Slashdot Mirror
New Zealand Looks at Internet Censorship
David writes "The New Zealand Government 'Select Committee', upon reviewing censorship law, has issued a report which among other things, recommends that ISPs face compulsory licensing "in order to control their behaviour", the forcing of a code of conduct upon ISPs, and recommends the implementation of an internet filtration programme not dissimilar from that of Australia's (although it is hazy on the details of what this would mean). They're starting to become really worried about the dangers of the internet."
Yes, but can their mighty filters prevent me from searching for pr0n in l33tsp3@k?
barzelay.net
In the document it mentions ratings such as M and R16... can some tell me what this rating system is? I'm curious.
Note to self: Cancel vacation to New Zealand, head to an Island more tolerant of my Internet porn addiction...
It would help if people actually read the report. First, its not a 'Government' Select Committee, its simply a Parliamentary Committee. Its a report to the Parliament, which includes some recommendations to the Government (which they are not bound to implement). Second, it recommends a voluntary code of practice for ISPs, as a first step. This isn't cause of 'hue & cry' about internet censorship - which if some of the earlier commenters are correct is irrelevant anyway...
Well, things are different in Middle Earth, but Gandolf is gonna be really pissed about this one.
Come on NZ. Didn't you pay any attention to what happened with the "censorship" in Australia? It was a complete failure.
Any attempt to censor the internet, short of taking over every router on the border, is destined to fail.
"Smoking helps you lose weight - one lung at a time" -- A. E. Neumann
The amount of Intrustion that governments want in our surfing is starting to irriate me greatly. This is all the more reason to get off-shore hosting and off-shore isp's going on
/ 223521 5&mode=thread
as I refear you to past slashdot link
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/09
I was just curisous, as the intrustion on liberty is really starting to bug me, What if anyone thinks of the possiblty of an off-shore isp, using satillites or other types of communication.
I might not like people looking at some of the things they look at, But I certainly don't want the government cenorsing things.
Firstly, I just want to say that if it is anything like Australian Internet censorship, it won't make any difference to the majority of users. It is just about having ISP's give the option for filtering to their customers. Secondly, am I the only one who waved their mouse over the damgers of the internet link and expected to see goatse.cx as the address?
Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
The first question this brings to mind is 'where is Old Zealand?'
/. before. Would they be liable if a single thing got through?
;).
I don't actually know much at all about their country, but I know it's a fairly well developed nation where people and sheep can live harmoniously. Is this sort of censorship common? The way the language in the paper refers to censorship (pg. 7) makes it look like censorship is accepted as a part of the government's job.
If that is in fact the case, how could this sort of thing work? Would ISPs be responsible for harvesting the URLs of all webpages with content offensive to the New Zealandic(New Zealish? Zealic? Zealaly?) government? That would be horrendously time consuming and expensive, and would be a constant chore. And we've talked about the consequences of blocking IPs on
I dunno guys. This sounds like a law without any teeth. If it's actually enforced, it seems to me (in all my ignorance) that it would result in NZish/ic/ian ISPs being unable to function. And even if it worked, it would take like three days before someone put out a program that simply went around the filtering. I mean, have your buddy in Seattle set up a webpage with a Java web-browser imbedded. Log into that site and ouila (wah-lah), you're knee-deep in scatological goat-rape porn. And I'm sure there's a way to set something like that up so that it would be very difficult to filter.
Okay, my ramble is done. I had to write a long time because I didn't want to be modded -1 for early posting
~SL
Nice attempts at spelling first poster.
sites like goatse.cx are world famous icons and heighten the excitement on public forums like /.
"Look mate, we don't share our sheep, we shear them", said the Australian to the Kiwi.
Oh come on, you can think of at least a few more outdated sites that don't really shock all that many people anymore to link to! Try a little harder!
Well I'm not about to visit the two sites you point out as examples (I'm at work... ha ha), but I disagree. If you let a government start censoring something, the tendency would be to take it as far as it can go. It would START with hardcore porn, but then where would it go? Sites that promote child endangerement are already illegal, and putting up pirated software is already illegal. I'm not in favor of sites that expose children in erotic sex acts. But that's plainly illegal, and has nothing to do with censorship.
Sigh. mention New Zealand, out come the sheep jokes. Nevermind Australia now actually has MORE sheep per head than NZ. Anyway, we export all the 'used' sheep, kiwi lamb tastes gooood!!!
Do you need a website upgrade?
"Our concern is not really to stop people looking at pictures; it's to stop the abuse of children involved in the making of this [hardcore] material," and where there is a clear case of child sexual abuse, no jurisdiction will defend it, he says.
Whoa, did I read that right? A government official saying something reasoned and intelligent when it comes to child porn? A clear understanding of the underlying problem? No blanket statements? No fear of the new medium? No desire to put everyone in jail and pull out the innocents later? No "gateway to other crimes" theories? No fallacious logic ("95% of child abusers have some form of pornography on their computers. Therefore, there's a 95% chance that anyone with any porn on their computer is a child abuser.")?? This guy has an actual concern for children, and doesn't just use "save the children" to advance an agenda??
Damn! All we have here is John "Under God" Ashcroft. If everybody is as clued in as this NZ guy, I'll take the censorship, thanks!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
A government that tries to "protect" through censorship scares me.
Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.
Personally I believe that ISP's should be given the same common carrier status as phone companies: they are not liable for any content traveling through their system.
This would not prevent them from being able to act against persons violating the law. Ie: kiddy porn is illegal in most countries. If you try to host kiddy porn, you are breaking existing laws and can be nailed with traditional laws and warrants.
Not hosting the content on the ISP? Then why should the ISP be responsible for someone elses actions? Help them find the source, sure, but again under already established laws.
If you arrange to have someone killed via the phone that does not make Ma Bell an accessory to murder.
If when planning terrorist activities any carrier could be held liable then I'd save to say it's time to lock up every phone & cellular company - they're aiding and abetting terrorism!
So why should it be different for the net and ISP's?
Protect the children?? When are we going to protect ourselves from this ridiculousness?!
Blockwars: a realtime multiplayer game similar to Tetris.
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
I disagree. I find both of those sites highly erotic, and often satisfy my needs while looking at them. Granted, they are not quite as good as some other high-quality sites out there, but pretty darn close.
I thought it was more to do with the accent...
:-), which of course is going to make censoring even more confusing....
all the time that kiwi's say sex instead of six
If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence you ever tried.
I used to have a link to a site full of pictures of a dead woman in various states of decay, being dissected. The URL had "nude" in it so I'd send it to perverts on ICQ. I never looked at it myself, but it has to be pretty vile from the reactions I got, worse than Goatse or Tubgirl for sure.
I have no problem with that filthy shit being removed from they internet, but will it stop there? Can it stop there?
Will they block pages that link to it? There goes this slashdot article. Would the article be blocked to protect people from hearing about those sites or to prevent them from heard that their government sucks shit!
First they try to control what we hear, then they try to control what say. First they try to control what we read, then they try to control what we write. They don't want censorship just to stop porn, and they don't want to leave it at just censoring where you go on the web.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
btw, with so many countries getting hysterical about protecting us from the evil that is porn, maybe they should take the next step and require all Internet users to get sterilised. That way, they can remove the demand, rather than the supply.
Maybe they could ask the "government" of China for some pointers.
About 2 years ago the NZ government was taking submissions with regard to changes to copyright law, particularly with regard to digital copyright. A small campaign was mounted here to try and get enough submissions against DMCA style laws here, and I must admit that we were listened to and considered. At this stage any mooted changes haven't made it as far as a bill to be passed, so we don't know exactly what they'll do, but it has looked promising.
In general our government has shown some willingness to be somewhat open minded in considering technology issues, and to actually listen to what real tech people have to say, so hopefully this bill being considered will actually end up being fairly moderate and well considered.
There is still hope.
Jedidiah
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
I clicked on tubgirl... I will be scarred for life. Please god sensor it...
Aston Games
how many internet users in New Zealand, here is the figures:(emphasis mine)
:)
Population: 3.8 million
Internet users: 1.3 million
Projection for 2004: 1 million
Is there anything to do with all these ill-made policies that cause the decline in no. of internet users in NZ? I wouldn't doubt it.
If you are in favor of sites that expose children in erotic sex acts or that promote killing people, you are the one with the problem, not me.
No, it's people like you who are the problem!
The danger with cencorship is who decides what is right and what is wrong? Your idea of acceptable may be very different from mine. Who's right?
American's love their guns on TV. Europeans tend to prefer skin. Personally I think the Europeans have that one right.
Your argument about Kiddie Porn and Child Endangerment, software piracy, and violence, are already covered by existing laws . They don't need extra regulations to make them illegal... they already are!
I am in favor of being able to conduct myself as I see fit, as long as I do not break any existing laws, whether you like what I have to say or not. It's called free speech and it's a fundamental freedom. Nobody says you have to listen to me. But don't you dare to shut me up because it upsets you!
Blockwars: a realtime multiplayer game similar to Tetris.
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
They want to steal our internet filtering laws? Don't they realise that they just don't work. Our system is complaints based and is restricted to Australia only, so what did the Aussie porn sites do? They went over seas.
Not only that but in the couple of years it has been running, the system has recieved less than a hundred complaints in total. ISPs are required by law not to host naughty material, and provide filtering software if and when the user requests it. And we all know how well shit like Net Nanny works don't we.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Relevant fact: The population of N.Z. is about 4,000,000.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"We're pretty hopeful that the outcome from all this might be more people making a real commitment to self regulation rather than seeing some draconian regulation introduced."
How is forced self-regulation any different than a law that does the same thing? It's like saying "give me your lunch money or I'll kick your ass and take it!" Admittedly, less ass-kicking is involved, but otherwise you feel just as bad.
If the Labor government in UnZed talked to their fraternal comrades across the Tasman (currently in Opposition at the federal level), they'd find out that Labor here has figured out that trying to impose censorship is a waste of time. Letting parents install filters if they want to keeps everyone happy, except the wowsers who want to ban everything except Disney films. They all vote Conservative anyway, so why worry about keeping them happy?
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
I disagree; goatse sent shivers up my spine when I saw it a year or so ago, but ALT-F4 remedied the damage (mostly). I don't think it should be illegal or censored; I didn't follow the other link because I assume it's similar. Who should decide which sites are like the ones above? I'd prefer to decide for myself.
If you are in favor of sites that expose children in erotic sex acts
Define child. It's a bit different (legally) depending where you reside. Are non erotic sex acts ok? Is softporn ok? Who pidgeonholes sites? Maybe Ashcroft?
child endangerment
What about McDonalds.com? They propose feeding kids fatty foods; that's child endangerment.
Software piracy
I 'pirate' software even though I've already bought it; I hate cataloging windows id#'s and putting in a game cd when I want to play so I 'pirate' them though I've paid. Try and use an appropriate term; either copyright infringement, license infringement or DMCA infringement.
If you are in favor of promoting sites that expose children in erotic sex acts or that promote killing people, you are the one with the problem, not me.
What about cnn.com? They extensivily covered the Clinton scandal; you might consider Melinsky a child. They promote war in Iraq (killing people).
Could you clarify your points?
Whereas NZ has a population of 43.1 million .
Glad to hear someone is finally thinking of the sheep!
Blockwars: a realtime multiplayer game similar to Tetris.
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
[sarcasm]Of course this is all about stopping pr0n, and NOTHING to do with stopping people from being able to download movies and music.[/sarcasm]
Funny how groups in both Australia and New Zealand starting kicking up a stink about "Filtering", so soon after visits by american "entertainment" industry lobbyists.
http://jesus.everdense.com/
This is a company that also limits the bandwidth available to customers through specific ports (think P2P). It doesn't matter that the customer has paid for the connection - they still tell (force?) you to use it as they want.
Prices for data? 128kb/s ADSL with 5GB monthly cap - NZ$65
up to 8Mb/s (usually around 2MB/s) ADSL (home) 500MB per month $49 1GB per month $69
up to 8MB/s (usually around 2MB/s) ADSL (home or business)
600MB - $62
1200MB - $120
1800MB - $176
3000MB - $292
5000MB - $458
10000MB - $888
20000MB - $1800
These are NZ$ (multiply by .6 to get $US equivalent) plus 12.5 % sales tax, and ISP fees, as this is just for the data flowing over Telecom's network.
And you thought sensorship was our biggest problem - I don't see why are they would sensor us anyway - it's not like we have the means, financially or technically to access much anyway.
And /.ers thought there wasn't a need for ASCII porn... ..k
The Mothership
You obviously didn't RTFA carefully enough, young asshat, or you would know that the C*PAs have jack and shit to do with child pornography.
Mmmm... Now, tell us this is compatible with the manure conversion technology from the "cow-shit to electricity" article I just read and you've got a (+5 Interesting) post. Otherwise, I think you're the troll your sig warns us against.
In other words, I shit on you! Oh, how do I describe the joy of trolling to the troll? Is it a shitty experience? You bet! But WTF? It's only karma, right?
Everything I've ever learned the hard way was based on a statistically invalid sample.
I know I've taken some cheap shots at the Kiwis but from what I've read of the articles they are looking for a sensible way to balance the rights of their citizens to look at porn with the oh so real fact that shit like child porn, beastiality and snuff movies do exist on the web.
If they can come up with a way that manages to both protect their citizens rights and make inroads into the production of the sick shit then all the better for them. God knows we need some one to re-think the Internet cencorship laws here, thankyou Chief Luddite Alston.
I just wanted to bring out two paragraphs in the secondary link (dangers of the internet) about the transitive property of 'objectionability', in case some people missed it:
The status of an encrypted file under the censorship law (Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act) is very broadly defined. If a file can "by the use of a computer program" be converted into an objectionable file, then the original file is judged to be objectionable.
However, for any two arbitrary bit strings a program can be written to convert one into the other, so strictly according to the legal definition every file is objectionable.
That is a great example of TERRIBLE law-writing. I mean it sounds all la-de-da at first glance, but don't people re-read these things? How can you sign something into law when it clearly implies that every file on every computer is 'objectionable', and thus illegal. Dammit! Laws are important and writing them like that is negligent!
Laws like that only go to convince me that the government is too incompetent to make any important judgments for me. If they'd only stop trying, they might not come off like such buffoons and we'd all be winners!
Woo! I have been zinged!
Erm, wanged.
Erm, bah.
Here in the US we have lots of 9-5 parents who do not have the time or desire to intervene in their kid's lives as needed. A free Internet allows for graphic porn and worse, especially thru bulkmail at any major public e-mail domain. My own accounts are flooded with junkmail ranging from things illegal in some US states to things better left at the server they came from. Freedom has its prices, and many parents need to intervene more in what their kids are doing. Grnted, that is tough when both parents are working, but latchkey kids can just as easily unlock internet sites unintentionally. Governments are opportunistic creations that tend to centralize power at every opportunity, and here in the US you will find no better example. Post 9-11 there are groups here that have been advocating for deprivation of freedom of communication in order to prevent terrorism, prompting many of our mirror governments (similar to us but not necessarily our puppets; Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc.) to advocate the same. I concur with you that to such freedom for security is too high a price to pay, but unfortunately the freedom to speak of such things is protected by the very freedoms they seek to revoke. Hopefully we can balance freedom with responsibility, but who knows.
As long as there is a Second Amendment, there will always be a First Amendment.
i think that it is sad where the only place where people can be themselves is infront of a monitor, with out ever experiencing face2face contact/communication with their friends - which can give rise to isolation and lonelyness.
however I dont agree with you on the big brother idea: people are being policed on the net just like they are being policed in the real world, the main aim of doing this is that nobody gets away with doing something that they shouldnt (this may be different in your country though).
Computerworld > News > Monday, 10 March, 2003
MS fumbles anti-Linux PR
Remote access is "trivial" to set up
Andrea Malcolm, Auckland
Microsoft looks to have made a misstep in the public relations war against Linux.
A Microsoft-commissioned case study on a reseller website touts the example of a South Island company switching from Linux to MS Small Business Server on the grounds of performance. But according to the reseller which implemented the changeover, it's more a case of finding the right technology fit.
Christchurch horticultural products exporter Pacific Wide had been running the Mandrake distribution of Linux as its network operating system for three years, with Microsoft Office 97 on the desktop.
According to the case study, entitled "Pacific Wide favours Microsoft over Linux to deliver a stable platform for future growth", the company found Linux to be unreliable and unstable, causing user frustration and major inefficiencies.
It quotes Pacific Wide general manager Anthony Washington as saying that the company experienced a number of performance issues with Linux, including basic everyday jobs such as printing documents.
"Being a document-centric organisation, business productivity suffered if we experienced high levels of downtime, affecting our ability to service our customers."
It goes on to quote him saying the system lacked remote network access and web hosting capabilities, and that Linux support was an issue.
When Computerworld spoke to Washington he admitted knowing nothing about IT and didn't realise Linux can manage both web hosting and remote access.
Washington says before March 2002 the company had no clear IT strategy and the company's network was largely dependent on the skills of its service provider. Pacific Wide tended to employ small systems integrators which customised its software, resulting in a loss of skills when it chose a new provider.
"I came in at the point when we had decided to change over," Washington told Computerworld, "but there were always a number of issues going on with the network. I was told this by staff and past managers."
He says he thought a large part of the trouble was the service provider, which he didn't want to name, rather than Linux itself.
"We looked at our IT and felt we had grown enough to be dealing with more professional people."
Christchurch-based Datasouth stepped in as its new IT supplier and chose to deploy Microsoft Small Business Server 2000 and standardise desktops on Microsoft Office XP. Hardware was also upgraded with new HP servers, PCs and laptops.
Washington says he took part in the case study because he wanted to support Datasouth.
"It has done everything well. We haven't had any problems like we did with Linux and the last guy. Whether it's down to the people we now use or it's a Linux or Microsoft thing, I don't know. At least our computers aren't crashing now."
Datasouth business manager Aarron Spinley says his company has customers using Linux for firewalls but in the case of Pacific Wide, which has 100 employees but only 10 on the network, he thought MS Small Business Server was a better fit.
He says Pacific Wide had had SBS in the past so it wasn't expensive to get an upgrade licence.
He acknowledges that Linux can handle web hosting and remote access even though the prepared case study gives the impression that it can't. He believes, however, that the degree of configuration a small business would have to do to achieve those functions in Linux makes it unsuitable for small sites.
"There's nothing wrong with Linux and I wouldn't want to be perceived as anti-Linux, but it wasn't a fit for their size. In terms of getting an efficient mail server and remote user authentication, that all has to be configured and maintained."
He says given the size of the client, these functions would have been costly to add and maintain on a Linux system because of the services required.
Christchurch-based Linux systems integrator David Lane disagrees. He says remote access is "trivial" to set up and he has implemented it for many clients.
The case study also quotes Washington saying that having a standardised Microsoft platform has lowered the company's total cost of ownership "and helped us become smarter about our licensing and asset management. Furthermore, because we will now upgrade our IT systems every three years, we expect a quicker return on investment."
Washington told Computerworld he couldn't remember saying this. However, he says the company is now leasing both hardware and software whereas in the past it has bought them outright. Overall this will probably help the company stay up to date and over time will cost less, he says.
Now just who do you think should do your censoring, Mr. No-Qualms, MBA? The Internet is a fucking protocol, and not a movie theatre. People who mess with it (by censoring it) are messing with the medium. Don't go to those places (and don't link them nerdnic! Jeeze). Once they mess with it, you won't be able to make a fortune off of it.
I hate the sites you mention as much as you do, but dude, I hate censorship more, because it's always promulgated by dweebs (and Christians) who don't know their asshats from their elbows, and as soon as you give them the power to control what you don't want to see, they're controlling what you DO want to see.
Everything I've ever learned the hard way was based on a statistically invalid sample.
First you come up with something no one can argue about. "Child Pornography is evil","Communism is the greatest threat to liberty in the 20th century","Al quaidah has forever changed the way we view the world", "Germany was stabbed in the back", They are all the same. Things everyone knows to be true and no one will ever take a stand against.
:
Second, you come up with a solution, and assert if your solution isnt followed, the terrible menace will destroy everything held dear in the world. EX. "if we don't monitor terrorists use of the internet they will attack again","Its perfectly allright to entrap child pornographers because they are scum beyond belief and if we didnt we couldnt catch them","we must purge anyone having communist ties from positions of influence in hollywood","The enemies of the fatherland must be eliminated".
Third, well by the time it gets to three its to late. Something precious and irretrievable has been lost by this point. Its not retrievable but has to be fought for all over again and takes more than a bit of luck to build anew.
To borrow from Ben Franklin
Those that would trade their liberty for temporary safety diserve neither.
There is a group trying to do this that claims to have formed their own nation on an old oil rig off of the UK. It is the "country" of Sealand, population of ~12, and it actually issues passports. I don't have the website, but Google does. The UK deems them a target for possible takeover since they were running questionable financial transaction through their servers, and they'll allow anything but child porn on their servers. I dunno about taking them over, but the idea is at least sound in theory: buy your own oil rig, with investor help, and do nothing but run huge anounts of servers on it for profit.
As long as there is a Second Amendment, there will always be a First Amendment.
http://www.purelyrics.com/index.php?lyrics=bsxetpd x
my world is getting smaller everyday.
There's no need to require ISPs to be licensed and abide by a strict code of conduct for governments to fight things like child porn and snuff films. Those things are illegal and it's a simple matter of tracing the pictures to the source and obtaining a search warrant. The licensing requirement would facilitate censorship regardless of the policy's stated purpose. Today it might be used to stamp out child pornography, tomorrow it might be used to stamp out all sorts of controversial content. Fight child pornography by arresting those who produce it, but leave ISPs the fuck alone.
When will the paranoid simpletons realize that censorship accomplishes nothing?
Repeal the DMCA!
...off the list of places to go when the US completes its transition to a full blown police state.
before i start, i am NOT A TROLL, read all of what i say before you judge me.
I welcome censorship. what used to be the 'underground' movement in warez etc has been dragged up by the dickheads who made napster. everyman and his dog now pirates everything.
censorship will force everything back underground, so only those who are actualy know there shit can get it. like it should be.
John Howard (Australian Prime Minister) just visited New Zealand this weekend - is the internet censorship influenced by him, maybe?. Just like Australia follows the US in every police state policy Australia dumps it on New Zealand. New Zealand is tucked nice and far away from anything that remotely resembles a threat, I think it's best that they stayed quiet.
.. our sheep porn!
Almost as interesting as $100 diamond rolex watches.
Thats austrialian's. Get your sterotypes right.
S = Service; A = Access.
An ISP should expect some liability for the services it runs on behalf of users (web hosting, non-blind proxies, stats gathering/profiling, etc), but an IAP shouldn't at all, and an ISP shouldn't on any packets that it doesn't mangle on the way though.
That's some incentive for those fuckers known as Optus to stop running that transparent proxy of theirs (and still capping us to 3GB/mo) - keep yer grubby mitts off it, or you're liable.
Pronunciations of "six":
Australians say "sex".
New Zealanders say "sux".
Things like this make me proud to be a United States citizen. Our founding fathers did such a great thing with the bill of rights I can't imagine what our society would be like without them.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
I love it when our government gets serious about something like this. It's just sooo cute!
In New Zealand, it's perfectly OK for the POLICE and the LTSA (Land transport safety authority) to run graphic ads of people flying through windscreens, being run down by unattentive drivers, slammed into powerpoles and slipping over backwards on a childs toy, to land on a glass coffee table, with predictable results. Even if you couldn't predict it, it's there for you to see. And your kids. Right at dinner time.
Yet at the slightest mention of pr0n, people get up in arms thinking computers and the internet are for nothing else. And they're right of course, but so blind to think it's anywhere near as bad as the "real life" FUD that our own god-damned police force and transport authority screen.
There's a lot I like about living in NZ, but all of it either grows out of the ground or rolls in from the sea. The rest of wears suits and finds new novel ways to shit on its native citizens.
HP will be even more pissed when it finds out I'm selling iPaqs with 802.11b and biometric fingerprint readers for $200.
Was I the only one who expected the dangers of the internet link in the post to point to Mr. Goatse?
I stole this Sig
Actually they just counted them all and there are only 39.2 million now. And I'm sure there must be a joke in there somewhere too!
Sealand is actually based on an old anti-aircraft platform a few miles off the south-east coast of the UK. It's story is fascinating, and you can learn more at Sealandgov.com. They don't issue passports as far as I know, though there is the entirely virtual Republic of Lomar that does. A company called HavenCo is currently investing in Sealand, hoping to tap into a market for government jurisdiction-free hosting, co-location, etc.
Like eagles on pogo-sticks! -- Glottis
What I just can't comprehend is why anyone would WANT to censor the internet. It is a sad and silly lie that anything anyone might see, hear, or read is somehow going to alter their personality or corrupt their character. Yet on a daily basis I see people acting on this idiocy as if it were fact. I've seen mothers fearful that their daughters are going to listen to Britney Spears for fear of them somehow turning into harlots. I've seen this kind of behavior and this kind of attitude all my life and I STILL can't figure it out, at least not by using logic or common sense. The only conclusion that fits the facts is ignorance, foolishness, and maybe even a little mental illness. The thing that suprises me most is how people forget what it is like to be young. Their memory is selective at best. They may remember some things, but they completely forget that young people know how to think. They lack experience of course, but that doesn't make them into human tape recorders. It doesn't make them any more "impressionable" than anyone else.
Censorship is a tribute to the destructive power of stupid people in large groups.
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
I'm always curious how they sepperate search engines spider action from average Joe's porn lust? I am a programmer and so I experiment with spiders that index and copy files from the web, usenet, gnutella, irc, etc. I get a lot of sick shit that comes over the Net to my spiders.. probably more porn than any of these small time traders could imagine. I am always wondering if so crazy government spook is just waiting to come knock down my door, arrest me, and steal my computers so that they can claim to have made a huge porn bust. My spiders don't look for porn but they still find it. I keep copies of everything they find (cached) but that doesn't mean I actually am looking at this stuff. Sure some of the porn I look at but not the sick shit like children and snuff.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Just remember, any time you want to censor someone on the internet, you have the catch-all "Child Porn" to enable you to do so!
Never mind that it might also "accidentally" stop music/movie trading, and the government "might" expand it later to include prohibiting other sites that, say, are critical of your government, policies, companies, etc...
Thin edge of the wedge...
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Any state which fears the "Dangers of the Internet" probably has little reason existing, since it's obviously a despotism, or a pseudo-free government heading in that direction, which has reason to fear outside information.
Licensing is just another method to control access to information. Can you imagine having to be licensed to publish a book or magazine?
The fear of child porn is being used to institute harsher controls, just as the fear of terrorism is being used to implement things such as the USA PATRIOT act here in the states. Their primary goal is the limiting of freedom, not the elimination of the threat.
"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, 'Make us your slaves, but feed us.'" -Dostoevsky
Someone should sue MaBell for the contnt of their networks...Maybe then ppl would see how stupid ISP filtering is.
I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
Mod Points: Helping you keep your opinion to yourself.
12 sheep for every person in N.Z.
But they aren't allowed to vote.
After counting all those sheep, they must have been very, very sleepy.
michael:
from all of us down here, thanks for making the tag-line a hobbit joke and not another furry creature joke..
Whereas NZ has a population of 43.1 million [sheep]
It was up around 60-80 million, but then the gov't got rid of the per head subsidy.. population crashed about 20 million overnight.. on paper anyway.
If parents wants to censor their kids, they can invest in the software on their own. This is typical big brother tactics that leaves the general populace even dumber because they don't activly have to make choices and think.
There are no substitute for caring for your children and giving them the time they deserve.
It's the licensing requirement that is most worrysome. Concerns over obscene material do not justify the licensing requirement, nor the imposition of a mandatory code of practice (no doubt to get around the protections typically afforded to citizens by the courts).
The PERFECT time to post this link. They even have a nifty Java Webstart installer.
Amazing...a public official with clue...the end of the earth is upon us!
That's fine...you can take the censorship. I, however, prefer to think for myself.
However, your conclusion is wrong in that once people have the illusion that their leaders are clueful, then they're easier to contain and control...and censorship is part of that.
// Agent Green (Ian / IU7 / KB1JQO)
// IEEE 802.3: All 10base Are Belong To Us
That's why the smart ones don't use Net Nanny, but something better.
I saw a BBC report on Sealand in respect to data protection - apparently they have had a lot of enquiries from financial companies for off-site data backup. I think that everyone in this business has reviewed their backup strategies following 9/11, and given that this is not a major cost item for an investement bank, there is no harm in having your data in a different jurisdiction, as well as in a different location. Of course this may be a response to the New York Attorney General's investigations as well.
In New Zealand, it's perfectly OK for the POLICE and the LTSA (Land transport safety authority) to run graphic ads of people flying through windscreens...
Having seen the way you New Zealanders drive I'd have to support that....
Seriously though, the things they show in those ads aren't FUD, it's real. Try spending some time in an emergency ward and you'll see just how real. Computers and the internet have an upside and a downside, road transport has an upside and a downside. People tend to find the good things by themselves (that or some enterprising company points it out), noone likes to think about the bad side, so that's why the Government steps in and points it out. Do they go over the top? Sometimes. Do you really think that all politicians sit around and scheme of ways to screw over the country they grew up in? That's just a little too far fetched for me. They may be wrong a lot of the time, but I doubt it's a grand conspiricy.
Oh and yeah I know that went further than you were actually saying, but I got started and yeah well....
Yes, a large percentage of bad / angry drivers will always cause accidents, and I accept that New Zealanders are not the best nation of drivers either. But you don't need to stun and shock a nation to get some action. And I reiterate, if they spent that money on the roads, the road toll might not be so bad after all.
People get raped / beaten / mugged and stabbed here as well, I'm sure it's only a matter of time before some group gets lottery funding for more perverse TV ads. It doesn't really bother me unless I see it at someone elses place, I don't have a TV for a number of reasons, including this.
Personally, I think the Australian pronunciation is closer to 'sieks'. And NZers do pronounce it as 'sex', with particularly heavy accents tending toward 'sux' as you wrote.
The listed aims are:
- To ensure the fairness and accuracy of disclosure of business terms and conditions to the user public and community in general;
- To improve the standard of conduct within the industry;
- To provide public access to complaint handling and cost-effective redress mechanisms;
- To impose and regulate industry standards;
- To improve customer relations;
- To protect rights of access and free speech;
- To ensure that information and procedures are in place for the protection of minors from accessing objectionable material over the Internet;
- To ensure that the information and procedures are in place so Internet users know how to limit access to protect a user from accessing inappropriate or objectionable material
Note the positive phrasing - to protect the rights of access and free speech. I like that. In fact I like all of it. It seems very customer friendly. Which is why I expect Telecom's Xtra doesn't like it - it talks about the right of services being forwarded if you change providers - Xtra wouldn't like that.The onus is on the users, not the ISP to know how to protect themselves from objectionable content.
It suggests ratings systems like PICS. I have to say - it all looks good to me.
Recycle PCs and build a wireless community network www.hillsborough.org.nz
As my friend was kind enough to inform me, freedom of speech pretty much entails that my wanting to read the Bible pretty much guarantees running across a picture of an 8 year old in fishnets now and again (that Rocky Horror crowd is getting younger all the time).
It is a pity that NZ is considering such a move considering it was suppose to be one of the least regulated spots on Earth (fancied moving there). It just showcases the continuing struggle to assert freedoms while others demonize to maintain control (DCMA, PATRIOT, and the omnipresent War on Some Drugs... it seems to flow from the same vein).
One of the largest producers of child pornography is the US Postal Service (sting operations). It kind of makes the argument of protecting the children moot.
Just as an aside, it always struck me the most rabid defenders of the children were the ones most uncomfortable with children's' sexuality, which is a really odd proposition. Not to mention some of the most vocal defenders tend to be brought up on charges of molesting children after a while (the case with the head of Covenant House during the 80's comes to mind).
Not exactly the mindset I'd want telling me listening to Judas Priest will make me commit suicide (and even if it did, Wow! Talk about artistic achievement.). Do we really need it on the web too? Guess we do 'cause that would be censorship.
strangely enough, www.sheepporn.co.nz
How is forced self-regulation any different than a law that does the same thing?
If you have a law, you need exact standards, and legal precedents on what is, and what is not legal. But if the government is just merely threatening to do so, without giving explicit standards, by guess is that the ISPs will overcensor whatever they find that might be considered bad. This is likely to be arbitrary, without appeal and throwing suspicion at anyone trying to oppose it. The ISP is at essencially no risk when overcensoring, while at risk when undercensoring. Lacking standards, and exact filters, they _will_ err on the safe side.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
A friend of mine at a party once demonstrated the principle of a token-ring network with a bunch of guys. Messy ;-)
Zeeland is another provincewithin the Netherlands.
I don't like New Zealand Telecom any more than a lot of people here, but it's not fair to slag them just because of those prices. The Internet in New Zealand has always been expensive.
Firstly, your currency conversion rate was slightly on the high side. It's not 0.6, it's about 0.56. Secondly, if you don't like the Telecom port blocking then you have plenty of alternative ISP's to choose from that offer competitive rates and services.
Apart from that, New Zealand is an Island nation, so what do you expect? National traffic has always been dirt cheap, but most people can't live on national traffic because there's almost no useful content here.
Compare this with the US, which has a massive localised infrastructure where the majority of content that people want is nearby. International traffic isn't in as much demand, and it doesn't cost any extra because it's not a huge overhead for the ISP's on top of the national infrastructure already available. If 100 million Americans all suddenly wanted to access Australian content on a medium term basis, international charges in the states would go through the roof.
Irrespective of how much money they have, it cost Telecom a lot of money to get the Southern Cross cable laid, and in an age where many applications are beginning to demand a lot of bandwidth, there's still a limited amount of bandwidth that can flow through it.
The combination of everyone wanting international traffic and only having a limited infrastructure to provide it with leads to the international traffic cost that we have.
I always wondered what the dangers of the internet are. But yes now i can see, sending bits that make up dct blocks of jpeg picture data is as dangerous as abusing childeren. I didnt realise it before, but i understand now that anyone that sees one of these images - even for a second, will be drawn by their power and immeadiately feel compelled to go and find a child to take dodgy pictures of. I really think that all governments should be forced to read the World of Ends Public Draft. Unless of course they've already censored that site.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
We _have_ freedom of speech in New Zealand! Although in NZ it's less of an issue; it's only you yankies that have issues with freedom of speech and privacy.
you can trust our lame excuse for a government to bugger it right up.
The company known as Telecom, used to be publicly owned, but the Government sold if off, and now we have a hideous monopoly that owns all the land lines, and charges hideous prices for its "services". An isp called Xtra, is part owned by Telecom and Microsoft.
Our government also pays microsoft 1 billion dollars per year to aquire "software" for use in our "schools".
So with this in mind, I doubt any involvment from the governemnt bodys will be led with good intentions.
There goes our idea of opening a branch office in NZ later this year, and the possible clients down there - their loss, not ours. And I was so looking forward to it. But I guess NZ is wannabe Nazis just like their neighbors to the north...
As a security consultant who has, time and time again, run into large AND small ISPs (t-dialin, wanadoo, etc) who are unresponsive to emails sent to "abuse@...", I think the notion of requiring them to be licensed and to HOLD them to certain standards of behavior is great. After all, why should they be like any other utility?
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
why not ban those?
or about about s&m films? those definitely advocate abuse.
Do you really think that all politicians sit around and scheme of ways to screw over the country they grew up in?
I would say that most politicians sit around and scheme of ways to screw over those they think slighted them in some way.
I have met many politicians who obsess over ways to fuck over their neighbor who has annoyed them for some inane reason, or some company that has pissed them off, etc. etc.
They use their position of power for revenge and abuse.
So in the end the result is the same. By scheming ways to screw over individuals they want personal revenge on, they end up screwing over the country as a whole.
one of my lecturers may have sat in on this select commity , his name is hank wolfe. Hes ex-cia and hes a security expert. i am glad that he was "in on it" because hes a really pro privacy :)
Nope, don't like it.
> There's a lot I like about living in NZ, but all >of it either grows out of the ground or rolls in >from the sea.
I love the marijuana that grows in my back yard.
Best bit of NZ is the way cannabis grows so fscking fast. That and shitty police that can't stop u from commiting crimes 'cause there sooo pathetic.
Don't be a pussy
Smoke weed all day.
What could be better than a jet powered motorcycle? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8l6GTHLSWE
Just to give an accurate picture, I should say that New Zealand is the most beautiful country in the world. It has every beautiful geographical feature found in other countries: Mountains, glaciers, volcanoes, hot springs, flat savannas with lazy rivers, rushing streams, fjords, hills with wild wheat grass and occasional oak trees like in California, tropical islands, a small desert, and other features I can't remember now.
Check your facts and quote your sources bozo
Did I hear Censorship
I hear Jesse Helms is looking for work.
Use your head, can't you, use your head,
You're on earth, there's no cure for that - S. Beckett
Whats canada like? I hear the people are friendly and there is good sking. Ohh yeah and your far less likly to get shot too.
GPLv2: I want my rights, I want my phone call! DRM: What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
One of 10 reasons that makes the United States the greatest nation in the world.
Hey keeeeeeds, Teeeeem eeeeees goeeeeng to steeeeeck peeeeectures of peeeeeegs onto the wall weeeeeeeth peeeeeeens.
Don't take life too seriously. It is only a temporary situation. Usual disclaimers apply.
Don't take life too seriously. It is only a temporary situation. Usual disclaimers apply.
you can HAVE russel crowe!
Dont ask me, im just the bass player!
... then this means that they would willingly sponsor a project that uses CGI to create virtual children for people to abuse.
I wonder if they've thought it through that far.
The Yellow Times posted pictures of American casualties and POW's. Their ISP shut the site down. They quickly moved the pics to New Zealand.