Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Australia Censorship The Internet Your Rights Online

No Internet “kill Switch” For Australia 152

Posted by samzenpus
from the always-open dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Well, it looks as though at least some Governments have a backbone. Egypt switched off its internet to stop protests over the past few days, and the US Government is considering legislation that will give the President 'kill switch' powers over the internet as well. But in Australia, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy — best known for his attempt to filter the country's internet for child pornography and the country's flagship national fibre broadband rollout, says such a scenario couldn't occur."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No Internet “kill Switch” For Australia

Comments Filter:
  • by QuantumG (50515) * <> on Thursday February 03, 2011 @04:37AM (#35088246) Homepage Journal

    Honestly? The only way to get rid of unelected officials is constitutional reform. I really thought this was going to be the generation to do it, but it seems there's too many of us around who have fond memories of standing on the assembly ground to God Save The Queen.. and we can't talk about changing the constitution without talking about finally pulling our finger out and cutting the safety line to mother England. Or, ya know, we could petition the US to become their 52nd state - right after Israel.. I keed, I keed!

  • by Angostura (703910) on Thursday February 03, 2011 @04:39AM (#35088258)

    OK, I'll stick my head above the parapet, because I'm interested in getting opinions.

    Let's assume for a second that the kill-switch proponents are acting from the best of motives. They are worried about the potential for a huge, effective, external Internet attack on critical infrastructure, that could do the worst things - cut power, stop water , turn all the traffic lights red - you've seen the movies.

    They are concerned that it such an attack occurs the population will be screaming "Why didn't you plan, why don't you stop it, how come you can't turn external connections off, you bozos?".

    So they are planning and worrying - as they should.

    What is wrong, in principle with a killswitch, if the correct checks and balances are in place? What is a better solution?

  • by PatPending (953482) on Thursday February 03, 2011 @04:42AM (#35088266)
    Well, RFC 1149 worked for Egypt

"Text processing has made it possible to right-justify any idea, even one which cannot be justified on any other grounds." -- J. Finnegan, USC.