Comments | yh_tac: Guys, have you heard anything about this?

yh_tac

Guys, have you heard anything about this?

Nov 27, 2008 09:51

Is it really true that the government is trying to introduce an ISP-level filter in an attempt to reduce child pornography? Is it true that it will be totally ineffective, raise internet usage prices, block acceptable sites accidentally and slow down internet speeds up to 80%??

I can barely believe it. I thought sanity reigned in the Australian ( Read more... )

Comments 6

redinteriors November 27 2008, 03:32:51 UTC

Already have! I'm pretty sure I also email spammed everyone I possibly could.. please do so as well Cathy!

yh_tac November 27 2008, 23:00:46 UTC

Yes, you did indeed email spam me and it was a deeply rewarding experience.

vividgrae November 27 2008, 05:25:42 UTC

Yeah, Sisi got me. Done and done.

rain_and_snow November 27 2008, 14:03:39 UTC

Uh, yes.
That was one of the election promises.
Like SPEEDING UP internet.

It's not specifically an attempt to reduce child pornography. It can't be. They're not bothering with email or P2P. And besides, child porn has to be MADE, and they're not doing anything special about that - the actual PROBLEM.

And I think it could potentially slow up to 86%, but I could be wrong.

yh_tac November 27 2008, 23:05:52 UTC

I'm hoping it's just a knee-jerk reaction to make it look like they're doing something about child pornography, because as you said it's not really going to be effective. Apart from what you said, it's pretty easy to bypass filters like that if you put your mind to it.

What really worries me is that this can happen in a democracy. I thought the hints of totalitarianism would leave with Howard, but it looks like that isn't going to happen and it scares the shit out of me.

rain_and_snow November 28 2008, 09:24:43 UTC

There is little real difference between Howard and Rudd that I can see.
It's not a knee jerk reaction at all. Filtering of the internet - or similar (I don't recall the words)- was one of the election promises. It was not specifically about child porn, and I doubt this is either. Particularly as it's got nothing to do with the problem, only one of the representations of it. Voters were left under the impression that you could opt out of the 'clean feed', though, contrary to what is now being proposed.