Slashdot Mirror
Australian Labor Party Proposes ISP Level Filter
An anonymous reader writes "The Australian Labor Party (much the same as the Democrats in the US) are claiming they will force ISPs to block violent and pornographic content if elected. From the article: 'Mr Beazley said all households would be included in the policy unless there was a specific request for access to such material. It was "too hard" for many parents to install internet blockers on their computers to prevent offensive material being downloaded.'"
Just who defines "violent" or "pornographic" material? What is "violent" or "pornographic" material? Frankly, people who are smart will eventually get around it anyway...
Cry me a fucking river.
Can't install filtering software? How about sitting down with your kids and keeping an eye on what they're doing instead? Move the PC out to a communal area - the front room or dining room, somewhere you can see it from. Hell, you could even end up taking an actual interest in what they're doing, discussing things with them and perhaps even taking a part in their education (dangerous, I know). You never know, they might even learn a few limits of their own.
God forbid that parents should have to take some personal responsibility for what their children are exposed to. I know parenting isn't easy, but this trend of shoving responsibility and effort off to third parties is sickening.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Without something like this, parents would have to do things like be responsible, or supervise their children!!!
He tried to kill me with a forklift!
The ALP is currently in unelectable self-destruct mode, and appears to show no real signs of getting that fixed before the next election. Which is unfortunate, as the incumbents are a bunch of equally obnoxious nazis, though for other reasons. I doubt that having such nanny-state type policies is likely to help them in any way. What I can't figure out is why they don't just hand over the leadership to Julia Gillard and start working towards making themselves actually attractive to voters. None of this stuff is relevant to that goal, or will help them in any way shape or form. And I speak as a parent.
Tomrrow, dissident speech and knowledge.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
It seems just about every week we're hearing more and more censoring and blocking and "You can't do that here" talk from Australia. I always thought this was a free-wheeling, "come and say g'day" kinda place. But it sounds like it's more puritanical than the US, something I didn't think was possible.
What is up with this country?
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Since when did the democratic party want to censor internet access? I usually here proposals like this from the other side of the isle.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Porn is anything you lose interest in after you cum
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
President Clinton, one of the best presidents we've ever had
Thanks for the laugh; you started my day off right.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
If I would run an ISP, I would offer 'adult content filtering' as a service, their is obviously a big market for this.
Where I live, there are not that much differences between ISP's, I'am pretty sure a lot of parents would take such a service into account when choosing for an ISP.
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.
My 2 cents:
Filtering is fine, if its *your* choice not to view, not someone else imposing their filtering on you. This is why the British model is not a good one.
Opt-in would be better, it should be a regular purchased service like any other net service. Parents should also have the option of decided WHO defines their filter list. So that they could choose the filtering according to their own religious/Moral beliefs. If you're Islamic you might want to block Danish cartoons for example. If you're a Google fanboy, you should be able to order the Google safe filter. The *parent* should get to decide who they want to do the blocking, the ISP should simply offer the service of routing it.
ISP should *sell* the service, then there is a commercial incentive to offer a market in good filtering choices, rather than a reluctant half assed service.
Governments should be kept at barge pole length, because they have a tendency to censor views they disagree with.
Parents should be able to change the preferences on a website with their login/password they get when they order net connections, so that as their children grow they can turn the filtering down, or when they want to supervise their kids internet usage they can turn it off.
Finally, some filtering services should be whitelisted services rather than blacklisted, i.e. a whitelist of known good sites, for parents that are particularly sensitive to porn/violence issues.
Umm what about target shooting. That is a valid, legal and socially valid use of a gun. Your blanket comment about guns and the people that own them is the exact point. Just because you don't want them doesn't mean you have any right to stop others having them.
And will the list of people who "opt out" be kept confidential? How confidential? How do people know that by opting to receive porn, they won't end up on a list somewhere -- since obviously by definition there has to be a list at their ISP -- of "Social Deviants who Like Violence and Pornography"? Just the fact that such a list could or might exist, could easily cause people to not want to opt out. Everyone has a price; how long before some overzealous investigative reporter or tabloid journalist bribes someone at an ISP for the list, just to see what interesting people are on there? I can't think of a better story than revealing which government officals are on the "Porn List."
The way to do it is to make the system opt-in, not opt-out. If people have kids, all they need to do is make a phone call to their ISP; various ISPs can even market the feature as a selling point of their service if they wanted to. But any scheme that automatically filters everything and requires you to put yourself on a list in order to get uncensored access is inherently a bad idea.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Of course "the idea" dates from a time and place when the firepower available to the populace was roughly equivalent to that available to the government. Outdated since the arrival of the gatling gun - let alone the vast, vast gap between the semi automatic rifle or shotgun (legal for Aussie citizen) and the kind of stuff the RAAF or Australian Army has (eg Metal Storm)
They might kill you, yes, but not everyone.
The same principle can be applied with more effect using a strategy of unarmed, peaceful revolution. Shooting an armed revolutionary can be seen as a valid thing for a government to do. Shooting an unarmed civilian is not - shoot a few and you'll have no support, and no army to do your bidding.
This sounds much like how any country would judge another country: based on who that country allows to stay in power. Regardless of whether or not you approve of your elected officials, they did get there with help from 'yer votes. If you don't like them or want them there, get someone competent to run and vote him/her in instead.
I mean, kids just aren't interested in porn. If they happen on an iffy site that has porn ads they'll just go EWW! and move on to something more interesting.
If on the other hand they're old enough to actually be looking for porn I don't see how making porn harder to access for them is going to make them Better People (TM) when they grow up.
And if you wanted to censor violence you would first have to shutdown all tv channels basically, and bomb hollywood.
"because their husband would rather do himself in front of a picture."
The problem is the guy, not the entertainment. If he'd choose that over making love with his wife, he has other, more pressing mental issues.
I think any slashdotter wouldn't hesitate to to mate with someone 1/10 the attractiveness of a pornstar if given the chance.
I don't get it.
So, therefore, you see nothing wrong in shoving your views down every one else's throats. Just because you were too stupid to find naked pictures in order to facilitate your masturbation sessions as a kid doesn't mean that you should make life harder on those people who don't...
For a change, let me shove my views down your throat. I believe that your addiction of bullshit stories (the bible) is very bad for society, because it promotes superstition, it let people be bullshitted by control-freaks so they lose their self-control of their lifes.
So, you are not allowed to show a bible to children, and teach them religion, as this can adversely affect their minds, and render them into helpless psychologically-dependent people who cannot run their own life.
Has it occured to you that, perhaps, the bitch is a bit stuck-up, is a religious hag, or is a dog and is unable to sexually satisfy her husband who cannot therefore be blamed for using pornography to masturbate???
Yeah, so you're perfectly free to despise pr0n, but just make sure you keep your social dictates off my face. Otherwise, it will be a pleasure for me to shove that fucking bible in your asshole page by page, without vaseline.
How about keeping an open mind (of course, this is impossible for a religious type, because religion is first and foremost about closing minds)???
So, just because you're afraid of seeing the bodies of fellow human beings, you deprive yourself of technology... How about learning morse code? Your technological whereabouts would be even more painful this way... With smoke signals, you can also have tear in your eyes, and, if you're careful enough, burn your fingers for more pain.
Tell me, by inflicting all that pain on yourself and on others, what is your ultimate goal? Do you seriously expect that there will be a "great suffering reckoning" some day which will bring you goodies just because you sufferred and made other people suffer?
If so, this is the greatest testimonial to the terminally assinine stupidity of religious people (I lump together christians, jews and muslims, but feel free to include other assholes in there).
Christian women are NOT good at sex.