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."
So the filter would block the Internet?
Censorship is a "revolting and abhorrent phenomena" that "offends against the standards of morality".
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
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.
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!
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.
"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.
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/
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.
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!
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.
Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
"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.
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.
The most secure computer in the world is one not connected to the internet.
<FreeFrag> Thats why I recommend Telstra ADSL.
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!
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.
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.
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"
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
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
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.