Aussies Hit the Streets Over Gov't Internet Filters 224
mask.of.sanity writes "Outraged aussies will hold simultaneous protests across Australia in opposition to the government's plans for mandatory ISP internet content filtering. The plan will introduce nation-wide filtered internet using blacklists operated by a government agency, away from public scrutiny. Politicians and ISPs will join protesters in the streets to voice their opposition to the government's plan, which has ploughed ahead, despite intense criticism that the technology will crippled internet speeds and infringe on free speech. Opponents said the most accurate filter chosen by the government will incorrectly block up to 10,000 Web pages out of 1 million."
If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists win! (Score:5, Insightful)
Good On 'Em (Score:5, Insightful)
It takes some amount of courage to stand up to laws like this. Basically they have to publicly oppose the guise of 'Safety' and 'For The Children'. For politicians and normal people alike it can be difficult to come out sand say you oppose anything that is 'supposed to protect children'.
Good luck to them I say, and lets hope this kills this insane filtering plan.
Expect Government Response (Score:5, Insightful)
They will label the protesters pedophile sympathizers. Insinuations will fly. Motives will be questioned. Fingers will be pointed. Dissent will disintegrate.
Newspapers will be sold.
These protesters are only protesting the symptoms and not the root causes of modern censorship. That is why they will fail.
Vox Populi (Score:3, Insightful)
"Think of the children! Won't somebody PLEEEEEEASE think of the CHILDREN!" - Helen Lovejoy
While this is a great start, perhaps they can also lift the bans on games? I'm pretty sure that aussies will want to play F.E.A.R. 2 and Silent Hill Homecoming. Okay, maybe not so much Silent Hill, but they'll want to give this one a miss by choice, not by rating board decree or royal edict.
Re:Good On 'Em (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course in the long run government will win, as they always do. The business of government is simply too lucrative to resist. A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you're sitting at the top of a trillion-dollar power pyramid.
There's a reason why no government in history (democracy or otherwise) has ever significant, permanently, and willingly reduced its revenue or power over the people. The reason is simple, although not many are willing to accept it (or admit it): more government benefits the people who make their fortunes in the business of government.
Make no mistake, governments only expand in power and revenue throughout their lifetimes. We ought to sit down and think long and hard about this reality, because it is a perfect window into the true motives of government.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the whole "think of the children" issue. There are child protection software packages available. Parents need to start taking responsibility for their offspring and stop expecting everyone else to bend over backwards for them. You brought them into this world, not me. You take care of their well-being. I'm all for "thinking of the children" when it doesn't adversely affect anyone else but this does. Therefore, it is unacceptable.
What else can Aussies DO? (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I don not see anything else Aussies can do. I don't think their constitution is strong enough to carry a challenge against parlementary primacy. Naturally, they can vote the b#ms out, but that happens anyways as a matter of control.
Unfortunately, many "democracies", especially UK-style parlements, functionally are elected dictatorships.
Allow me to fix that for them .. (Score:5, Insightful)
The opponents are doing themselves a disservice by analyzing percentages. By doing so it takes the focus from "should we or shouldn't we filter", to "how much should we filter?" Government should never filter Internet access, and the US should put pressure on them however they can, though I concede that is unlikely to happen since so many politicians are too busy trying to figure out ways to convince the proles that the US Government should filter the net to slap the hands of others for doing the same
(admit it; you were in desperate need of a good run-on sentence and I filled it.)
Re:Expect Government Response (Score:5, Insightful)
They will label the protesters pedophile sympathizers.
That will depend on how many people really show up and how clear the protester's leaders get the message through. If they convince the average Aussie the real reasons they are protesting, the 'bad' people can say anything they want. Just like people calling Obama a terrorist (and here I'm only making an analogy) - he got the message through.
These protesters are only protesting the symptoms and not the root causes of modern censorship. That is why they will fail.
To get people on the streets, you need the symptoms. And, when they are already there, you tell them about the theory behind that, and the root causes. But you need facts and impact on people's lives to make them care.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the problem; since it's automated, that 1% blocked could be anything. cnn/bbc/etc could be blocked for talking about a child porn news item. That would seem unacceptable to me.
Well, according to the last part of one of the articles
The trial is expected to use a blacklist of 10,000 banned Web pages, using the rumoured 1300-page blacklist held by the ACMA mixed with dummy data.
If that's true, they are simply going to blacklist a bunch of websites. I heavily doubt cnn/bbc/etc will ever negligently be put on that list. I know little to nothing about this scheme but if it's a blacklist, you probably have little worry about with major news sites. A lot more to worry about things labeled as "counter-culture" or "low brow humor."
Re:Curious (Score:1, Insightful)
Personally, I think it would be a waste of government money. There are plenty of inexpensive private company solutions. In general, anything that private industry can do, should be left to private industry. There are of course exceptions, but this is not one of them.
Re:Expect Government Response (Score:5, Insightful)
Aren't you precious? Go ahead, hunker down, keep your mouth closed, mind your own business, and refuse to participate until someone--ANYONE--makes a protest that rises to your standard of approval against those so-called "root causes". Meanwhile, teh pwers that be will take your pathetic silence as acquiescence and will heap even more restrictive control over your life.
The best internet filter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we need to back up and examine that statement in itself. Why should the govt. be involved at all in technology or laws that protect people from themselves?!?!
Isn't part of being free, the freedom to fuck up?
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:3, Insightful)
1 in a million is 1 too many.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:5, Insightful)
Any widespread filtering of the internet at large will result in a massive tech 'arms war' that will make the cold war look like a Sunday picnic. Splinter cryptoed internets on both the current and eventually new internets will occur. Won't be pretty.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:5, Insightful)
Lastly, how is this any different than what China is doing? I'm surprised nobody has made this connection and accused the government of being no better than anti-free-speech China.
It has before been alluded that it is just like what China have implemented, even in the senate. To quote Senator Conroy (the nut in charge of the department for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy).
I was wondering if I could get the questions without being accused of being the Great Wall of China.
From http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/S11346.pdf [aph.gov.au].
No, you great twat, you can't, not when what you're proposing is so damn much like it.
Censorship is wrong. Period. (Score:3, Insightful)
Whether by the Chinese government, the Aussies, the US, wherever, censoring public communication is the ultimate expression of disrespect for the public, and seriously undermines the validity of the offending government.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:3, Insightful)
a false positive rate of 1% really isn't that bad--especially on a fully automated system
Well, I'd say that a technology with that failure ratio isn't ready for production. Just try dropping every 100th page you load into your browser. I concede that maybe a
1% blockage of websites is completely acceptable to most folks
but a 1:100 false positive rate is unacceptable. Unless the opposition to the filters wins, I'll remove Australia from my list of countries I'd like to live in. Too bad, I remember it as a great country when I've been there on vacation years ago.
Re:Wow, taking to the streets huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pornography has "no socially redeeming aspect"?
Can you tell me what the "socially redeeming aspect" of reading Slashdot is? And why I should allow you to continue doing so?
"This level of censorship will have zero practical effect on political speech."
On what basis do you make that assertion? And why are you limiting it to only "political" speech? And in what circumstances do limits on free speech (political or not) "often" make sense?
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:3, Insightful)
I would be interested too see if sites which report negatively about this new adventure suddenly find themselves on the list.
Re:Curious (Score:2, Insightful)
Simple, really (Score:3, Insightful)
Parents have not exercised proper control over their children. Obvious on the face of it.
Government has recognized this lacking and is preparing to step up to the plate, at least in some minimal aspect.
This removes the need for any "parenting" in that specific area. Of course, since "parenting" is an obsolete concept that seems to have gone out of favor with June Cleaver we can expect further government action.
It is an obvious step. The government can't legislate "parenting" so they are going to (ineffectively) step into that role. The people have spoken, by not doing any parenting themselves. I believe we can expect similar action in the US sometime soon. The nanny state expands to fill all voids.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:1, Insightful)
And why do you think that we are free ?
Just because you repeat "Land of the free" a lot doesn't make it true.
In every nation there are stringent laws that govern the behaviour of individuals and companies.
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:1, Insightful)
This is in response to an earlier comment ... on the time line. ... OK. So WHAT? These countries have not a bite to their actions. Let's play Soylent Green and scoop em up.
The Aussies, Brits & Canadians have already LOST. They're going to protest this action
In the United States, we're just a hair's tooth away from the same. Check out the War Powers Act AND the Presidential Executive Orders AND the power given to FEMA concerning putting the US Constitution on HOLD without stating WHEN or HOW it would resume (restoring RIGHTS Back to the American Subjects and a restoration of their Citizenship) Please remember the Branch Dividians taught us how a "Cult" is defined by our friends running our government.
I love this country but, neither party has an answer since departing so far away from intents of the Original Constitution.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:5, Insightful)
if they do this in the USA, there will be blood. end of story.
I didn't see any blood over the USA PATRIOT Act, did you?
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:5, Insightful)
No, in fact, I've seen outright approval of the PATRIOT Act. Too many people have the attitude "It doesn't hurt me in an obvious and immediate way and it just might help catch a terrorist, so it's a good thing!" A trivial application of critical thinking shows how it hurts EVERYBODY in subtle and long-term ways. It is one of many popular laws that exists because we base our decisions more on worst-case-scenarios than on rational cost-benefit analysis.
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:3, Insightful)
So what you're saying is that THEY are actually Cardassians? child porn is a smokescreen for music torrents which are a smokescreen for free speech.
"a plan within a plan within a plan leading to a trap" [wikipedia.org] seems very in-line with what you're describing. Hmm, this situation is alternatively terrifying and awesome, not sure how I'm supposed to feel as an old trek nerd and current music nerd.
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:3, Insightful)
That's because for all the freedoms taken away/mangled by the patriot act, it's not immediately present in the mind of the average american. Americans just plain don't like to be bothered. Laws like the Patriot Act get passed because it doesn't affect the day-to-day grind. But, take away the ability to surf porn and chat up myspace and people will be pissed. God knows what would happen if some ISP decided to block fantasy football sites here.
Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good On 'Em (Score:2, Insightful)
To play devil's advocate I wouls say that a single person can indeed act decently and change things for the better, but only if they actually have the power to make those changes.
In democratic governments the ability of the same individual within the government to make the same changes is minor compared to the larger number of those who would rather increase its size.
Not saying that autocratic governments are inherently better...but this is an aspect of democracy which one could argue is not always best.
Re:The Grand Tube Experiment (Score:5, Insightful)
They can block anyone's free speech and blame the whole thing on a mistake.
From what I've seen over the years, the incompetence defense works every single time. Officials can do something they want to do and blame it on a mistake and the public accepts it unquestioningly every single time. It's one of the most perfect propaganda techniques ever engineered.
Re:Good On 'Em (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that pretty much covers it.
The way to stop this (Score:4, Insightful)
Write to your local MP and senators (especially write to those who hold the ballance of power in the senate).
The greens have already said they will oppose this in its current form (Whether they would accept it if it was 100% opt-in and voluntary I dont know)
If we can get enough people to oppose it (especially those on the liberal/national opposition in the senate) Kevin wont be able to pass the law necessary to implement the filtering.
Re (Score:2, Insightful)