Slashdot Mirror
Australia's Censored URL List Remains Hidden
kinsalis writes: "There is an article about the Electronic Frontiers Australia's failed attempt to have access to a list of sites which where deemed worth of censorship under Australian Internet censorship law. While it stands to reason that most of the sites would be child pornography, what is to stop someone slipping in any old url if no one can check the list?"
here in the US we have the first amendment which enables us to not be censored in any way on the internet... oh wait...
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
What? You don't trust your gov't?
I have been pwned because my
Are IP's blocked? Are DNS lookups merely prohibited?
/.ers, how has this affected you? If it has affected you, have you been able to conveniently side-step it?
In almost all cases, an anonymous proxy will get around these guys. (We miss you, Safeweb!) If it's just DNS lookups being probhibited, there are many, many public DNS servers as well as a growing system of alternate DNS roots.
So, to the Aussie
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Have never heard of this group anywhere but slashdot. The URL list is indeed kept hidden but the average man in the street is not in the least bit interested in it - i have never come across a site that i cannot get to and from memory the submission is voluntary.
A country has a right to prohibit the import or availity of certainf thibgs, publcations, movies, pictures, magazines etc - no one will argue that the prohibition of kiddie porn mags is a bad thing (no one i wont shoot on sight will argue it anyway....) but they will argue about this mythical list that may not even exist (no one has ever actually seen it)
This is not america and thankfully censorship here is not all present, you also need to be aware we do not have a constitution like the US (we do have one but not like yours) and no free speach amendments.
Basically i see this as a storm in a teacup and im sure other aussies feel the same way.
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
of why everyone should have a 2nd amendment. Unresponsive Government? Where's my shotgun!
How long does something like this stay secret...serveral people must have the list, and many want it. In order to block the items on the list serveral sys admin's or similar people must have the list. Being that this is front page news on /. , it can also be said that many people would like to see the list. Hence it is only a matter of time. Correct?
Repost forgot to login.
LinuxWorx
Spelling errors are intentional as are gramatical error
... that goatse.cx is included on the list. I am sick of it.
I can imagine that a list like this can (and probably will) be misused by the Australian Government in order to block the sites of certain people or organizations that dare to question the government, especially during political campaigns like elections.
Now I live in Canada and I can see some examples of attempted censorship by our news and media because they question the ethics of the polictial party currently in power.
Why is it that everytime that a goverment whether it be American, European or Australian (the governers of the free world mind you) we find that the Internet becomes a little weaker and ends up being worst then we could have believed.
/. to be banned next. What about new sites? Do they automate information, if so do they block all sites because this will give problems with sites such as essex.gov and so on.
Who says what is acceptable in this case? what if they choose
The fact is that goverment needs to understand what role they should have with the Internet, which is they should have no control over it, how can you control what comes into a country, who has these controls?
I believe that these questions need to be answered first, America should not and can not become the police of the Internet (look what has happened in Bosnia because we are the police of the Internet?)
It would be fairly trivial for a blocking mechanism to collect the IP addresses of those requesting "dangerous" content. Instant fishing expedition. Arrest and fine anyone who tries to access illegal content. Given that porn sites are buying up expired domains, someone checking an old bookmark could be in for a nasty surprise when the police come knocking on their door. Now you've slid into a state more like Turkey or Burma, where all Internet access is monitored. All justified by "protecting the citizenry from dangerous content."
DMCA - Chilling free speech since 1998.
What if a "blacklisted" site is cached on Google?
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Having never heard of this group before now i decided to check them out
/. able to comment ?
Executive Director Irene Graham
Chair Kimberley Heitman
Vice-Chair Greg Taylor
Secretary/Treasurer Dale Clapperton
General Board Members Roger Clarke
Nick Ellsmore
Amit Khanna
Richard Rannard
Craig Small
Danny Yee
10 years in IT and i have never heard of any of these people - any other aussie
Just use P2P apps to get around them. The internet is already going back to its good ol days of anarchy. See u on the other side!
A famous Kuro5hin guy known for abusing anyone who disagrees with him with mod bombings and attacks - man what company these guys have - and he's NEVER held a real job in IT - hes a pro student...
what a bunch of ratbags - tell me timothy DID danny submit this article to you perchance (i know he posts on here) ?
Most of the non-North American world doesn't care about democracy or other current issues. They lead busy lives that are carved out for them by their respective societies and know only the bliss of ignorance. Take the Japanese insistance that it's now okay to hunt whales since the populations have returned. Have they already forgotten how the populations got so low in the first place?
This article won't change a thing or make even an ozzy care. The average ozzy is too busy to ponder what life would be like if he had the advantages of the average North American.
I cringe every time I see this topic come up....
There is no Internet censorship in Australia...
There may be a list of 'banned' sites, but no mandatory or network level blocking is happening.
An Australian can quite happily go to any site regardless of how disgusting, disturbing, explicit it is, or who's political agenda it's pushing.
I believe that ISPs have to provide access to blocking software if the customer wants it.....but that's the limit.
I believe that the list is provided to vendors of blocking software for the Australian versions of their software.
Advanced users are users too!
Whatever happened to the Troll Library? If someone could post the "blowjob with braces" troll (that one was priceless), that would be great.
Hmmm... www.hotsexynakeddodgyphotos.com could get banned. But what about URL spoofing? E.g. hotsexynakeddodgyphotos@porn.com ?
On a similar note, I really have to say I'm disturbed by what seems to be a new trend in spam/pop ups - "rape" photos. The other day at astalavista.box.sk I got a pop up that loaded up galleries all about rape - it was very unsettling.
As well, most the spam I get now has "rape" in the title. The way it's written though I'm wondering if whoever is writing it really knows what it means - they are obviously not native English speakers.
--- Why are you wearing that stupid bunny suit? | Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?
The Regulations explained
And here it discusses the type of information blocked...
And of course this forms part of the NON MANDATORY code of practice Found Here which states
So basically the code is only enforced when you have done something worthy of enforcement - perhaps like hosting kiddie porn sites ?
So what we have is an orginisation who is trying to make a name for itself (having no actual cases to fight in australia aside from this) by filing a freedom of information request that they no doubt knew would fail and then when it does and the press release hits the news getting one of their members to post a story here....
Maybe im cynical but there is no story here that i can see ?
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
Here in Canada quite a commotion has erupted over the firing of an editor of the Ottawa Citizen for having written an editorial calling for the resignation of our Prime Minister.
In question are the close ties the owner of the media chain has with the Prime Minister due to the fact that it was his very government that allowed the media chain to persue a number of controversial acquisitions that had been previously disallowed by canadian law.
What is clear here, is that politicians will meddle with the media and what they report when given the chance to do so. What is to stop, in this case, an australian Prime Minister from blocking a website whose constant criticism of his policies has aggravated him? Since the list cannot be checked the answer is probably nothing.
This government sponsored censorship raises a serious issue of precedent. The precedent of the governement having the power to block access to information, otherwise publically accessible to the citizen, for unverifiable purposes and results. It is the governement giving itself the right to restrict what a citizen could normally view without restriction in any other country-- without appeal or public review.
In my view, there is a careful balance of power that is being toyed with, both in Australia and in Canada, that needs to be stopped. I hope the Australian courts see the danger here and reverse the decision and I hope justice prevails in the case of this editor who has been wrongfully fired-- in fact it is my wish now that this media group be broken up.
See Citizen story here and here
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
As we all know, censorship is probably in the top three major internet offences.
So, I propose that any country censoring its citizens internet (Australia, Singapore, China, Zimbabwe, listen up) should be denied access to your machines.
You job, as a sysadmin who cares for the internet, is to block these countries from accessing your servers.
When they get tired of being stuck in their own sandbox and choose to fix their broken laws, unblock them. If they decide they don't want to do anything about it, fine, its their bed, let them lie in it.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Many people here are probably not aware of the fact that Australia recently became the first country to outlaw the use and possession of Salvia Divinorum, a psychedelic plant unrelated to any other in known existence (its active component is Salvinorin-A) -- What's to stop them adding sites like sagewisdom and Erowid in an effort to prevent the free flow of information as well? The reasons of its illegality in Australia are somewhat unknown, as the plant itself is not habit forming, or destructive (at least not known to be), and rather singular in its reality modifiying effects... Restricting information on these topics would only do more to prevent the safe usage of such enthegenic substances.
d. Taylor Singletary
d. Taylor Singletary,
reality technician techra.el
ISP's are, however, required to offer their customers Netnanny-style filtering software (from an approved list of filtering software providers) which additionally checks the government's list of blocked sites. Last I heard the takeup rate on that software was approximately 0% :)
As I've said before several times here, it was just a stunt to keep a particular federal Senator on side for a vote on tax changes. It's a stupid law, but compared to the *other* stupid things this particular government has done (and their are scads of them) this one at least has the virtue of being irrelevant.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
"The more laws, the less justice."
-- Marcus Tullius Cicero De Officiis [1195]
"...For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than
passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase
of crime in this country is closely connected with this.
--Albert Einstein, "My First Impression of the U.S.A.", 1921
Yes, you are quite right. I believe Robert Heinlien also states something simular (or quotes Einstein).
This article won't change a thing or make even an ozzy care. The average ozzy is too busy to ponder what life would be like if he had the advantages of the average North American. Excuse me? Is that supposed to be a joke? I think you'll find that 99% of Australians are damn glad they DON'T live in the US, and have no desire to end up with a society like the US (people already hate the sue-crazy trend, and we're getting fatter just like the average US citizen, but we've a long way to slip before we end up down at that level) When a country has constitutional protection for every nutcase to own a gun and in a world wide context: one of the nastiest countries (in terms of damage/manipulation etc to other countries) and is in the midst of a global witch hunt under the guise of "anti terrorism", I don't think anyone in their right mind would envy those living in that country. As an average american I presume: do you know where australia even is (or were you asleep for the olympics)? sure you aren't confusing us with somewhere else?
If you mod this as a flame you didn't read my post.
There is a very odd duality that exists here. It's the governemnt do this, don't do this. That is impossible...
In this story it talks about the government regulating what sites you can view on the net. Obvious censorship, baddd....
But, in other stories you (general users, mods) preach and praise the good of man. Using the government as a welfare distribution scheme to help the needy and take from those bad bad people.
You hate Microsoft although probably 60% of the readers here use an MS product at some point in the day.
So... You want the government to not mess with the internet but, you want them interfere with Microsoft. You want them to let software be free but, still have good software..
I agree, censorship is bad.
I agree, the government should be not interfere with the internet.
But, if you want this to happen. Don't expect them to do anything for you. I'm fine with that. I can fend for myself and produce without the help of the governement...
Make a choice..
Leave the poor American alone. S/he's quite happy believing that everyone wants to be an American (and who can blame him, especially the way Mr Howard (known to the rest of the world as the unnamed official sitting next to the IOC chairman) has been brown nosing lately) and Australia isn't likely to declared a terrorist country anytime soon (unless the US takes up cricket or rugby, then it'll become a matter of national pride).
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
http:// www.lustykoalabears.com
ButitsURLisonit.
Some censored URL lists censor the list itself, other lists don't. Now imagine the censored URL list of "every censored URL list that doesn't list itself". Should that list censor itself or not?
Why does Slashdot always go psycho about Australia's NON EXISTANT censorship.
/. No one listens, and most of the time they get modded down.
We do NOT, I repeat DO NOT have any internet censorship in Australia.
As you may have noticed, most journalists have no idea what they are talking about with technology, and frequently get it wrong. That problem isn't exclusive to the USA.
The "censorship" in Australia is realy like this:
There is absolutely NO censorship. If you happen to be a "Concerned Parent", your ISP must provide you with software such as Net Nanny...etc if you REQUEST it.
It is completely optional. It is in no way mandatory.
The Australian authorities have a list of kiddie porn sites that they give to the makers of filtering software so that those sites can be included in the list of blocked sites for the Australian editions of their software.
This topic has come up on Slashdot numerous times, and whenever an Australian tries to explain it to the rest of
Why let the truth get in the way of a good story?
It seems that you just want to have a bitch about Australia, without looking into the facts.
I hope this in some way clears up the topic, but seeing as this has come up before, and everyone keeps bitching about the exact same things, I doubt you'll listen.
So in principal I am for this type of censorship. But of course the two main issues with this are:
If you publish the list, then you get the trust, but lose any effectiveness (actually making it easier for people to access these sites). So then it's a question of ensuring a reasonable level of trust without publishing the list. One way of doing this is to let an independent body (e.g. the EFA) review the list - but that would have to be done under condition of secrecy.
However, the EFA demanded access under a freedom of information law - if they'd won, then any Tom, Dick or Bruce could demand the list, thus removing all secrecy.
So, while I can understand arguments against any censorship (effectiveness & trust) this decision seems to be clearly right.
While it stands to reason that most of the sites would be child pornography, what is to stop someone slipping in any old url if no one can check the list?
Well, maybe they've just worked out where all that lost productivity in the IT sector is going...
SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
what is to stop someone slipping in any old url [slashdot.org] if no one can check the list?
WHAT IF THEY ALREADY DID?!
How are we to know if they can't see this if they can't access it. Perhaps already slashdot is being blocked around the world while innocent millions go on believing otherwise!
[no, I wasn't serious]
[this part censored by ABA] so it is very interesting to see what is the reaction of [this part censored by ABA] to this including [this part censored by ABA] and [this part censored by ABA].
Publishing the list would have the opposite of the intended effect: it would publicise content that was deemed unfit for publication.
I cannot let you see it as you would die laughing, but trust me it is funny.
I am pretty sure that at least three people know something of the list. One has a list of the machine names, the other the domain, and the last one the TLD. A computer assembles the list so that no one(1) person knows the sites, otherwise they might try to actually see them.
I disagree with this analysis.
Effectiveness is based on the blocking software's effectiveness. The porn sites advertise like crazy (they are businesses after all), so people will find out about the sites. Adding them to a huge government list is likely to have less marketing value than you'd think -- who is going to go to all 100K blocked URL's, and how much traffic for each of those URL's would result? Trivial.
Trust: without an open process, there can be no trust. Look at the various "net nanny" type systems -- all of them keep private lists, and there are constant accusations that they're blocking sites based on hidden agendas, etc. Without publishing the list of blocked sites, there's no way for people to trust that the list isn't being abused.
well, there actually IS censorship on the internet. i know one case where NordRheinWestfalen (one of Germanys provinces) tried to censor the access to ogrish. on ogrish itself the "big guys" (FBI) forced the host to remove a video (Daniel Pearl).... so much to the First Amandmend "Freedom of Speech" in the USA
There was a fuss recently about illegal immigrants parked near it, they were eventually sent to Nauru who needed the money. BTW Look at the map and you will see that Jakarta is far nearer than any decent sized Australian port.
So how does it fare under the Aussie laws? Is slashdot in danger of broken links? :-)
Instead of slashdot, perhaps the article should have given examples of sites that criticize the Australian government. They just might have the nerve to block such sites, especially those that aren't well known.
Check out article 19 of the declaration of human rights, and you will see that although Australia does not have a 'freedom of speach' or 'bill of rights' in their constitution, they do have something similar. Since Australia is part of the UN, it is meant to be respecting human rights.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
"speech".
But seriously, why is the entire world so afraid of freedom of speech.
I guess Jefferson, Madison et al really WERE rebels, eh?
I mean, their whole philosophy was "treat people like adults and punish them if they screw up".
Today we've switched (even in the US) to "you're a little boy, and I'm going to make sure you don't get hurt.
People like that shit anymore. Disgusting in my book.
How can you accept less?
Slashdot is the only place I have seen anything about this "block list"...
On top of that, I haven't seen any sites "mysteriously dissapear" or anything... As far as I can tell, it mainly applies to things such as child pornography, and other illegal material.
Just the same as that Imports and Exports of physical material is prevented by customs (drugs, other illegal material, etc.), so too should other illegal material such as child pornography.
Am I allowed to bring 5kg of pure cocane into Australia? No, so why should I be able to bring any other illegal matterial into the country, be it physical or electronic.
Go back to your homes people, nothing to see here...
[root@GRIFFIN root]# rpm -e coffee-1.22.3-1a.i386.rpm
error: removing these packages would break dependencies:
this is easy to get past... use the google cache to view the page... instead of sickkiddieporn.com it will be http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sickkiddiepor n.com
Is censoring child porn acceptable? If so, is it also acceptable to censor pictures of war victims? Or pictures of starving children? Or pictures of political prisoners?
Hiding something will not make it go away; it will only make people less aware of it and less likely to do something about it.
Hey man, let it go. Folks are just jealous that we have great beaches.
I find this somewhat odd because Slashdot has run quite a few stories referencing EFA media releases and other materials. And if anyone actually went looking for us, we should be pretty easy to find - if you put "censorship Australia" into Google (as of 19 June 2002), the top six results consist of EFA pages and the personal pages of two EFA board members. Heck, even on a search as general as "internet censorship", EFA and EFA board members manage two of the top ten results!
Anyway, if you want to know what we do (and who we are), that's all on our web site.
Danny (EFA board member).
I have written over 900 book reviews
The sumbitters comment proposes the hypothetical situation that a site was submitted which had no reason to be censored.
There is obviously some form of sumbitting, reviewing, then posting to the block list (hey just like slashdot stories!). So why couldnt there be just as simple method for withdrawing a name from a list?
For example:
Say an ISP offers thier users some webspace. Most use it for perfectly non-censorable things. But theres one person that ruins it all, posts some kiddie porn and gets the whole ISPs web domain blocked (for this example im assuming the Aussie censorship comittee does NOT contact providers about this before hand). The ISP should be able to then do a self-audit, remove the offending material and go to the censors and get removed from the list proving that the specific reason for blocking thier domain has been corrected.
This method is still a hassle, and its still censorship, but it allows the law to do EXACTLY what it is supposed to do and limit collateral damage in the name of 'decency'.
MA-rated content (from the the Office of Film and Literature Classification's own guidelines):
- can only "imply" sexual activity
- can't include "gratuious" coarse language that is "very strong, aggressive or detailed"
- can't contain depictions of violence that are "high impact" unless they are infrequent and not "prolonged or gratuitous"
- can only treat "adult themes" (such as suicide and marital difficulties) if it's done discreetly or at low intensity.
I think that's enough to give the idea. It may also be useful to think of films that are R-rated in Australia and hence would, if put online, be subject to takedown notices (if there was a complaint about them): Hannibal, Apocalypse Now, The Exorcist, The Godfather, Lolita, Mad Max,Danny.
I have written over 900 book reviews
But we actually stated in our FOI request that we weren't after details of anything that was illegal to possess, or that might compromise police investigations.
I think the real reason the ABA won't reveal the net censorship details to the public is that that would reveal what a total farce the net censorship system is.
Danny.
I have written over 900 book reviews
From the AU posts in this topic, it sounds like the "censorship" is merely a government PR gesture and doesn't represent an active attempt to block content.
I wonder if maybe the fact that they won't release the list is due to the fact that there isn't one. Think of the time and effort that would be required to actually build and maintain a halfway accurate list of proscribed content. If the postings of the Aussies are right and the censorship laws are merely a "pro-family" political gesture, then its likely they're not making the effort.
They may also just be buying a list from a censorware vendor, whose contract prohibits disclosure as a trade secret, not to mention the political implications of a law whose enforcement mechanism relies on a third party.
Not quite. It can't be any programming language. It has to be Java or Perl or Php or something the kids on /. are using.
Say something nice about C# and watch them rip you a new karmic asshole.
If you're over 40, you are treated like crap on slashdot. If these kids would listen to an experienced point of view sometimes, they might learn something.
--
Ask the Ya-Hoot Oracle Anything!
for the crappy, virus infected code they force you to have.
If I owned a site and my customers complained via other channels, like picking up the phone, sending me e-mail to some other mail-boxes, snail mail or vibes or harmonic resonance, that they couldn't reach me, I'd fix the problem.
Finding a site running DNS and and hacking it to bounce a visitor to a sub-domain host to another destination isn't exactly rocket science.
Its the basis of DynIP. In this case its screwing with the host tables without authorization. If nothing else is done to the system, it would be very hard to detect as it wouldn't really impact the site.
The legitimate site could even be an Australian government site. The IP address can be any unused address and it can be anywhere.
The ONLY way to really cold-cock the kiddy porn bastards is to switch to IPv6. Otherwise, its too spoofable an too many points.
Now THAT might spur on the adoption of IPv6. Someone should suggest it to these government bozos. "Do it for the children."
Those hypocrites might regularly sell their own mothers, wives and kids for whiskey but they couldn't publicly NOT back this.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
If you're over 40, you are treated like crap on slashdot.
"On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog." You communicate in a reasonable, polite fashion, and no one knows or cares how old you are. Yes, some opinions are prone to getting modded down, but going into any group of strongly like-minded people and expressing a contrary position isn't going to get you listened to. Even if the group is neutral, some people may be hostile to your idea. (This is true no matter what the composition of the group.) Yes, being a community with some scientific bent, Slashdot doesn't tend to accept arguments from authority or arguments from age. That's a good thing; it means everyone can get heard, and good ideas tend to rise to the top. If you don't have good ideas, or can't express them, well, then I guess all you can do is whine about it.
They use your fear of pedophilia, of child sex against you. Either enjoy what you get and stop complaining, or reflect on your fundamental p.o.v., and see if it cannot be altered..
Abstract of the Rind Report: A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples
A defence of the above published in the Skeptical Inquirer, Aug 2001
Gay and Bisexual Adolescent Boys' Sexual Experiences With Men
Judith Levine's Harmful to Minors gives a more female centered view
You see it's nonsense to say 'yes, well, I accept that child porn is such a great evil that it cannot be allowed to exist' and at the same time expect to have freedom of speech and freedom to read what you like over the internet, and expect not to be watched and cataloged by the secret police while you do so. Information is information and a system that is designed to control one type will control another. It's as simple as that.
As long as you accept the line against child pornography unblinkingly, you will be fighting against symptoms, that is - how much - not the cause - why at all?
pogROM
(The above isn't to say that I agree with child-rape, violence against women or anything non-consentual, rather I would like to make the point (or the conjecture at least) that child-rape, and violence are in the minority of child sex cases, rather than the majority, and that most pedophiles, and indeed most accused of being sex offenders are not any more dangerous or less human than any other criminal (or in other words, no different than ourselves, criminals mostly in secret), but that this illusion serves the ones in power very well indeed.)
you know in alot of ways things like this actually make america look good.
then again if you take a step back and look at it again, we really CANT look good when it comes to people's rights. the politicians want a capitalistic-communism mix. they want you to have money , so they can have money (taxes) and so you can buy the all-wonderful-all-amazing intellectual (sp?) property supplied by those wonderful consumer loving people over at the RIAA (where they fight to rip off not only consumers but also musicians) and of course the lovely people over at the MPAA ('the VCR will crush the US economy -yeah THEM')
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
It has a geek anti-establishment pro-Apple/Linix bent.
--
Ask the Ya-Hoot Oracle Anything!
There's no "scientific bent" here. The majority of the folks here are undegreed kids, very few have any formal scientific training.
And you know this how? There's enough anonymity to make that claim impossible to check.
In any case, I wasn't claiming they all understood Lorentz contraction; a scientific mindset is not something picked up with your bachelor of science. A scientific mindset is rarely taught in schools, but can be easily picked up by anyone who is willing to read, learn, and think logically, including undegreed kids.
It has a geek anti-establishment pro-Apple/Linix[sic] bent.
Gee, you think? Do you go into churches and complain when they have a religious bent, too? That's what slashdot is; if you don't like it, then go somewhere else.
Liking something to show that you hate something else isn't rational thinking.
--
Ask the Ya-Hoot Oracle Anything!
I don't like [...]
If you're really over 40, you should know by now that no one really gives a damn what you like, especially when you're the 500,000th person to show up at the party and then start bitching about it.
After loafing around all day, I say, "I am working around the clock to protect you and your children. It's top secret, so I can't tell you what I am doing, and you can't check up on me. Now sign my paycheck." And there is nothing those poor Australian taxpayers can do :)
Can *you* prove that *you* don't have weapons of mass destruction?
Actually, I was the *first* to show up at the party. You're the 500,000th, and you're whiny, snotty, and bratty.
--
Ask the Ya-Hoot Oracle Anything!
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
The law in question only covers sites hosted by ISPs in Australia. Google isn't affected by this law, just like if the Australian content provider shifted their material to a server located in Sweden.
One of the reasons why the EFA would like a list of the banned sites issued is so they can construct a list of where the sites have moved to, thus showing that the only real effect of the censorship law is to move business overseas.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});