Slashdot Mirror

No joke. Photos of small-breasted woman, regardless of age, is also considered child-porn.

Bullshit.

As to the actual story, the police already wander around public car parks checking to see if you've secured your car, and leave a flyer under the wiper. If the car is secure they tick the "Congratulations!" box; if not, they tick a box describing why your car is insecure. A quick Google tells me that this is also fairly common in the Good Ol' US of A.

Don't see anybody complaining about that, though. Apparently, the police knowing that somebody within a street or two has an open WiFi AP is worse than them physically touching your property and potentially building a database of who habitually doesn't lock their cars...

Yes. Pictures of women over 18 with small breasts are illegal on the grounds that it is "virtual child pornography":

http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/australia-bans-small-breasts/

Please note that in our country the Australian Classification Board does not have any legislative powers. They can exclusively ban material from sale and that's where their ability to regulate content ends. It is perfectly legal to own pornography depecting women over 18 with small breasts, and it is legal to buy it overseas and have it shipped in, as well bring it through customs.

The banning of media content is something that falls under the powers of the State not the Federation. For example the book of American Psycho was banned by the Office of Film and Literature Classification. Additionally the state of Queensland passed a law specifically putting this book on a restricted items register. The result is it's perfectly legal to buy the book overseas, even just on Amazon and have it shipped to you providing you don't live in Queensland. If you travel to Queensland with the book and you get sprung by an unusually switched on cop then you're screwed for carrying a restricted item.

Yes. Pictures of women over 18 with small breasts are illegal on the grounds that it is "virtual child pornography":

http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/australia-bans-small-breasts/

Drawings of girls under 18 are banned because that too is virtual child pornography:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/01/simpsons-powerpuff-girls-porn-nets-jail-time-for-australian.ars

Basically then if they want to arrest you I'm sure they could find something in your porn collection that's illegal, whether its a girl with small breasts or some cartoon porn.

Much like Canada they're very concerned with "virtual" things down there and far less concerned about real crimes. No doubt they'll be banning virtual murder and virtual dangerous driving in computer games next.

Nice try at painting this as a right wing failure but it's actually *anti-abortion* sites that are already on the blacklist http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/acma-anti-abortion-prohibited/ .

The last government we had which was deeply conservative refused to implement a system like this, instead pointing people to the multitude of private solutions that they could implement on their own machines.

The current government - Labour - is left wing, pro-abortion, pro-union and now pro-censorship and have already censored anti-abortion websites.

I'm sorry if object reality is the exact opposite of what you and the individuals who modded you up wish that it were but this is not being implemented and abused by the mythical whipping boy of the internet the conservative right wing. No, the biggest censorship push in our history is being implemented and abused by the allegedly cool, metro, technocrat left wing.

So where are you going to look at it from now?

If I were this guy, this would be my defense...

The Simpsons have existed for 20+ years. Yes, they may have childlike features, but they are all past the age of consent, even Maggie.

This is Australia silly; they're banning small breasts in porn because it looks like child porn. http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/australia-bans-small-breasts/

If you read that article, ANYTHING that resembles child porn to a child-porn-centered-classifier is illegal.

"Shall we put such hysteria aside and look at what this ruling is saying to Australian women? Basically, it's classing a certain normal female body type as obscene. It's declaring all flat chests to be automatically juvenile, something that should not be viewed by anyone because of a fear that it will stir up "base instincts" in certain people."

"Can the Classification Board be any more insulting or sexist?"

I suggest that from now :
- Flat chested women stop having sex, this is obscene, they are like, you know, children, that's unhealthy
- People having sex with flat women should be charged as pedophiles.
- Pubic shaving should be forbidden. It makes the body look juvenile.
- Men should have mandatory beard, otherwise they look too similar to children
- Men without beard should be barred from doing porn.

This idiotic plan is not killed and dead. The Labor government in general, and Senator Stephen Conroy in particular, have been taken aback by the strength of the opposition. The article noted in the summary only covers some of the incompetent answers given to hard questioning by the main Opposition party and one of the minority parties.

Trials are still being underway involving 4 tiny ISPs, one medium ISP, one Christadelphian ISP and one large ISP majority owned by Singtel.

There is no engineering, vendor neutral specification giving trial design criteria or testing methodology as the basis for the trials. There is no requirement for the ISPs to disclose which method of censorship they selected. The ISPs have been supported to the tune of $AU300,000 but there is still a $AU887,000 consultancy contract for the testing and reporting of on a system to block up to 10,000 URLs. The IWF annual report lists between 1100-1300 sites blocked by their system. Rumour has it that much of the testing in the small ISPs is using equipment from the same censorware vendor but this is not confirmed as several censorware vendors have been lobbying for the windfalls. Watchdog, using the NetClean system was involved in some separate testing undertaken by another ISP, Exetel. The Exetel trial received a great deal of criticism in the Australian internet community and Exetel customers. The trial has not been cancelled and neither has the testing consultancy.

Any assumption that the scheme will disappear is premature.

A list of 1000s of banned films and publications is still in existence. The censorship regime has become more and more repressive over the last 10 years. Realistically the entire basis of censorship needs serious review. It is managed by more than one government authority under several different pieces of legislation. The proposed censorship of the internet is under the control of the telecommunications authority which is yet another government authority.

You would have to try very hard to find a more incompetent approach to anything to do with IT, networking or civil liberties all in the same package.

The German BKA is planning to put up actual "STOP SIGNS" on the Internet?
The Australians had fun with this:
"Simulate Australian Internet censorship" http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/simulate-australian-internet-censorship/
Or the direct link
http://nanourl.net/36a87
You get to see you ip for that "logged' feeling :)

You will find that infact some trials in Tasmania have already taken place and a report on the effectiveness, or otherwise, of that effort can be had here.

have a look at this link, yet another blog with info on the whole pesky internet censorship thing here in .au. There are also countless discussions including on the greens forum.