Censorious Swine - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-25-2008, 08:38 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:20 AM
Censorious Swine

I am apparently incapable of making the right choices online so the government is stepping in to make them for me
Quote:
Australians will be unable to opt-out of the government's pending Internet content filtering scheme, and will instead be placed on a watered-down blacklist, experts say.

Under the government's $125.8 million Plan for Cyber-Safety, users can switch between two blacklists which block content inappropriate for children, and a separate list which blocks illegal material.

Pundits say consumers have been lulled into believing the opt-out proviso would remove content filtering altogether.

The government will iron-out policy and implementation of the Internet content filtering software following an upcoming trial of the technology, according to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.

A spokesman for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said the filters will be mandatory for all Australians.

“Labor’s plan for cyber-safety will require ISPs to offer a clean feed Internet service to all homes, schools and public Internet points accessible by children,” he said.

“The upcoming field pilot of ISP filtering technology will look at various aspects of filtering, including effectiveness, ease of circumvention, the impact on internet access speeds and cost.”

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) contacted by Computerworld say blanket content filtering will cripple Internet speeds because the technology is not up to scratch.

Online libertarians claim the blacklists could be expanded to censor material such as euthanasia, drugs and protest.

Internode network engineer Mark Newton said many users falsely believe the opt-out proviso will remove content filtering.

“Users can opt-out of the 'additional material' blacklist (referred to in a department press release, which is a list of things unsuitable for children, but there is no opt-out for 'illegal content'”, Newton said.

“That is the way the testing was formulated, the way the upcoming live trials will run, and the way the policy is framed; to believe otherwise is to believe that a government department would go to the lengths of declaring that some kind of Internet content is illegal, then allow an opt-out.

“Illegal is illegal and if there is infrastructure in place to block it, then it will be required to be blocked — end of story.”

Newton said advisers to Minister Conroy have told ISPs that Internet content filtering will be mandatory for all users.

The government reported it does not expected to prescribe which filtering technologies ISPs can use, and will only set blacklists of filtered content, supplied by the Australia Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

EFA chair Dale Clapperton said in a previous article that Internet content filtering could lead to censorship of drugs, political dissident and other legal freedoms.

“Once the public has allowed the system to be established, it is much easier to block other material,” Clapperton said.

According to preliminary trials, the best Internet content filters would incorrectly block about 10,000 Web pages from one million.
Computerworld - No opt-out of filtered Internet

So it was going to be that the state would have two books, one censored one which "protects the children" and another which you could choose that would contain sex, drugs and naughty literature; apparently that is too much and censor creep has occurred. Because of out rating system it is illegal to watch certain unrated films or read certain books, this internet censorship program will be abused and in principle prevents citizens from getting information. This is what we suffer for only having implied rights, give me a first amendment any day (although please take away the politicians).

Repeat: According to preliminary trials, the best Internet content filters would incorrectly block about 10,000 Web pages from one million.

Every time that the state blocks access to information is incorrect (with exceptions of harm such as child pornography, although not depictions of it - although child porn is more an issue of law enforcement protecting children than censorship, I think there is something to be said for breaking down rings rather than simply blocking sites).
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 10:26 PM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 03:20 PM
that basically sucks.
__________________

__________________
Se7en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 11:38 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:20 AM
And for grownups on FYM, the T-Shirt says Jesus is a Cunt
Quote:
A GOLD Coast teenager who wore a T-shirt by English extreme metal band Cradle of Filth that reads 'Jesus is a c**t' has been charged with offensive behaviour. Above the offensive slogan a nun is depicted masturbating.

A 16-year-old was arrested on Monday for wearing the shirt and was charged with offensive behaviour under the Summary Offences Act 2005 for public nuisance.

Senior Sergeant Arron Ottaway said the teen was walking along Hollywell Road, in Biggera Waters, when a officer saw him.

Police conducted inquiries at Australia Fair, where the teen said he bought the shirt, to find any shops selling it.

The Reverend Matt Hunt of the Helensvale Baptist Church said it was sad people spoke about the Lord in such a way.

"It's fairly common language these days to express sadness, anger or hurt," he said. "It's a degrading word to use and Jesus is anything but that. It's like calling white black."

Mr Hunt said using the Lord's name in vain was a serious sin.

"When someone comes to the point of saying Jesus is the devil or Jesus is 'expletive', the Bible does say be very careful because you're on thin ice."

Gold Coast lawyer Bill Potts said the arrest highlighted Australia's need for a Bill of Rights.

"One of the great problems with our country is that we talk about rights such as privacy and freedom of speech and the like but they are not enshrined or protected in any way as they are in America," he said.

"While there are always limits on freedom of speech, you can't incite violence or anything like that, it seems to be now more than ever that our rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression should be protected.

"A Bill of Rights which enshrines that protection is long overdue in this country."

Mr Potts said charging the teen was 'ludicrous' and brought the law into disrepute.

"A shirt might offend some and might be amusing to others," he said.

"If a person was wearing the shirt in a church or a religious rally where it was specifically intended to offend or cause disruption, then perhaps the prosecution might stand a chance.

"However, to criminalise juvenile or boorish messages is to bring the law into disrepute. The police are acting like the thought police and censors."
Teen arrested for 'blasphemous T-shirt' | News.com.au Top stories | News.com.au



It's not classy, it's not even particularly insightful but should we have cops arresting teenagers for a t-shirt?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 11:42 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 03:20 PM
Quote:
“Labor’s plan for cyber-safety will require ISPs to offer a clean feed Internet service to all homes, schools and public Internet points accessible by children,” he said.
Does this mean only homes with children? And how would they determine that?
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 11:45 PM   #5
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,730
Local Time: 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
It's not classy, it's not even particularly insightful but should we have cops arresting teenagers for a t-shirt?
Absolutey not.
__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 11:46 PM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:20 AM
All computers can potentially be used by children, hence you will have the child lock by default when you register with an ISP, you have to call up the ISP to get the slightly less censored internet.

In the immortal words of George Carlin, Fuck the Children!
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 12:02 AM   #7
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 03:20 PM
That's ridiculous.

Why isn't it incumbent on the children's parents to police their internet access? What's that got to do with the rest of us?
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 12:35 AM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:20 AM
Because that doesn't win over theocrats who can hold a balance of power or win votes in the broader community, apparently the filter at Parliament House blocked out information on the Afghan opium crop as well as reproductive health and the issues surrounding sexualisation of children, if a filter ever does go online I can think of quite a few sites that I currently visit which should be blocked off, I don't think of myself as a criminal.

For practical purposes censorship can't work, I can get hold of anything I want one way or another, but as a matter of principle it seems hopeless, the tone of discussion is essentially that those who oppose censorship are child pornographers; this isn't an issue limited to Australia, and no country is immune, although from what I understand the US does have the strongest protections on free speech.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 02:03 AM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 06:20 AM
On this, you and I are as one, A-Wanderer. The wowsers, straighteners and downright authoritarians in the government (who, I happen to think, make up a relatively small community of obsession around the relevant minister, Conroy, perhaps with a bit of tacit support from Rudd who really should know better), are a joke and a disgrace.

And the theocratic senators they might be trying to please with this sort of stuff, will be gone soon enough. The support for that sort of thing is pretty thin in Australia, and it was a bit of dopey luck that Fielding for one ever got a seat.
__________________
Kieran McConville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 04:16 AM   #10
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 07:20 AM
what are we China?

don't let your kids on the computer without you watching them. Put the net nanny on. Why do we as a childless household have to contend with these bans because some children are nosy fucks.

If i want to research how to make a bomb out of fertilizer, or read arab websites, or say 'fuck the government and their stupid ideas and laws' on another site, i should be allowed to.
Censorship is a load of shit. People shouldn't really give a fuck about what other people are doing or saying unless is DIRECTLY affects them or is seriously breaking the law.
__________________
dazzlingamy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 06:56 AM   #11
Loungeroom Dancing Queen
 
Purplereign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: where I can Breathe . . . and it's Magnificent
Posts: 24,782
Local Time: 06:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzlingamy View Post
what are we China?

don't let your kids on the computer without you watching them. Put the net nanny on. Why do we as a childless household have to contend with these bans because some children are nosy fucks.

If i want to research how to make a bomb out of fertilizer, or read arab websites, or say 'fuck the government and their stupid ideas and laws' on another site, i should be allowed to.
Censorship is a load of shit. People shouldn't really give a fuck about what other people are doing or saying unless is DIRECTLY affects them or is seriously breaking the law.
Shazam!

Time for adults to take responsibility, stop pussy footing around and wanting to be their kids best friends and actually freakin' parent . . . also time for governments to stop trying to sneak through dodgy legislation that erodes more of our rights to information & freedom of expression
__________________
'You might just as well say, that "I breathe when I sleep" is the same thing as "I sleep when I breathe"!'
Purplereign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 07:54 AM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
Varitek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: on borderland we run
Posts: 16,861
Local Time: 03:20 PM
that is outrageous.
__________________
Varitek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 08:06 AM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:20 AM
I know that I am stocking up on as much lesbian porn with golden showers, hot wax and spanking while I still can; one never knows when it could come in handy.

Same goes for THIKAL and PIHKAL.

And Salo.

It's all technically illegal here or should it be
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 09:30 AM   #14
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 151,035
Local Time: 07:20 AM
Am I the only person who doesn't think they can or will actually successfully implement this? I just can't bring myself to care.
__________________
"Mediocrity is never so dangerous as when it is dressed up as sincerity." - Søren Kierkegaard

Ian McCulloch the U2 fan:
"Who buys U2 records anyway? It's just music for plumbers and bricklayers. Bono, what a slob. You'd think with all that climbing about he does, he'd look real fit and that. But he's real fat, y'know. Reminds me of a soddin' mountain goat."
"And as for Bono, he needs a colostomy bag for his mouth."

U2gigs: The most comprehensive U2 setlist database!
Gig pictures | Blog
Axver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 09:54 AM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:20 AM
Does it matter when they send in the AFP to bust up art galleries? Or when films of artistic merit are refused classification (for the record I don't think it is the states job to play art critic and decide what constitutes artistic merit)? Or when video games are banned or altered for distribution? (which actually impacts me, from the censored Duke3D with green blood and without strippers to the removal of morphine from Fallout 3, I think I they add to the game, reflect the creators intentions and I like seeing tits and drugs)

Technological limitations are not indefinitely insurmountable, the concept that the state should be involved in regulating the information that adults can access is repellent to me and an argument grounded in free speech and free expression will outlast one based on the high price and limitations of a filter at this point in time.

I don't think that we will wake up under a jackboot because of an internet filter or even that the politicians would be smart enough to properly abuse it, I do think that it would be an annoyance that would underscore the lack of guarantees on free speech that would force people to use some basic tricks to get what they want online. There are obviously some examples where free expression is curtailed for justifiable reasons in a civil society, military secrets, industrial information and libel for instance but those arguments shouldn't extend over art or entertainment.

I have a strong conviction that I as an individual should be able to access information freely (however consumption of a product which positively causes harm to others such as child porn should be a crime) and that I should have sovereignty over my own mind and body (provided I am not causing harm to other people). No matter how simple it is to bypass the law and exercise individual autonomy I consider censorship wrong in principle and worthy of attention if not active protest. I suspect those convictions would equal that of the most devout theist, and they actually have tangible impact., though thankfully I live in a stable and relatively free country and have access to a reasonably unregulated internet for the foreseeable future and there are practically no serious consequences if they did pull it off.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com