Slashdot Mirror
US-Australia Tensions Rise Over Net Filter
daria42 writes "Tensions between the US Government and its counterpart in Australia appear to be rising over Australia's proposal to filter the internet for objectionable content. The US government has raised its concerns over what it sees as potential censorship directly with the Australian Government. However, last night, Australia's Communications Minister Stephen Conroy denied he had had any approach from US State Department officials."
Where women don't shave and men chunder...
"We can censor you but you can not censor us, we can hide info to you but you can not hide info to us." --United States of America
He's CENSORING the output of his speech! :p
Restore the madness of youth's lechery
One branch is expressing concerns about our lovely Internet filter while the other is trying to ram ACTA down our throats.
BOTH will have an effect on free speech... neither of them we want.
Successfully filtering the net is impossible - that's been proven time and time again. If either one of them realized this simple truth then they'd know that their statements are somewhat nonsensical.
Both governments and many others would love to filter the net. Now, Google and Yahoo might not be so interested. It could cut into ad revenues.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Normally I disagree with USA foreign policy, but in this case I welcome US government sticking its nose in where it's not welcome. On behalf of all (thinking) Australians, thank you USA for standing up to our government and this facist policy. http://stephenconroy.com.au/
Please don't send a Word document when a text file will do the job.
...how both so-called "free" countries will crack down upon China for filtering the internet on what they claim to be important free-speech-issues, but in the same time will not hesitate to implement rather identical measures at home.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Agreed. The USA needs to be more direct, as clearly their current approach isn't working if Stephen wasn't even aware until he read it in the paper.
I would love for the USA to make as big a deal out of this as possible.
Invasion. p/.It's obvious hat Australia is controlled by a repressive regime and we have no choice but to invade and install a Democracy!
This news isn't on the scale of Google redirecting mainland Chinese search results to Google.cn but has more in common than Senator Conroy here in Australia would like people to think. Wait, no, that isn't even right, he's openly compared the proposed Great Firewall of Australia to the filters in China.
When Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Federal Labor won the last election and Barack Obama and the Democrats won the elections in the US, Australian newspapers reported their first meetings as being one with kindred spirits, in much of the same way as George Bush and John Howard. This filter is perhaps the first large(ish) crack in this relationship, and I'm really hoping the Americans kick up as much of a fuss about Australia's laws as China's if the filter in Australia goes through.
The problem for the voting public here is in our version of the two party system, the opposition are considered the more conservative party, and its new Christian far-right leader Tony Abbott has been fairly silent on the whole issue. One can imagine he supports it in spirit but doesn't want to seem as though he's agreeing with Labor. Either way, we're royally stuffed.
In the meantime if you're an Aussie, don't forget the Electronic Frontiers Australia is accepting donations for their Open Internet campaign.
Cheers, ~ Ruben
Certain countries, including Australia support the Cultural Exception
I lived in France for 20 years, also a supporter of this, I wish we did in UK. In France, it meant that the continuous diet of brainless, braindead violent programmes and 'rich people behaving nauseously' (Beverly Hills xxxxxx) were present, but in limited quantity, There were and are a lot of local cops shows, Julie Lescaut, for example, more connected with the indigenous culture.
Finally, I have family in the West Indies and when the island switched from BBC to US channels (anecdotally, but many people said it) violence increased.
I know I'll get a lot of hate for posting this, but there is a category of cultural toxic waste and it does modify behaviour, however much we wish it didn't.
On y va, qui mal y pense!
Today in The Age: Government goes to war with Google over net censorship
Senator Conroy has conceded that greater transparency is needed in terms of how content ends up on the blacklist, but last night he again refused to make the blacklist itself public, saying it would provide people instant access to the banned material.
Okay Stephen here is how it works: every time an Australian hits the black list they post the URL on a wiki somewhere so if anybody needs some porn or the libaral party website or whatever they just follow the link from there and access it through a russian VPN? Simple? Okay.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Yeah, well, I wouldn't break out the bubbly just yet.
We [USA] are just waiting for the world to bend over, then we'll goatse you all with ACTA.
Nothing personal, as we USA citizens are getting gaped also.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
I know I'll get a lot of hate for posting this, but there is a category of cultural toxic waste and it does modify behaviour, however much we wish it didn't.
So what do you propose doing about it?
http://michaelsmith.id.au
I really hope that the US put a lot of pressure on our Australian government to try and prevent this draconian Mandatory Internet Censorship. If it goes ahead in Australia, it will pave the way for many more developed Western countries. This is a serious attack on our freedom. There's not much left we can do at the moment - the internet community is kicking up a fuss, most polls & votes are >94% AGAINST the censorship, the US gov, google, local telcos, ISP's and all the technical experts are advising AGAINST it, but ignorant Senator Conroy and the government keep pushing ahead to censor the internet. If it goes ahead it will be bad news for everyone. The more people that support us on this VERY important issue, the better. Slashdot + its community probably have the potential to help make a difference. Please USA, and the entire international online community, show your support on this in any way you can!
The Sydney Morning Herald had an informal web poll today with 3 choices: In Favour of filtering, Against filtering, Indifferent. Last I looked at it 96% had voted against! That's overwhelming. You usually get lots of indifferent here. How this sad man Stephen Conroy can claim to be a representative of the people is beyond me. He is clearly acting against their interests and against their wishes. He's one of few politicians here that's gotten public death threats (not that I could ever condone something as stupid as a death threat). Since he would seek to push ahead despite this he should be sacked. I have no idea if there's a legal provision for it in the Australian constitution (and I doubt there is) but there ought to be.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Against all my instincts, I find myself for the right of governments to filter, as long as they are 'legitimate' governments.
That is, the 'people' can hear the arguments and throw them out, if they don't want the filtering.
Optimally, the production models would change so that no-one produced trash and education levels so that no-one consumed it. I'm mainly talking about TV which is a push medium and which may be dying anyway.
I'm 60 this year and I have seen a step by step decline sold as 'freedom' and 'free trade', code words for 'we're making a lot of money with this' don't take away that 'right'.
But you're quite correct to criticise, I don't have anything like a complete answer and it pains me to end up on the 'wrong' side.
On y va, qui mal y pense!
Seriously, shove these Aussie stories up your ass. We're fucking sick of the sight of them. Go beg for attention elsewhere.
This is slashdot.org, not slashdot.org.us
Please don't send a Word document when a text file will do the job.
within a community, so Australian's would be right to be very disappointed to see our friends in the US campaigning against our right to regulate. The bottom line is that the greatest threat to freedom on the Internet at present is the dominance of selfish US corporations. So unless the US government is prepared to tackle the dominance of these large companies in a significant manner such as splitting them to have no more than a 5% market share then please do not lecture Australia on freedom.
To all those people who repeat the comment "censoring the internet is technically impossible" - If you are against censorship then say so, rather than saying censor ship won't work for technical reasons.
The purpose of the internet censorship in Australia is to mirror the existing censorship we have in other media. I think that makes sense. However, the opacity of the blacklist is totally unacceptable. It must be transparent.
However, last night, Australia's Communications Minister Stephen Conroy denied he had had any approach from US State Department Officials."
Filter must already be working then
---
I followed your homepage link and I thought there was a lot of interesting stuff there. Previous trials of filtering in Australia have resulted in totally innocuous pages being filtered. The reasons for this always come back to incompetence on the part of the people maintaining the filter.
The open ended filter my government proposes can never be guaranteed to filter only illegal content because there is no adequate peer review. When you propose a filtering system you should think how it could go wrong. Somebody in government could read "Alternative Currency Software" and decide that it is dangerous for people to read your site.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Makes me think we're gonna go to the mat with Australia next...
Q Hillary, do we like censorship in China?
A No
Q ok, what about Australia then? (nyah!)
A Don't like it there either
HEADLINE - RISING TENSIONS WITH AUSTRALIA OVER NET CENSORSHIP!
--- Mercutio was right.
Seriously, pull your head out of your arse, mate. This is about a developed, democratic country trying to blind its people even more than it already does by pushing its conservative, Christian views on its secular population. And, as usual, damaging the lifestyle of the majority of its citizens because no one in power here can grow some balls and find a way to actually punish criminals instead of hiding them away in hotels (prisons) that cost tax payers countless dollars every year and achieve nothing. Now you might not care personally, but these are issues that are relevant all over the world - Australia is just unlucky enough to be the example. So you don't live here? I don't give a fuck where you live. Go read some other site if you don't like it. It's not your Slashdot. We are members of this community and WE care, as do many community members who have never been to Australia. It is our rights and our future on the line - not just a collection of news stories.
/trollfeeding :(
I would personally like to thanks the Slashdot editors for continuing to run these stories. I get quite a bit of my info on this topic from here and I live in Australia. I'm 20 years old and I have never set foot outside this country, but if this plan goes ahead I will seriously consider leaving for good. I do not want to leave my home. So thank you, Slashdot, for continuing to promote awareness of our situation.
Against all my instincts, I find myself for the right of governments to filter, as long as they are 'legitimate' governments.
The issue is that while you might be quite happy for a legitimate government to filter, they can quickly become an illegitimate government, perhaps especially because they control the filters and will filter any evidence of their illegitimacy from the public at large.
The biggest issue governments have is that there's no heirarchy to the internet - they can't speak to the owner of the internet like they could with newspapers or TV networks or radio networks - and that lack of a single point, or even a limited set of points of control freaks most governments out. Spin is awful hard to get out there when you need to spin hundreds instead of a handful.
Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
Don't you hate to see the children fighting?
Wow! Someone else from Perth on Slashdot. Hi!
Despite any posturing, It's their fucking wet dream to be able to do it here too.
Last nights ABC Radio Interview download/stream
I dont get it...
Its meant to block *very* objectional material (ie, kiddie porn & beastiality), but what about all the other porn & violence our kids should not be looking at on the 'net?
Im sure plenty of parents will get the idea this filter will protect their kids from all non-kiddie-safe material. Thats very far from the truth.
Sure, let kids view thousands of hours of kinky, watersports, scat and BDSM porn, but dont let them see one of those 400 beastiality sites, itll corrupt them forever!!
So they want to put in place a system that will cost tens of millions of $AUD, complicate ISP filters, reduce reliability, increase latency, to just block those ~400 specific URLs.
Sure, more URLs will be added, but how many out there that should be on the list will be missed?
Fucking stupid.
we're only here to care for one another. how's that going for us? you call this weather?
never a better time to consult with/trust in your creators, who can, it is said, lower/raise the 'tension' level in the wink of an eye. one of the creators stated goals is protection of the innocent.
Apparently the minister didn't receive the objection via e-mail because the obscenity-laced rant didn't get through the Aussie filter.
I don't want censorship at all. But I think it's hilarious that America, which is so censored that it can't even show boobies on television (nipples, specifically), is telling Australia that it shouldn't be censoring things.
There was an article posted only a couple of days ago that essentially said censorship is harmful to democracy. Maybe both the US and Australian governments should get out of censorship altogether, lest they wind up like China.
I agree, the actual proposal is ridiculous (although we run Dan's Guardian in a drop-in to protect kids using it, makes us hypocrites...) but I'm thinking about the philosophy behind it.
My ideal is that every citizen has a level of education and ethical-compass where they can do all this 'work' themselves. But, actually, I have seen standards going down in the UK, not old-person grumpiness, I really wish they hadn't.,,
As standards decline there's less protection at individual level against 'trash'.
On y va, qui mal y pense!
If you believe in freedom of speech, you should oppose muzzling entertainment as much as muzzling political speech. If your political views are less convincing than mine, working on your policies is better than banning my speech. Likewise, if your country is unable to compete with the culture of the United States, perhaps understanding what makes American culture so powerful and pervasive and trying to emulate it is the better move rather than muzzling it because you're unable to compete.
I value politeness. If you extend it to me, I'll extend it to you.
on a friends computer and drunk, but i'm anarche. for our outerworldly friendly, whats really happening here is....
1) if the Government puts this into place they secure the Senate vote of Steven Fielding, so they can pass other laws and look as if they are doing something.
2) should most Australian find any of the things specifically listed on the blacklist accidently, they'll report it. no-one wants kiddie porn on the net. if you do i'll report you. we are signatories to a shiteload of foreign treaties allowing us to request the foreign government ot investigate kiddie porn...
3) this filter will not work. the company contacted to implement the filter claims it wont work, the ISPs who tested it claimed it wont work. why do the Government claim it will? (see point 1)
4) Obama threatening to bar the JSF from being delivered - while painful to Boeing will be far more incentive to Captain Kevin to drop this stupid law than the threat of election. welcome to the two-party system in an apathetic country flourishing....
5) this filter will significantly degrade the Australian internet speeds, while the Government can't be bothered buying a speed upgrade.
So please, our US friends, petition Obama to stop this shit. Australia's (tiny) internet community doesn't stand a chance....
Meanwhile Aussies, who feels like presenting a petition to Obama in his visit requesting a delay of the JSF until this filter is dropped?
As recommended by the Computer Science department of the University of Walamaloo:
1. No pooftah sites.
2. No sites advocating the maltreat of the "abbos" in any way whatsoever, especially if there's video - unless the site is password protected.
3. No pooftah sites.
4. No sites that do *not* advocate late-night drinking.
5. No pooftah sites.
6. There is *no* rule six.
7. No pooftah sites.
Australia, Australia, Australia, Australia, we love you! Amen!
I am glad to see you got it...
oy!
Nothing happens in Perth, where were you last Monday night?
His department's media releases don't make it through ours either. Spamassassin thinks he's using some sort of dodgy mail server. They should hire some Russians to make the thing look legit.
> if your country is unable to compete with the culture of the United States, perhaps understanding what makes American culture so powerful and pervasive and trying to emulate it is the better move rather than muzzling it because you're unable to compete.
Sure, because the fact that something is more successful automatically means that it's better. Ergo, Taylor Swift is a better musician than Mozart, and Chevrolet makes better cards than Mercedes-Benz.
...or what else are they babbling this time?
A new entry in Slashdot (a mere six hours later) shows that "The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 passed a Senate panel giving the president unprecedented power to issue a nation-wide blackout or restriction on websites without congressional approval."
To fight the eeeeeeeevil terrarists, obviously. Why else?
Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
See subject-line above, & again: Guys, IF you're going to "mod me down", have the balls to say why, & on what TECHNICAL grounds... (valid technical reasons please, no off-topic b.s. need apply).
Thanks!
(Because I am willing to discuss/debate ANYTHING you throw my way on this account (how filtering can WORK FOR YOU, FOR THE GOOD, & on the SIMPLEST PRINCIPLE THERE IS: "You can't get burned, if you can't go into hell's kitchen", more-or-less!))
I mean, lmao: Those who "mod down" w/out justification or saying why, are the TRUE "anonymous cowards" around here... not folks like me that choose to post as AC because we're not easily tracked fools around this website in doing so (trackable for trolling etc. that is).
APK
P.S.=> HOWEVER - Am I against filtering such as CHINA implements, which impede possible truths or other points of view (very russian "pravda-like" methods, lol, as I call it), to protect their political interests? Sure I am...
However, by the SAME TOKEN, I am all for filtering out what are KNOWN BAD SITES &/OR SERVERS (such as those known for delivering malware &/or botnet content, etc. et al)... I hope you understand my points here in this regard! apk
The road to hell^W censorship is paved with good intentions. If people, even a minority, want to see US shows, who the hell are you to decide if they should or not?
Give people access to all shows, and let them decide.
Yes, it turns people into being less chauvinistic, perhaps.
Not that I care personally: I get all my content from the interwebs. But I oppose your "benevolent censorship" as a principle. WIth current technology, we should be able to access almost all major TV channels worldwide.
Dilbert RSS feed
Well, whirlpool.net.au fits the bill quite well already, although its scope is not as wide as Slashdot. I read and post on both. The point of the internet is to create global discussion, not partition everyone off into their own country.
See subject-line above, & again: Guys, IF you're going to "mod me down", have the balls to say why, & on what TECHNICAL grounds...
Then by all means pass on that sentiment to Conroy, as due process is definitely not part of the proposal.
Last time I checked, Australia was a democracy, as as such the politicians and their departments' actions should be answerable to the public and this proposed filter bypasses every method of accountability we've put in to law.
"We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run over." - Aneurin Bevan
Internet was down resulting in a dazed Zen thoughts of "If there's no-one to blog/facebook it to, did it really happen?"
My car says otherwise though :(
"We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run over." - Aneurin Bevan
I'm all for the US Government bringing the matter up with our government. It sounds like this was done respectfully and informally, which is the right way to go when you have one mature democracy dealing with another. They aren't making demands or threats or anything ... just voicing some concern. An added pressure on Conroy to drop the idea, hopefully. Anti-Americanism is rampant in Australia these days but I hope people can still see that, for its flaws, the US still acts as a positive force in areas such as this.
Having said that, I still think that there's no way the filter will every make it to the realm of reality. It's so wildly unpopular that I think Conroy is likely to get a tap on the shoulder from others in the Cabinet and be told to quietly drop it. This is an election year after all. Perhaps it might resurface during Rudd's second term (which it seems inevitable he'll get).
Unpopularity aside, it's a completely useless system anyway. A basic blacklist of perhaps a few hundred URLs. HTTP only. Since when was HTTP the main method of distributing illegal content? (And even if it was ... proxies, VPNs, blah blah). Again, I think the government will not be wanting to be seen to be wasting money on expensive, ineffectual programs in an election year.
And even if it does get formally introduced into Parliament I honestly can't see how the Government will get the numbers to get it through the Senate. The Greens and other minority parties will oppose it. The big unknown is the Liberals' official stance on it, but I reckon they will probably oppose it too, as it could be a bit of a vote-getter for them. Abbott, as a Christian, might ~personally~ support it, but that doesn't mean the whole Liberal Party will take that position ... the Liberals in general are less unified than Labor and more willing to cross the floor for their ideals (see: Malcolm Turnbull et al.). Conroy clearly wants to push it through while Labor is comfortably ahead in the polls, but even now I think it might be too politically risky.
So as I have done for the last year since this filtering idea arose, I will bide my time and wait. Every time it's been "just about to happen" ... it hasn't. There's still a lot of obstacles ahead for it. And the US' comments here are another useful addition to those obstacles.
Personally I am more concerned if this is being implemented on the basis of the ac poster apk stating that filtering versus known bad sites and servers/purveyors of mal-ware and the like (even hardcore porn so kids aren't as easily able to get a view of it) are being blocked, or, are they only blocking based on people that attempt to criticize Conroy or Australian governmental policies? If the former is true, filtering off known bad sites or servers that try to take advantage of you then yes, filter those. Otherwise, if the latter? No, do not do that. Now, on what you stated fostware?? Perhaps it ought to be put to a vote, or, offered by Aussie isp companies as an option only. I don't know how things work in Australia, but if they are in fact a democracy as you claim, then if they are filtering off things that critique their governmental policies only, then, they are doing wrong. If they are filtering off known bad sites that harm computers and thus people? Keep on doing it.
I think the OP's post is a result of certain "editors" crap-flooding /. with so-called stories from Australia.
Nobody has a problem with seeing genuinely interesting 'News for Nerds' from downunder, but the fact is that these "editors" are posting anything that mentions Australia.
Take a look at this list: http://yro.slashdot.org/tag/australia
Stephen Conroy (the current communications minister) is the most incompetent politician Australia has had the shame to put up with in dozens of years.
He has shown, if nothing else, a complete and absolute lack on integrity in his pursuit of this filtering scheme.
Between one interview and the next, between one statement in parliament and the next, his excuse for the filter has changed, his reasoning has changed.
He has been dismissive, arrogant and accusatory of anyone who says *anything* against his policies.
He has *completely* ignored all the advice of anyone and everyone who has any involvement in child-protection in australia, *AND* overseas.
While *claiming* this is all about "protecting the children" his governments budget for the federal Police Anti Child Pornography team has been *LESS* than in the previous government.
In Short, Stephen Conroy is a classic example of someone who will be *instantly* turfed out on his arse at the next election, and is *personally* and *directly* responsible for the impending massive voter backlash against his entire party.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
"Last time I checked, Australia was a democracy, as as such the politicians and their departments' actions should be answerable to the public and this proposed filter bypasses every method of accountability we've put in to law." - by fostware (551290) on Tuesday March 30, @11:40AM (#31671784) Homepage
Per my subject-line, fostware... I take it then, that YOU are an Australian (cool, I have an uncle in Queensland or nearby it rather) & per your reply, that you guys/folks in Australia were NEVER asked, as a "general populace" what YOUR feelings/thoughts were on this, ever?
Ok then... QUESTION: DO YOU FOLKS HAVE ACCESS OR KNOWLEDGE OF EXACTLY WHAT IS BEING FILTERED OUT THEN?
Thanks for the answer man... seriously (this HAS "piqued my interest")
See, because yes, for example, in China or the U.S.S.R. (Soviet Union, whatever they call themselves now) I can see that happening - the party "decides what's best"... they're FREELY admitted as communist states is why!
However, by way of comparison, in a DEMOCRACY? I cannot...
(@ least, NOT without giving peoples in your nation FULL UNRESTRICTED ACCESS TO E X A C T L Y WHAT WEBSITES/DOMAINNAMES/HOSTSNAMES (or even IP Addresses) have been blocked off!)
APK
P.S.=> However - What I DO KNOW about "blacklists" (like HOSTS files can be, which IS how I use them personally) is, is that "black lists" work vs. malware distributors & attacks like botnets!
(That's just per results I noted earlier, per my initial posting, & for stopping KNOWN BAD SITES &/OR SERVERS from "burning you" & enslaving your system (as in botnets) or, ruining it in general... & even for speeding up your internet (by blocking out adbanners) VERY SUBSTANTIALLY!)
I only hope for your "Aussies"' sake, that it's NOT being used ala "Russian 'pravda'" reasons, limiting critiques of your own government freely, etc./et al... once more, thanks for your reply in this regards (especially IF you folks have access to the lists of what is 'blocked off' now)... apk
Whirlpool is a hypocritical crap site that conducts censorship itself, anyhing related to doing your own network cabling is deleted by their asshole moderators.
although we run Dan's Guardian in a drop-in to protect kids using it, makes us hypocrites...
Doesn't make you hypocrites. I have no problem with the owner of a link to the internet filtering their connection. I do have a problem with Big Brother doing it for me.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
The point of Slashdot - or at least Slashdot editors - seems to be promoting certain countries.
There's no denying that Australia is grotesquely over-represented here. Very few of the many stories about that country which make it to Slashdot would ever be considered worthy if they were not about Australia and were submitted by someone from somewhere else. The bias is ridiculous.
There are many nations on planet Earth, but most go ignored by Slashdot, even though stuff is happening there which is at least as interesting as anything we're seeing in all of these news items from Australia, and usually far more interesting....Yet we never read about it here.