breach in the history of privacy" by collecting private wireless data while taking pictures for its "Street View" map service.
Australia last month launched a police investigation into the data collection, which Conroy described as a "quite deliberate" act. He denied it was in response to Google's vocal opposition to the web filter.
Conroy Friday said the delay was not intended to appease global critics which also include the US State Department, saying "international governments don't determine Australia's classification scheme."
He stood by the filter plan, saying he didn't think "any Australian actually tries to describe blocking child pornography or bestiality or pro-rape websites as censorship."
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20100709/ttc-australia-internet-technology-censor-0de2eff.html
Some good news for Phil and Sledge! ;D
-
Wht the hell are you people doing down there Phil? I (and virtually every other thinking pro-2A supporter) has said that the right to keep and bear arms is there to guarantee the right to freedom of speech and protest. Those rights are there to guarantee the rest of them. Well, look at the sequence. First the guns, then the censorship. What next, and what the hell are you going to do about it when you are disarmed and you can't comunicate via the net to effectively organize?
I have have pooh-poohed those who think Obama is going to declare Martial law (I still do). However, they ask me (fairly) in return, "What would it take to get you to think about more than just electioneering and peaceful protest?"
Well, this is it. I wouldn't start shooting politicians, but I would definately start joining and organizing folks who were prepared to do more than "risking arrest" or having marches with tribal drums and giant puppets. Chiefly, I would begin to start to try to convince folks that a radical political solution, like imposing a bill of rights to curtail state power de jure in a way it never has been in Oz is both necessary and a non-negotiable demand. Failing that........
FQ13 who has seen his tipping point. "Its for the children" my ass. >:( This is critical moment. It is the one time you have to get the liberal urban yuppies on the same page as the gun toting rednecks. Don't let this crisis go to waste. Make sure the public sees that there is no such thing as a "reasonable compromise" on basic rights. God speed.
-
Wht the hell are you people doing down there Phil? I (and virtually every other thinking pro-2A supporter) has said that the right to keep and bear arms is there to guarantee the right to freedom of speech and protest. Those rights are there to guarantee the rest of them. Well, look at the sequence. First the guns, then the censorship. What next, and what the hell are you going to do about it when you are disarmed and you can't comunicate via the net to effectively organize?
I have have pooh-poohed those who think Obama is going to declare Martial law (I still do). However, they ask me (fairly) in return, "What would it take to get you to think about more than just electioneering and peaceful protest?"
Well, this is it. I wouldn't start shooting politicians, but I would definately start joining and organizing folks who were prepared to do more than "risking arrest" or having marches with tribal drums and giant puppets. Chiefly, I would begin to start to try to convince folks that a radical political solution, like imposing a bill of rights to curtail state power de jure in a way it never has been in Oz is both necessary and a non-negotiable demand. Failing that........
FQ13 who has seen his tipping point. "Its for the children" my ass. >:( This is critical moment. It is the one time you have to get the liberal urban yuppies on the same page as the gun toting rednecks. Don't let this crisis go to waste. Make sure the public sees that there is no such thing as a "reasonable compromise" on basic rights. God speed.
Been wondering if there was one for you.
I should have known it would be 1A/censorship.
No sarcasm, I SHOULD have been able to guess that.
Censorship is a much hotter topic, and more appealing to those who may have no interest in guns. About the only thing that would stir up more people is if you tried to bring back slavery.
Old newspaper saying "if it bleeds, it leads", Piles of burning books are far more attention grabbing than a gradual encroachment by legislation and "judicial precedent", Perhaps we need to start illustrating the connection in our own information.
Along with the suggestions FQ made, I would suggest networking below the radar with like minded folks in your area.
You never know, but it might be nice to have friends who are not included on employee, or membership lists.
Just saying. ::)
-
Been wondering if there was one for you.
I should have known it would be 1A/censorship.
No sarcasm, I SHOULD have been able to guess that.
Censorship is a much hotter topic,
Its not just a hot topic, its the truth. Politics is the art of applying reason to struggles for power. To apply rules that mitigate the law of the jungle. Without free speech, reason is silent and its welcome to Somalia. Edward Bulwer-Lyyton, the guy who said the pen is mightier than the sword was correct. But only if the pen can summon a bunch of folks with swords. Otherwise its just poetry.
FQ13 who will now chill out, but I do mean that.
-
Hiding crime is not stopping crime.
(http://gallery.mac.com/philw/100192/rant-on/web.gif?ver=12747846650001)
this is a tried and trusted methods that submitted a highly cultured nation; Germans said that Hitler took away their rights "drip by drip"....
"...Prime Minister Julia Gillard backs the filtering plan. She made her support known .., saying she understood public concerns over the scheme but that Senator Conroy was working to find a resolution that would be in the "right shape"."
Yes, the PM does 'understand' the public concern, and just like Rudd is ignoring ALL evidence that is contrary to their position. That evidence being:
Blocking webpages does NOTHING to stop the original crime.
The pages mentioned (i.e. Child Abuse/Porn) don't require this 'new' filtering scheme to be blocked/shut down as they are already illegal and can be blocked via that legislation.
The more effective method would be to ID and track visitors to these sites and than prosecute them under the laws AS THEY ALREADY EXIST.
Forcing people to comply with a law (or legislation) is a very different thing to enforcing the law. Enforcing the law requires a person to have done (or suspected of doing) something wrong before action is taken against them.
As it is only specified webpages that would be blocked it would not stop even a fraction of the stuff due to people creating/deleting pages and email and P2P not covered by the filter.
Why is it that the poor stupid socialists think that it is their right to legislate against peoples freedoms then howl that the boat people cannot enter Australia. This will probably drag on for years and years
Conroy is only worried about it now as there is an election soon we have been complaining about it for the last 2 years!!!!
Conroy is a massive arse clown that has NFI what he is talking about with this.
The internet has seen a rise of (worldwide) support groups/forums where victims gain(ed) strength from each other and we have seen a rise in the criminals being exposed and arrested.
This government is doing the opposite and trying to hide it. These groups have spoken out in the past that they fear the government will ban their sites/forums because they deal with criminal material, even if it is to support victims of the crime.
Why waste tax payers money on this (125million btw), they say its to prevent images of child abuse ect... But what about the other things they may want to block without telling us.
I'm heartily sick of this government who think they are the keepers of all knowledge of what is best for us.
(http://gallery.mac.com/philw/100192/rant-off/web.gif?ver=12747846630001)