Slashdot Mirror


Australian Internet Censorship Plan Torpedoed

An anonymous reader writes "The Australian Government's plan to introduce mandatory internet censorship has been scuttled, following an independent senator's decision to join the Greens and Opposition in blocking any legislation needed to start the scheme. Anti-Gambling Senator Nick Xenophon previously supported the filter because it could also block gambling web sites, but today withdrew support saying 'the more evidence that's come out, the more questions there are on this.' This week surveys found only less than 10% of Australians supported the censorship. Censorship Senator Stephen Conroy has consistently ignored advice from technical experts saying the filters would slow the internet, block legitimate sites, be easily bypassed and fall short of capturing all of the nasty content available online. Conroy expanded the list to block Adult R18+ and X18+ web sites, and this week said it would also block sites depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence or 'revolting and abhorrent phenomena' that 'offend against the standards of morality.' Last week an anti-abortion website was added to the blacklist, and Conroy said he was considering expanding the blacklist to 10,000 sites and beyond."

66 of 308 comments (clear)

  1. Block The Internet by TheMeuge · · Score: 5, Funny

    Conroy expanded the list to block Adult R18+ and X18+ web sites, and this week said it would also block sites depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence or "revolting and abhorrent phenomena" that "offend against the standards of morality".

    So the filter would block the Internet?

    1. Re:Block The Internet by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Unfortunately for Conroy, ridiculous web censorship mechanisms are themselves a revolting and abhorrent phenomenon...

    2. Re:Block The Internet by MadDogX · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't know about the rest of the internet, but by "abhorrent phenomena that offend against the standards of morality" I'm pretty sure they mean MySpace.

    3. Re:Block The Internet by moose_hp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Conroy expanded the list to block Adult R18+ and X18+ web sites, and this week said it would also block sites depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence or "revolting and abhorrent phenomena" that "offend against the standards of morality".

      So the filter would block the Internet?

      If they applied the same filter to television, most channels would only display white noise.

      --
      DON'T PANIC.
    4. Re:Block The Internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know about the rest of the internet, but by "abhorrent phenomena that offend against the standards of morality" I'm pretty sure they mean MySpace.

      Couldn't the morality part also apply to anything for gay rights?

    5. Re:Block The Internet by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Funny

      If they applied the same filter to television, most channels would only display white noise.

      How is that any different from the award winning programming currently broadcast on TV? ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    6. Re:Block The Internet by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly - so if you keep it vague and fuzzy you can block things you don't like without having to publicly declare discriminatory prejudices.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    7. Re:Block The Internet by purpledinoz · · Score: 2, Funny

      The only time where I wished such a filter existed was when my room mate in university set my default homepage to goatse.cx on my browser. Yikes!

    8. Re:Block The Internet by BrokenHalo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trouble is, these politicians don't actually have any ideas beyond their narrow-minded suburban little headspace. After all, they are just glorified parking attendants; they don't have any real skills. We (Australians) can see the silver lining in the cloud of the financial crisis, in that the Government are so busy tearing their hair out about something they can't do anything about, they don't have the energy to pursue something they can (sort of) do.

    9. Re:Block The Internet by jggimi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Big brother is watching you! But who is watching the watchmen?

      I'll guess

    10. Re:Block The Internet by Niris · · Score: 2, Funny

      But how else will we hear stories of the Australian who locked his daughter up in the cellar for years? *ducks*

    11. Re:Block The Internet by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh Be Afraid Mister Anonymous

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    12. Re:Block The Internet by tuxgeek · · Score: 2, Funny

      "abhorrent phenomena that offend against the standards of morality"

      Depending upon your perspective of what defines morality this could also mean
      1. US congressional members that look like TV evangelists with homosexual closet fetish's they act on in airport restrooms.
      2. US congressional members that look like TV evangelists that test how many prostitutes they can bang on a quick road trip across state lines.
      3. US congressional members that look like TV evangelists, but have a secret fascination with young make interns and sodomy in quite back room closets.

      Heck, Senator Stephen Conroy might even be one of these just waiting for his moment to make the headlines.

      --
      "Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself." Mark Twain
    13. Re:Block The Internet by Zancarius · · Score: 2, Funny

      How is that any different from the award winning programming currently broadcast on TV? ;)

      Easy. White noise is at least soothing and tolerable. :)

      --
      He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
    14. Re:Block The Internet by geekgirlandrea · · Score: 4, Informative

      White noise is white because it contains an equal amount of all frequencies. There certainly are other colors of noise.

    15. Re:Block The Internet by rts008 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No commercial interruptions!!!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    16. Re:Block The Internet by Fluffeh · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actual it can't apply to politics the high court has ruled that in order to have a free election politics can't be censored

      Sounds simple if it went through. Got a site that is blocked? Want it UNblocked? Add some political commentary to it... I can see it now...

      Naughty Nurses Narrate Politics!
      Tiny Teens showing you just where to stick your vote!
      Bound, Gagged and Beaten - how to vote with sign language!
      Favorite Fetish - Why we all like to fill in an election card differently!
      Gay Political Watch - Is your bread buttered on the other side?

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    17. Re:Block The Internet by TapeCutter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Politics is a strange world, Conroy was put in charge of this so that it could be killed when the time was right. What better way can you think of to do that than to expand the list until it includes issues dear to the heart of the puritanical moron who's vote the government of the day was trying to buy.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  2. I am not an Aussie... by Cornwallis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...but my daughter spent a summer there a few years aback and loved it and I've always admired the people so let me ask... Who can I send money to in order to get Conroy voted out of office ASAP?

    1. Re:I am not an Aussie... by mrclisdue · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a member of the Human Race, I, too, feel it is our obligation to do what we can to support the abolition of asininity.

      Political borders notwithstanding.

      However, I have very little money, but I can collect tabs from soda cans.

      cheers,

    2. Re:I am not an Aussie... by the-empty-string · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So why in the hell would you spend money to meddle in foreign politics that don't affect you in any way?

      Because people outside Australia may very well end up being affected by it. Western governments have a habit of citing other governments' policies as a way to make those policies more palatable to their own citizens. The British have CCTV cameras at every street corner, let's also put them on our streets. Software patents are allowed in the U.S., let's harmonize the legislation. Australia thinks of the children and censors the Net, we should do the same!

      For instance, even though I'm not in the U.S., I donate to the EFF. It's a global world. We're running out of places where we can hide from these things.

      That makes you just as bad as the us in the US, always wanting to tell other nations what they can and can't do with their sovereignty.

      Yeah, it's exactly like that. Only completely different.

    3. Re:I am not an Aussie... by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm an Aussie! But I don't want your money - I'll do it for free as a public good. Virtually no one here wants this crap - it's just the nanny-state nitwits voted in by the over-60s, who probably don't even know what the internets are only that they're full of Terrible Things because Today Tonight told them so.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    4. Re:I am not an Aussie... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's why the way this legislation is going could actually be a good thing. If they'd managed to push this through with a bit of intelligence and subtlety, maybe creeping in with the infrastructure behind the scenes (I'm looking at you, IWF) and then expanding it publicly, it would only be a matter of time before other countries were citing it as a success and proposing to employ their own, equally horrific censorship schemes.

      As it stands, however, this guy is making it so unbelievably unpalatable that even people who don't normally care about this kind of thing are kicking up a fuss. The list of requirements doesn't even sound reasonable any more. That's excellent news, because it gives us something to cite if and when they try to do similar things elsewhere.

    5. Re:I am not an Aussie... by the-empty-string · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The principle of self-determination holds that only citizens directly affected by a government should be allowed to influence its policies.

      I would agree that foreigners shouldn't vote in the elections and shouldn't be allowed to contribute to candidates. Other than that, they are well within their rights to express their opinions, and also to support groups opposing or favouring policies that may end up affecting them. This is how various NGO's work, and it's a good thing.

    6. Re:I am not an Aussie... by blind+monkey+3 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who can I send money to in order to get Conroy voted out of office ASAP?

      That's easy, you send your money to Conroy - you'd be surprised what politicians would do for money.

      --
      BM3
    7. Re:I am not an Aussie... by the-empty-string · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you have no objections if foreigners from the United States lobby for passage of a Digital Millenium Copyright Act (or clone thereof).

      They already do that here in Canada, through their corporate subsidiaries. Trying to shut them up has as much chance of succeeding as the censorship laws; it's better to speak up against the ideas. What I object to are the DMCA-like laws themselves, which is why I support both local and U.S.-based groups like the EFF.

      I understand and generally agree with your point regarding self-determination. At the same time, I recognize that borders lose their relevance with every passing day when it comes to laws of a certain authoritarian flavour. The market of ideas is just as globalized as the other kind, as this very forum demonstrates.

    8. Re:I am not an Aussie... by computational+super · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you talking about Australia or America now?

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    9. Re:I am not an Aussie... by wdef · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I do blame the post-war Baby Boomers for the wave of nanny state repression we are all enduring in the UK, Australia, the US, and elsewhere.

      That generation have been running things now for almost 20 years. This was the same generation that benefited so from the emancipation of youth culture in the 60s and into the 70s. They enjoyed sex, drugs and rock and roll, inventing a whole new cultural paradigm out of the Beat Movement of the 50s, tearing down boring conventions, raising hell. When they became politicized, they demanded accountability from authorities and youth participation. Some refused to go to Vietnam and get killed. They demanded the lowering of the drinking age and the age at which you could get a license. They wanted to be treated as adults at 18 or before. They wanted free love, meaning no social restrictions on sexual intercourse. They reveled in the contraceptive Pill. They got all of their demands.

      But as they grew a bit older, they got married. As their kids hit teenage years, they panicked, knowing from experience just what they could get up to, because - remember - this generation had already done it all.

      Steadily, they began to pull up the ladder they themselves had climbed. They decry the promiscuity of young teenagers, saying it is harmful. What killjoys they became. In many cases, they want to raise the drinking age and the age at which kids can get a drivers license because young people are too "irresponsible". Having themselves fought for 18 to be regarded as the age of majority, now many want to increase that upwards. Having fought to lower the age of consent for themselves, many now want it raised.

      This is the ex-free love generation that now wants censorship.

  3. Censorship by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Censorship is a "revolting and abhorrent phenomena" that "offends against the standards of morality".

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Censorship by MadDogX · · Score: 5, Funny

      By that definition they would be forced to censor censorship. The very concept is too mind-boggling for me to grasp.

    2. Re:Censorship by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is the third time in as many days we've had the self-referencing paradox.

      Please, won't somebody think of the causality?!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:Censorship by Shikaku · · Score: 4, Funny

      In Soviet Russia, self-referenced paradoxes cause you!

      Ow. My head hurts just thinking about that one.

    4. Re:Censorship by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Funny

      Kind of like my situation. I am really opposed to picketing, but I don't know how to show it.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  4. Senator likes his internet porn me thinks. by JoshDmetro · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gambling is evil but midget porn is awesome apparently .

  5. Xenophobe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    After RTFS, xenophobe doesn't even begin to describe Stephen Conroy. Pluriphobe would be a better description, for want of a better word. In Holland we would use the phrase "more pious than the pope", but I know of no English expression that can explain his thickheadedness. He should be tried for blatant disregard of personal freedoms.

    it would also block sites depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence

    Really? Is he also going to block all Hollywood movies from entering Australia.

    1. Re:Xenophobe? by Xest · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Pluriphobe would be a better description, for want of a better word. In Holland we would use the phrase "more pious than the pope", but I know of no English expression that can explain his thickheadedness."

      How about dickhead? nobend? tosspot? Here in England we've mastered our language to produce plenty of simple yet effective and widely applicable words for situations and for people like this. For additional effect you may prefix a language construct which could only be defined as a pre-offensive such as "fucking".

      Hopefully we will soon update our finest Oxford dictionaries to include these useful and flexible language constructs and terms.

  6. Give them an inch... by VShael · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and you know they'll try for a mile.

    This is why those types of idiots have to be resisted at every single step of the way.

  7. Quick, somebody grab the cluestick! by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Conroy expanded the list to block Adult R18+ and X18+ web sites, and this week said it would also block sites depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence or "revolting and abhorrent phenomena" that "offend against the standards of morality". Last week an anti-abortion website was added to the blacklist, and Conroy said he was considering expanding the blacklist to 10,000 sites and beyond."

    He wants to block all of that content and has narrowed it down to a mere 10,000 sites? Conroy's depth of knowledge in this field is simply stunning! Next, he'll find the only five or six sites on the web that depict bestiality!

    1. Re:Quick, somebody grab the cluestick! by VShael · · Score: 5, Funny

      Next, he'll find the only five or six sites on the web that depict bestiality!

      Exactly! There's so much bestiality on the net now, that if you google for "People having sex with goats on fire", google responds with "Too many results. Please specify type of goat."

  8. It all makes my head hurt. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "If it offends me, I want it banned for everyone." seems to be the mentality of so many. I understand the general intent of blocking that stuff, but it'll never, ever truly work. Besides, people like him will never listen to any other opinions, let alone listen to numerous experts telling them their ideas are wrong.

    Heck, you could tell him that water was wet while soaking him in a bathtub floating in the ocean during a rain storm. But if his mind is set on water not being wet, he'll never listen.

  9. Now if only the UK would drop its stupid scheme by wdef · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Great to see that common sense has at last prevailed. I would like to see this as a triumph of democracy but it perhaps appears to be as much due to a lucky accident of the numbers in the Senate. Now, if only the UK would drop its misguided plans to implement filtering of the internet, albeit by different means iirc. And you in the US - don't think you're far behind. Your bunch of idiots wait to see what oppressive regime the bunch of idiots in Europe can impose on their populace before imposing it on you - at least that is what happened with the idiotic EU data retention laws and the current move in the US to force large numbers of wifi routers to keep logs.

  10. Fight not over yet by Xanni · · Score: 4, Informative

    While it is true that a mandatory filtering proposal is likely to require legislation to implement (especially without the support of the Internet Industry Association and a voluntary code of conduct), it is not clear that any future legislation is dead in the water just yet.

    http://www.efa.org.au/2009/02/26/xenophon-opposes-mandatory-isp-filtering-but-fight-not-over-yet/

    --
    http://www.glasswings.com/
  11. Representatives of the People by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This week surveys found only less than 10% of Australians supported the censorship.

    Yet almost 50% of their elected representatives, and probably media outlets, supported it. How do we account for this?

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:Representatives of the People by Trentus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yet almost 50% of their elected representatives, and probably media outlets, supported it.

      I recall someone busting Conroy's chops on the ABC radio show Media Watch a short while back. I also remember another ABC radio announcer slipping in some filter related questions to one of the people involved in a child porn ring bust. Something to the effect of:

      interviewer: "What about filtering, does that help the problem?"
      police guy dude: "Oh, they don't do anything."

      I should really try and find a source for that. There were a few other radio shows talking about it as well (I think "Spoonman" on Tripple M dedicated an evening to the subject).

      There were a few TV spots on morning chat show type programs, as well as a nice little piece on the 7:30 report. They all (and rather surprisingly for the morning shows) seemed to convey a nice message of "While childporn is bad, and it would be awesome to be able to get rid of it, this filter thing is just stupid." There were also various newspapers who had people blogging about the subject on their websites. I don't remember seeing a whole lot make it to print though.

  12. [subject censored in the public interest] by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2, Funny

    If they have an inch, they'll brag to the girls that it's at least a foot. And promptly try to block any access to evidence and squelch any opinion close to the truth.

    Look carefully at any would-be censors, for they likely have something to hide, and merely seek to conceal it behind a bigger screen...

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  13. R18 and X18? by hansamurai · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is there like a master list of all the R18 and X18 sites...? I think I need to check it over to make sure they all deserve to be there.

  14. One reason... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One reason why support for the blocking is so low in this nanny state might well stem from the fact that there is still a significantly large proportion of the population who cannot get any connection better than dialup (if that), who would find their snail-like traffic grind to a halt.

    If you're a city-dweller, you're fine, but there are lots of areas, not necessarily even very far from cities, where broadband access is poor or non-existent. Needless to say, our government's priorities are not appreciated in those areas.

  15. Squeeze by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The harder you squeeze the more you piss off the electorate.

  16. Re:Bandwagon by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This looks to me a lot like a McCarthy moment; as in Senator Joe McCarthy. Conroy sounds a lot like him in being a lunatic zealot suffering from severe self-righteousness to the point of being pathological. I mean, when a guy starts talking about banning anti-abortion sites and sites showing drug use, he's gone so far around the bend that those who back him, usually out of pure political expediency, can no longer do so.

    What is sad about this, sadder than even Australia coming within an inch of this level of censorship, is that a government could let itself get so out of control.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  17. Oblig. Bash.org by frieko · · Score: 4, Funny

    The most secure computer in the world is one not connected to the internet.
    <FreeFrag> Thats why I recommend Telstra ADSL.

  18. Not out of the woods yet by amorphic101 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm elated to hear that Senator Xenophon has withdrawn his support and I agree that this is a major blow to the (dis)honourable Senator Conroy and his cronies. However this is still far from over, as the EFA point out: http://www.efa.org.au/2009/02/26/xenophon-opposes-mandatory-isp-filtering-but-fight-not-over-yet/

    However doomed, this is still government policy and it's entirely possible that Xenophon's vote could be won back if the government agrees to back other causes close to his heart. There's also the possiblity of Liberal senators crossing the floor, (the Liberals were the ones to introduce the "Black List" after all) or of Labor winning more Senate seats in the future to give them a more powerful standing in the senate.

    Having said all that this is definitely the best news we've had for a while on the Aussie net censorship issue. In your face Conroy!

  19. Transparent by anomaly256 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ignored all expert advice.. Expanded the scope beyond it's original intention despite this.. Decided to bypass the larger, more popular, more mainstream ISPs during trialling and instead used a very select few mainly used by 'ma and pa kettle' types who would be ignorant of anything should their net one day be slow and half missing.. Isn't it obvious? This was never about morality or protecting the innocent. This was about instigating a control mechanism. The ability to shut you up and control your perceptions. Or.. perhaps he really thought he was doing the right thing, and going about it the right way. Really, either way you look at it, either his motives or his competency do nothing but put Australians at risk of being subjugated. He needs to be impeached. Now, I'm all for his originally claimed intention. But I think we need to find someone else to implement it. Someone with half a fricken clue and no ulterior motives.

  20. The Letter and Site in Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/acma-anti-abortion-prohibited/

    In response to a complaint about an anti-abortion web page showing photographs of what appears to be aborted fetuses, ACMA has declared the page âprohibited or potential prohibited contentâ(TM). The Whirlpool member who made the complaint, presumably to gauge ACMAâ(TM)s response to such content, has published the departmentâ(TM)s email:

    Subject: Complaint Reference: 2009000009/ ACMA-691604278
    Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:45:00 +1100
    From: online@acma.gov.au

    Complaint Reference: 2009000009/ ACMA-691604278

    I refer to the complaint that you lodged with the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) on 5th January 2009 about certain content made available at:

    http://www.abortiontv.com/Pics/AbortionPictures6.htm

    Following investigation of your complaint, ACMA is satisfied that the internet content is hosted outside Australia, and that the content is prohibited or potential prohibited content.

    The Internet Industry Association (IIA) has a code of practice (http://www.iia.net.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=415&Itemid=33) for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) which, among other things, set out arrangements for dealing with such content. In accordance with the code, ACMA has notified the above content to the makers of IIA approved filters, for their attention and appropriate action. The code requires ISPs to make available to customers an IIA approved filter.

    Information about ACMAâ(TM)s role in regulating online content (including internet and mobile content), including what is prohibited or potentially prohibited content is available at ACMAâ(TM)s website at www.acma.gov.au/hotline

    Thank you for bringing this matter to ACMAâ(TM)s attention.

  21. Given that definition... by Benfea · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...I would have assumed they were going to block sites like Rapture Ready and the Hannity forums.

  22. Re:Well... by amorphic101 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I heard a conspiracy theory of sorts back when the censorship plan was first coming to light. Apparently Conroy isn't particularly popular even within his own party and the story went that the 'net censorship legislation was given to him in the hope that it would fail as catastrophically as it seems on track to do.

    After it blows up in his face, his peers in the Labor party would have a good excuse to push him out. It does sound a bit far-fetched but hope springs eternal...

  23. Anti-abortion website blocked for good reason? by wastedlife · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now, I'm not saying being against abortion is wrong, you have the right to your beliefs, but if the web page they blocked was like the signs they posted on the roads when protesting the Planned Parenthood going up in the Aurora/Naperville IL area, I can understand why it went on the filter(note that I am against the filter in general, just playing devil's advocate on why that specific page may have been blocked). They would post shit like pictures of cut-up late stage abortions and dead fully developed babies (as in, unlikely to have come from a legal abortion anyway). Now, I've never seen a pro-choice campaign smear ads everywhere with pictures of crack-babies, kids with fetal alcohol syndrome, and other abused children, so why do anti-abortion campaigners have to basically troll shock pictures to get their point across?

    --
    Said, "It's just like dice but it's got more sides And it tells me who lives and who dies"
    1. Re:Anti-abortion website blocked for good reason? by wastedlife · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Good point, and I agree wholeheartedly. If they are really worried about children being affected by content on the web, then they should provide tools for the parents and let it be voluntary. Protecting children from themselves should be the parents' responsibility, not the government's. My point was that there might be a reason it was added to the filter list other than just the fact that it is anti-abortion. Going by the types of things they are blocking, those pictures would probably be considered "offensive" and "prohibited".

      --
      Said, "It's just like dice but it's got more sides And it tells me who lives and who dies"
    2. Re:Anti-abortion website blocked for good reason? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The tools parents use are of a good example of why this cannot work, they do not have never and cannot stop kids looking at anything they want on the internet ...

      The only "tool" that works is put the computer in a family room and be around them when they are using it, this is 100% foolproof and may even lead to them speaking to their children occasionally ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    3. Re:Anti-abortion website blocked for good reason? by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For the same reason that all life is sacred, but killing abortion doctors is a ok.

      Extreme groups are (almost) always wrong.

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    4. Re:Anti-abortion website blocked for good reason? by dancpsu · · Score: 2, Interesting
      For the same reason that all life is sacred, but killing abortion doctors is a ok.

      I'm not going to argue against abortion or defend fringe groups, but your logic does not follow.

      If there was a serial killer who had escaped from maximum security prison several times to continue killing, then by killing him, it would preserve more lives. Therefore, killing someone is in line with protecting all life, because all alternatives lead to more lives lost.

      --
      "Scientists don't change their minds, they just die." -- Max Planck
    5. Re:Anti-abortion website blocked for good reason? by wastedlife · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I understand that you are not defending them, but how does your logic follow? Abortion doctors aren't serial killers escaping from prison. They are certified physicians performing a legal, albeit controversial, practice. If one does not agree with the law of the land, then they should work to get it changed or leave. Vigilantism of this kind is just not acceptable. Besides, it seems to me that one of the major foundations of many religions is the 10 Commandments. "Thou shalt not kill" is a statement that in no uncertain terms people should not kill other people. Not at all. Never. Under no circumstances is this acceptable. Yet many are killing others in the name of God. Can anyone make sense of this?

      --
      Said, "It's just like dice but it's got more sides And it tells me who lives and who dies"
    6. Re:Anti-abortion website blocked for good reason? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are certified physicians performing a legal, albeit controversial, practice.

      Would murder be perfectly acceptable if it were legal? Because that is the crux of the issue: Is abortion murder?

  24. Stephen Conroy by cparker15 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Stephen Conroy is an asshat.

    That is all. Carry on.

    --
    Have you driven a fnord... lately?

    You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later.

  25. The Frightening Aspect... by Zancarius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What is sad about this, sadder than even Australia coming within an inch of this level of censorship, is that a government could let itself get so out of control.

    What's frightening about this, though, is that other Western governments are probably using this as a test case to determine the efficacy of such censorship (and whether public opinion will effectively bend over and take it).

    Make no mistake about it, there are forces in the US and UK alike that would very much appreciate this level of censorship, perhaps even under the guise of limiting/preventing piracy.

    --
    He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
  26. English Language Lesson (NSFW) by zooblethorpe · · Score: 3, Funny

    For additional effect you may prefix a language construct which could only be defined as a pre-offensive such as "fucking".

    Hopefully we will soon update our finest Oxford dictionaries to include these useful and flexible language constructs and terms.

    Meanwhile, on the other side of the puddle, we already have this useful word fully incorporated in our official lexicon, even to the point of being included in English language lessons, such as this one (though the atrocious spelling might also be indicative of something...).

    The useful and versatile F word is one of the few that may be used in just about every major grammatical category -- sometimes even all in the same sentence.

    That fucking fucker's fucking fucked!

    (And, lest I miss out on the Meme Train:)

    Also, fuck you. :)

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  27. Re:Australia political sideshow by aXis100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You should hear what this crazy George W Bush was doing....
    Winning an election with a minority, reading books upside down, sending people off to illegal wars and making hilarous mistakes in speeches.

    All polititians look stupid if all you see is foreign news - bad news travels much faster. That said alot of them look pretty terrible in the local new too ...