Aussies Hit the Streets Over Gov't Internet Filters

mask.of.sanity writes "Outraged aussies will hold simultaneous protests across Australia in opposition to the government's plans for mandatory ISP internet content filtering. The plan will introduce nation-wide filtered internet using blacklists operated by a government agency, away from public scrutiny. Politicians and ISPs will join protesters in the streets to voice their opposition to the government's plan, which has ploughed ahead, despite intense criticism that the technology will crippled internet speeds and infringe on free speech. Opponents said the most accurate filter chosen by the government will incorrectly block up to 10,000 Web pages out of 1 million."

Comments

The Grand Tube Experiment

[eldavojohn]

Opponents said the most accurate filter chosen by the government will incorrectly block up to 10,000 Web pages out of 1 million.

Uh, why didn't they use the metric of 10^4:10^6 or 1:100? Sounds like somebody wanted that statement to be heard as much more impacting than it is. The thing that worries me is that if we look at other technologies designed to "protect the people from themselves," a false positive rate of 1% really isn't that bad--especially on a fully automated system. A high false positive rate is--in my opinion--what's holding back facial recognition but I fear that 1% blockage of websites is completely acceptable to most folks. Maybe a better analogy is that of the FCC in America and the words you can't say on TV ... even though there is no research showing how these words negatively affect people, this small percent of our language and expression is blocked. This analogy (like all) is flawed, however, as you might never know what was on that website that caused the super happy and helpful animated kangaroo to appear on your computer and gently chide you that this site is not for Aussies.

Hopefully (and I'm betting on this) it will turn out to be a lot like prohibition. The outlawing of these sites and data cause their value to skyrocket, the government is made to look a mockery, your average citizen (I've heard talk of simple SSL encryption stopping this) knows how to reach them, in so doing they inadvertently supply criminals with capital and the very stupid law is repealed. Twenty years later, everyone is joking about "the Grand Experiment" and how pathetically futile it was to begin with.

Lastly, how is this any different than what China is doing? I'm surprised nobody has made this connection and accused the government of being no better than anti-free-speech China.

After reading a bit of the plan on Australia's Cyber-Safety, it's evident this quickly degrades into a "think of the children" mentality:

While the internet has created substantial benefits for children, it has also exposed them to a number of dangers, including exposure to illegal and prohibited content. Parents rightly expect the Australian Government to play its part in helping protect children online.

So why isn't there an "opt-out" plan for those Aussie adults who like our interwebs a little dirty (and are over 18 years of age)?

Re:The Grand Tube Experiment

[poetmatt]

What you doubt, is not reality.

Remember the whole "5 9's" philosophy of uptime?

Well what if you reduce that back to 2 9's of uptime, which was like ....8 hours a year I believe. I think you know how big of a deal that even 1/10th of a percent can make, in that regards.

Now lets take this to an ineffective bloated government mandated filter, and you think it's going to work? Yeah, right. "we're only blocking 1% of the internet, and it happens to be every torrent sites (including linux ISOs) , and 0 child porn websites. I'm proud that the other 80% of the sites we filter are very effective".

Watch an almost identical quote to that come out of government mouthes if this is implemented.

Re:The Grand Tube Experiment

[gorbachev]

If that's true, they are simply going to blacklist a bunch of websites. I heavily doubt cnn/bbc/etc will ever negligently be put on that list.

They are doing something very similar in Finland. The biggest difference is that ISPs aren't required to filter based on the blocklist, yet.

An unnamed police officer (yes, apparently a single person) is in charge of what goes on the list and what comes off the list.

They recently put w3c.org on the list.

Obviously it was a mistake, but nevertheless it quite nicely demonstrated that any site can end up on the list.

Even Save the Children don't want the filters

[OzPeter]

A quote from this article in the The Age

"Holly Doel-Mackaway, adviser with Save the Children, the largest independent children's rights agency in the world, said educating kids and parents was the way to empower young people to be safe internet users.

She said the filter scheme was "fundamentally flawed" because it failed to tackle the problem at the source and would inadvertently block legitimate resources."

With Rudd comes censorship

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm an Australian, I've recently become concerned about the plans my government is instigating. Just on /. there has been a recent plethora of Australian govt technological announcements that seriously impeach our ability to freely access information.

I will certainly attend one of these protest rally 's providing it's located within 400km of my current location (which I seriously doubt).

And cheers to iinet for attempting to denounce the governments ridiculous plans. No doubt those at the mercy's of company's such as Telstra and Westnet will suffer the full effect of these proletariat injunctions.

- Dane green

Curious

[camperdave]

I'm curious. What does the Slashdot community think of government run opt-in blacklists and/or whitelists?

NEUTRALITY

[kieblerh]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q25-S7jzgs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mYbYG-nXVA Lawrence Lessig is the man! Internet users should be in control of what software they use and what content they transmit over the internet. The internet has operated openly since its start. Nobody should be able to use their market power, or government power to silence people's voices on such a powerful network as the internet.

Not In The Streets

[Nom du Keyboard]

Hold your protests in the voting booth, not in the streets. Then something will really happen.

Re:Not In The Streets

[ratboy666]

No, not in the "voting booth".

The reason is simple -- a government that is elected sets up an organization. Typically, the organization is created without an "exit strategy". After which, future governments end up feeding it anyway.

So, we end up with a "internet monitoring" or "media monitoring" organization. It may live on a LONG time.

As an example: Ontario, Canada, created a censorship tribunal in 1911. By the 80's, very few people could tell much about it, although it was still active. Indeed, it existed until 2004, when it was declared "unconstitional" (in the Canadian sense). See: http://www.ccla.org/news/winter04-05_10.html

However, the Ontario Film Review Board still exists (http://www.ofrb.gov.on.ca/english/page4.h) but I find it interesting that the events of 2004 are not mentioned in its "self-history".

That is what happens to these initiatives. Leading to the only solution possible. "I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure." (Aliens).

Over 250 million websites to be banned in Aus?

[Anonymous Coward]

The indexed web alone contains over 25 billion sites. That means we're talking at over 250million sites blocked! :D

Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w

[Anonymous Coward]

big business and lobbyists for the music/movie/software studios who want to block torrent sites.

These issues are also a smoke screen, just like child porn and terrorists. The _real_ problem is free speech, that is what is under threat.

This was all planned. In "Between Two Ages" by Zbigniew Brzezinski he predicted the internet and the rise in free speech. This take down of the free internet is just the next step. Get us all hooked, get the world using it, then transform it into the greatest propaganda tool ever invented.

First they caught us in the "net". Now we are getting moved into the "grid".

We _must_ keep hold of the internet in its present form, this is very important.

Re:If we don't stop thepiratebay, the terrorists w

[YouWantFriesWithThat]

actually that might be the kind of obstacle that would force an evolution of our networks and communications. i think that people usually respond well to adversity; in this case there are a lot of very intelligent and skilled people that want information that other people have. if barriers are thrown up in the way of the transfer of data they will find ways to use technology to overcome them or create new technology to do it. i kind of like the idea of "splintered cryptoed internets" because they are less easy for any one entity to control.

besides, if the entire network is illegal to be on, can you imagine how good the warez will be?

Aussie gov't makes example out of citizen

[doug141]

A video site called Liveleak, that runs a few dozen new videos daily, ran a video of a russian circus family practicing, which involved an adult holding a child by the limbs and tossing/spinning him about. The aussie gov't is prosecuting an aussie for watching the video. Here's the appeal for support for the accused:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a77_1228162261

Re:Finland for the win! oh the misery!

[ultranova]

Oz is not the forefront of this "let's block the internet to save our children movement". Unfortunately the do-gooders in Finland have beat you to it, giving us a very sour tasting "Win".

And the end result of that was that I set up a Tor relay and will never again trust the Finnish police, since it has proven itself to be willing to abuse its power - not a single one of the sites on the block list I sampled contained child porn.

Re:What else can Aussies DO?

[Malekin]

Although nicely social, demonstrations and protesting seems somewhat futile [snip] Naturally, they can vote the b#ms out, but that happens anyways as a matter of control.

One of the important goals of protesting is to get many people to take notice of the issue who otherwise wouldn't. If nobody pays attention to the issue it's not going to affect how they vote. With a colourful protest splashed across the evening news more people are going to want to vote the bums out sooner.

(And seriously, you self-censored the word "bums"? Harden the fuck up, mate)

Re:Business Oppotunity...

[zuperduperman]

Actually, in all seriousness, this is what scares me more than anything about this insane plan.

Because such businesses *will* spring up, and pedophiles and criminals will indeed flock to them. And within a very short space of time we will have laws introduced that make it not just impractical to bypass the filter, but *illegal* to circumvent it or to offer technology or services for doing so. From there we are but a short hop from making all but government approved (ie. backdoored) encryption illegal and from there to complete totalitarian control over society.

So this rather innocent sounding filter has the potential to cascade, through it's obvious flaws and the inevitable embarrassment of the government when they become publicized, to something much much more serious.