Slashdot Mirror


Aussie Censorship "Live Trials" Won't Be Live

Xiroth writes "In what could be the first step to backing down on the plans to censor the Australian Internet, Communication Minister Stephen Conroy has made it known that the live trials of the Government filter will not, in fact, be live, instead being downgraded to a closed network test. Given that this would provide no further information than what Government tests have already provided, this may prove to be a face-saving measure before the plan is quietly scrapped. Nonetheless, concerned Australians are encouraged to attend protests planned for this weekend to ensure that the Government gets the message."

19 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. While all the news is about Aussie censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It turns out the UK has been censoring the web all along.

    I'm surprised this hasn't been on Slashdot already as it's been on the news quite a bit here.

    1. Re:While all the news is about Aussie censorship by iDav · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's new here because our supposedly left-of-centre Labour government is trying to impose a decidedly right-wing policy on the public. That and the (dis)Honourable Senator Conroy responsible for the plan shows only complete disregard for the truth and logic, and utter disdain toward the general public and ISPs.

      The primary reason for the protesting and media coverage is the fact that the blacklist that would be used is to be secret, and there will be no transparency or public accountability in regards to the content of the list. The fear is that the government could easily, and quietly, block ANY content they want at any time. This simply cannot be allowed. In the UK, they only use a ratified international blacklist of 1,300 sites. In Australia there would be those sites, plus anywhere up to 10,000 sites of the Australian Governments choosing.

      --
      ...My Sig Sucks...
    2. Re:While all the news is about Aussie censorship by Xiroth · · Score: 5, Informative

      In fact, they've already indicated that they're looking to ban illegal but morally grey information such a euthanasia methods. Independent special interests in the Senate such as Senator Xenophon and Senator Fielding have indicated that they're interested in banning sites where the legality hasn't even been settled, such as gambling websites and hardcore pornography.

      The biggest concern, of course, is the potential censoring of political speech. Euthanasia, in fact, falls under that, as the Greens and Democrats have indicated their support for legalising it - in fact, if memory serves, as a precautionary measure a Greens state senator read out methods of euthanasia in parliament under the protection of parliamentary privilege with the knowledge that the proceedings of Parliament must be recorded and be made freely available to the public, rendering the government unable to block the publishing of the material. If material regarding euthanasia and other controversial topics is blocked, could that not soon lead to the blocking of political speech of minor parties and political activists that wish to overturn the bans on the material?

    3. Re:While all the news is about Aussie censorship by aaron+alderman · · Score: 3, Informative

      You couldn't be any more wrong if you tried.

      Howard and Rudd are pandering to the religious right. The censorship in question is the type of "think of the children" mentality the religious want to impose on others. There is nothing progressive or liberal in censorship.

      Howard was one of the most RIGHT WING Prime Ministers we have ever seen! It's almost as if you are living in reverse world where up is down and left is right. (Almost like you are down under or something)

      Don't forget that in Australia our financial policies and social policies do not match onto the hardline USA system. (Our right wingers aren't small government and our left wingers aren't socialistic)

      Socially our centre is right. Economically our centre is left. Confusing, isn't it?

  2. What's the point? by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Funny

    How Things Work Everywhere Else:
    1. Concept.
    2. Pilot.
    3. Evaluation. bad: Return to 1, or continue to 4.
    4. Real world trial.
    5. Evaluation. bad: Return to 1, or continue to 6.
    6. Implementation
    7. Fine-tuning
    5. Evaluation. bad: Return to 7, or continue to 8.
    8. Maintenance

    How Things Work in Australia
    1. Concept.
    2. Real world trial.
    3. Public relations debacle. bad: Return to 2, or continue to 4.
    4. Implementation.
    5. Drink beer.
    6. Maintenance.

    As you can see, everything is going according to plan. Just check your boots before you leave the server room. -_-

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:What's the point? by daver00 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Guy guys guys, not even close, its more like this:

      1. Drink Beer
      2. Knee jerk reaction to minority public opinion
      3. Implementation
      4. Ignore public opinion, frame debate in terms of moral shades of black and white
      5. Drink beer

      Note the whole 'concept' part is where you have all been getting this wrong.

  3. Yay, protest. by Starayo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm certainly attending, though my efforts to rally my friends have been hampered by their SHE-DEVILS of girlfriends who all have plans for that day. Damn their icy hearts!

    Seeing as these filters are so ridiculously easy to bypass, a major concern for me lately is how they'll be handling people who use these methods, especially since they have perfectly legitimate applications *besides* bypassing the filter.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  4. Re:Its not such a bad idea... by iDav · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If the plan were only to block specified illegal content, then aside from technical issues, I would agree.

    The problem is they plan to block "unwanted" content, with no definition of "unwanted" being offered. They can legally block anything they don't want. That is incredibly dangerous.

    --
    ...My Sig Sucks...
  5. Re:Its not such a bad idea... by Mountaineer1024 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why bother to implement a system that will only affect the people that it is least aimed at?
    Child pornography (and the other psuedo legitimate targets of this filtering) is already illegal, this should be an enforcement issue, not a censorship one.
    Whilst ISP's may be reluctant to cooperate with the MPAA/RIAA to catch "pirates", I can't imagine any of them shielding a child predator for a single second.

    As an aside, yes I am Australian, yes I've lodged an official protest and YES if implemented, I intend to bypass these retarded filters.

  6. Re:Its not such a bad idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Censorship is never a good idea (or even "not a bad idea" ). You probably think that because you probably never lived in a country where real censorship existed (and often with "immoral" people "disappearing", after all, it's easier to silence the critics as they appear than to dismiss and censor all that they say).

    If you let the government tell you what is "immoral" and what isn't , you go in a pretty slippery slope. Today you may have a "good" government; but no one knows if tomorrow the members of your government go insane and define that now you will live under a dictatorship which will allow them to filter anything they consider "immoral".

    Now, what is a good idea is parents educating their children for the real world , teaching them that different opinions exist and some of them are (according to some societies, religious or political groups) immoral . Shielding children from the world will only lead to a mass of sheep that can be easily controlled by the media and the government and can't take their own decisions.

  7. Re:Surprise, Surprise! by z0idberg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That might be the case if there was any chance it would even remotely work in the real world. But I think this is a sign of them finally coming to the realisation that it is going to flop spectacularly and this is a way to find that out away from the publics view.

    A real world trial would have showed up all the problems that everyone has been pointing out, and it would have brought those problems right into the homes of voters all over the country.

    This way they can continually have it in testing until it fades from the publics mind then mothball it.

  8. Re:Its not such a bad idea... by chrome · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's a good thing you don't get to speak for the rest of us.

    Honestly, I am quite able to make up my own mind as to what I can read or look at. I don't need anyone making that determination for me.

    As the great Frank Zappa once said, "There is no sound that you can make with your mouth, or word that will come out of your mouth, that is so powerful that it will make you go to hell", and in the same vein there is no image or word you can see or read that will 'sabotage your mind' against women and children. What you decide as content that 'leads to a depraved mind' might be classified by others as just simple harmless garbage which most people will just ignore and never seek out anyway.

    It doesn't matter what kind of censorship they do, nobody can ever do a thorough job. There is simply too much garbage out there that would need to be filtered, and stuff will always slip through. Even the tests that showed they were blocking large amounts of legitimate content also showed that they were letting through some content that should have been blocked. So much of the truly abhorrent shit that they're wanting to block, child pornography, isn't even traded out in the open via the web anyway; it's traded via DCC on efnet or other IRC networks, or on private SSL secured boards that change IPs regularly.

    One of the many stupid things about this is that given the above being true, the amount of money required to implement the government's plan will end up increasing our connectivity costs even more than they are today, for no discernible benefit.

    So, in summary, whether or not you think censorship of the internet is a good idea or not, it's pointless because no matter what you do, you'll fail in your objectives, and end up just costing the public more money trying to force your morality on them.

  9. To demonstrate how wide ranging this filter is... by SigmaTao · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There has been a recent court decision in New South Wales (a state in Australia), where images of Bart and Lisa Simpson engaged in sex acts are considered child porn and a citizen has been fined for having such images on computer he owned. If the national filter is to prevent child porn the scale of filtering is just mind boggling. (There are various references to the court decision... here is one example http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24771973-16947,00.html )

  10. A lack of transparency by Capsaicin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In fact, they've already indicated that they're looking to ban illegal but morally grey information ...

    Of the greatest concern is that the list of what is blocked is secret. Most Australians, myself included, would not disagree with censorship to some degree. However this is a power which in the hand of executive government (or indeed a private organisation) has a great potential for abuse. Consequently what is required is complete transperancy. The secrecy of current plan achieves the opposite of what our system of government requires.

    The biggest concern, of course, is the potential censoring of political speech.

    Exactly! And given the decisions of the High Court regarding the "implied right to political communication," inherent in the Constitution, it is also beyond the power of government to do so. If, however, we are to be kept in the dark as to what is being banned, how can we have any confidence a government is not indulging in such unconstitutional behaviour?

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    1. Re:A lack of transparency by PopeGumby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of the greatest concern is that the list of what is blocked is secret.

      The biggest concern, of course, is the potential censoring of political speech.

      Exactly!


      You should decide which one is the biggest concern, because they are seperate things. If the greatest concern is that the blacklist is secret, then you're saying that if the Labour party just came out and said "we censored euthanasia page waystodie.com, because we felt like it", you would be okay with that?

      My greatest concern is that no other person should not be controlling what I can and cannot see on the internet, or anywhere else for that matter.

  11. Protest: Now in Canberra by renegadesx · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is now also a protest organized for Canberra.

    Garema Place, Civic from 12pm-2pm

    --
    Make SELinux enforcing again!
  12. High speed National broadband Infrastructure! by daver00 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Where is it? Come on Rudd, where the hell is the broadband infrastructure promised during the campaign?

    This is what gets to me the most of all in this debate, they have not even begun to build the infrastructure they promised to build, and here we are bogged down in this utter waste of time instead! I am dead set against the censorship plan, but what I am even more pissed off about is that the national broadband scheme has taken a back seat to this bullshit!

    The one reason this government appealed to me is that they appeared to understand the importance of infrastructure to the digital economy. But it seems like they are not even close to getting it.

  13. Move! Take Action Now! by a.ameri · · Score: 3, Informative

    Taking part in the protests is the first (and very important step). Here is the list of places where protests will be held:

    Melbourne:
    Saturday 13 December
    State Library
    12pm-5pm

    Sydney:
    Saturday 13 December
    Town Hall
    11am-4pm

    Brisbane:
    Saturday 13 December
    Brisbane Square
    11am-3pm

    Adelaide:
    Saturday 13 December
    Parliament
    12pm-4pm

    Hobart:
    Saturday 13 December
    Parliament Lawns
    11am-1:30pm

    Canberra:
    Saturday 13 December
    Garema Place, Civic
    12pm-2pm


    Please also consider taking the following actions:

    1) Call Senator Conroy's office on 03 9650 1188. Do not be rude, do not swear, just in a very reasoned and rational voice, express your disapproval, and in a few short sentences, say why you disagree. It matters a lot.

    2) Write a letter to Senator Conroy, make sure it's between half a page to one page (no more than 400 words). Again, in a polite tone (that doesn't have to be formal, and doesn't have to have letterhead, etc., just your name and address) let him know why you disagree with him. His address is:
    Senator Stephen Conroy
    Level 4, 4 Treasury Place
    Melbourne Vic 3002

    3) Write a letter to your local MP. It doesn't matter what party he/she is from, Liberals will use your letter to back up their claims in Question Time, which gives publicity to the whole issue and will bring it to mainstream media's attention. Labor members will also express their criticism, privately, to him. This specially matters if your local MP is a Minister and serves in the Cabinet. To find out who your local MP is click here.

    4) Write a letter to Prime Minister Rudd. Let him know that when the Australian people voted him in office last year, they didn't know "Education Revolution" means censorship. Rudd's address is:
    PO Box 6022
    House of Representatives
    Parliament House
    Canberra ACT 2600

    5) Donate or become a member of Electronic Frontiers Australia . Right now the EFA is the sole organisation fighting this. They need all the help they can get.

    6) Write a letter to your ISP. It doesn't matter if it's the Evil Telstra; on this, we're all together. They are fighting the battle for us right now, but it would help them to know that what they are doing is a good business practice, that you expect them to fight this to the end.

    Don't just sit around and do nothing and then complain about how evil governments are. We, the citizens are the ones who allow governments to become evil, by our political apathy. Move! Take Action! Now!

    --
    -- /* Those who don't underestand Unix, are condemned to reinvent it poorly */
  14. Re:Streisand effect by Sique · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ah yes... a more recent example:

    The Bundespruefstelle für jugendgefaehrdende Medien (the german Federal Control Institution for Media Deemed Harmful to Minors) prohibited publishing its own list of indexed media in 2003. For exactly the same reasons.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*