Australian Govt Censors Notes From Secret Anti-Piracy Talks

An anonymous reader writes "It looks as if the Australian Government really doesn't want the public to know what's going on in its closed-door talks with ISPs and the content industry. The Attorney-General's Department has applied the black marker to almost all of the information contained in documents about the meetings released under Freedom of Information laws. The reason? It wouldn't be in the 'public interest' to release the information. Strange how the public seems to have a high degree of interest in finding out what's being talked about."

Comments

Internet Villain of the Year

[niftydude]

Maybe Stephen Conroy can win internet villain of the year a second time.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Ghaoth]

It's strange how they know what we shouldn't know. Bunch of UN communist stooges. Bring back Guy Fawkes.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[mjwx]

It's strange how they know what we shouldn't know. Bunch of UN communist stooges. Bring back Guy Fawkes.

Guy Fawkes was just the fall guy.

The leader of the group was actually Robert Catesby who was a Jesuit who wanted to replace King James and the English government with the 9 year old daughter of King James. Catesby was a bit of a religious extremist himself, described as a crusader by his friends and relatives. Guy Fawkes was a soldier who had fought in the Spanish Netherlands, hence he was tasked with guarding the gunpoweder the rebellion kept in a storehouse under the House of Lords, he was not the core of the Jesuit rebellion. Fawkes may have been historically the most famous, but it was Catesby's head that was put on a pike in front of the House of Lords.

To be frank, I dont like the likes of Conroy, I like the idea of giving control of the internet to a bunch of religious rebels even less. OK, Conroy is a religious twat as well, but he'll never get his way, the Labor backbench would have a little rebellion of their own, his filter has failed twice before in the house.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe Stephen Conroy can win internet villain of the year a second time.

He works against the people. He should literally be tried for treason.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[LordLucless]

Catesby might have been a religious extremist, but then, so was James I. His persecution of Catholics is what drove the Gunpowder Plot. The distinction between the Gunpowder Plotters and James I wasn't that one was religious and the other isn't - it's that one was Authority and the other was Rebellion. You might as well say you don't like Conroy, but don't like the idea of putting a bunch of dead Englishmen in charge either - it's a strawman. That's not what the OP was saying.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[mjwx]

You might as well say you don't like Conroy, but don't like the idea of putting a bunch of dead Englishmen in charge either - it's a strawman. That's not what the OP was saying.

The OP was making a false equivalency to the fall guy for a religious rebellion to freedom.

I challenged that pointing out that Fawkes is not a symbol for freedom at all, he wasn't even the guy in charge, he was the guy who was caught (Catesby and Percy weren't). As a result, my point is not a strawman but rather, the expression of the old saying "better the devil you know". We know Conroy will be controlled.

BTW, pointing out James I was religious is a bit of a strawman, pretty much it's trying to say "It's OK to do something bad because Janey is also bad". That whole period of English history went from Christian Tyranny to Protestant authoritarianism to reformation years ahead of mainland Europe.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[crutchy]

He should literally be tried for treason

and if that doesn't work we can always figuratively try him for treason

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[bmo]

Conroy needs to die by having a rack of telecoms equipment fall on him.

--
BMO

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

Shush !!!...you're confusing all the Americans here with all this talk of actual history and facts and goings on that doesn't involve them !

If it's not Obama and Jebus in Montana and Terrists and the UN World Government and USA Numba Wun ! they don't understand it and they tune out......hmmm...on second thoughts......carry on!

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

What have communists to do with it? It's not a plot by communists to steal your freedom, you paranoid fuck. It's rich and powerful people desiring more control, and you are giving to them.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, a slashtard wants mod points so he's going to bash Americans. Fine, you want a flame war, then it's on bitch!
Yes, all this chit chat about the events of a now trivial island with bad weather, worse food, and unattractive people is pretty dull. The history of England was summed up well in the Blackadder series - rich douchebags treating ignorant peasants like shit for centuries.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[GmExtremacy]

It's time for you to return to Gamemakerdom, is it not?

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

"Treason doth never prosper; what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." -- Sir John Harrington c1600

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[CowTipperGore]

Crap, stupid instant mod system. That Overrated was supposed to be Funny.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Ihmhi]

The leader of the group was actually Robert Catesby who was a Jesuit

So wait, Jews did 11/5? 4chan was a bit off on the date but I'm sure they'll be ecstatic nonetheless.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[whoever57]

The leader of the group was actually Robert Catesby who was a Jesuit

So wait, Jews did 11/5?

I think you need a little education

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[dr.g]

I have an avatar that says we should virtually try him for treason.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[sjames]

You may be historically correct, but culturally, Guy Fawkes has come to symbolize rebellion against authority in any form.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

Who bribed who to make Steven Conroy our anti-communication minister in the first place.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, a slashtard wants mod points so he's going to bash Americans.

Modpoints for an AC post.

Fine, you want a flame war, then it's on bitch!

BAHAHAHAHA! Obvious troll is obvious...except to tards like you who actually get trolled hard by it...lol :D

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[cffrost]

Crap, stupid instant mod system. That Overrated was supposed to be Funny.

Doesn't matter, you've accomplished the same thing by undoing your moderation. No moderation and "Funny" both give the poster zero karma.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

That's great and all, but he said "bring Guy Fawkes back", which invokes history rather than purely symbolism. Reciting the Gunpowder Plot poem invokes symbolism. Using the Guy Fawkes mask invokes symbolism. But if you step into history, you better know what you're talking about.

Re:Internet Villain of the Year

[sjames]

Unless you believe he was advocating actual resurrection, he was speaking symbolically.

Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely sickening, and yet we are helpless to do anything. That Stephen Conroy is the biggest clown but the Australian public are too stupid to realise. Truly saddening,

Re:Sickening

[Ghaoth]

Conroy is not the biggest - he is one of many. Only 30% of the population support Labor (an organisation that can't even spell its own name correctly). A large percentage of the population dispise and detest them. However, short of civil inssurection, how the hell do you get rid of them? The people can't call an election and they have taken away our guns.

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

A large percentage of the population dispise and detest them. However, short of civil inssurection, how the hell do you get rid of them? The people can't call an election and they have taken away our guns.

Welcome to Western democracy - it's a wonderful place where people can vote for whoever they want without being shot!

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

how the hell do you get rid of them? The people can't call an election and they have taken away our guns.

Guns are easy to obtain, what is rare is the willingness to pull the trigger (even more so against a modern military, as it'd be suicidal).

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, and it was the Howard government that took away your guns. I hope you've learnt a valuable lesson today: pretty much all politicians suck. Otherwise they wouldn't be politicians.

Re:Sickening

[duk242]

Taking away the guns was for the best...

Re:Sickening

[Capsaicin]

However, short of civil inssurection, how the hell do you get rid of them? The people can't call an election and they have taken away our guns.

You wait until the next federal election when we all get to vote. That's how we like do it round here.

I thought the conservatives really overreached when they banned almost all guns (even though 85% of my fellow Australians supported Howard on this issue). When I read posts like yours, however, I wonder whether my loss at having my piddly 22 taken away isn't, after all, outweighed by my gain from having any firearm kept out of the hands of folks like yourself.

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

Conroy is not the biggest - he is one of many. Only 30% of the population support Labor (an organisation that can't even spell its own name correctly). A large percentage of the population dispise and detest them. However, short of civil inssurection, how the hell do you get rid of them? The people can't call an election and they have taken away our guns.

Having guns or no guns makes no difference at all. Look at the US. Citizens over there (or should I use the modern term consumer ? ) are being fucked every day by corporations and the government. Do you see consumers use their oh so sacred arms ? No. So what good is your right to bear arms if you end up as a coach potato ?

Re:Sickening

[JockTroll]

Taking away your computers and internet is next. Is will be "all for the best", as well. Keep telling yourself that, it will be less painful. You may even like it, some people love to be servants.

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

The people with the guns win. (it was the military, not the people who remove the big guy from power in Egypt)
If the military fully supported the man in Egypt, all they would have is a lot of dead people and a shacking finger from the UN. If the people can not fight back the US and UN will not help them.

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that voting will ever do anything. Maybe if we got to chose what to vote on, till then it's just the illusion of control.

Re:Sickening

[crutchy]

but the Australian public are too stupid to realise

at least some of us are smart enough not to give a shit about all this impossible-to-implement and enforce internet censorship garbage, and our pollies are smart enough to have a bit of fun giving the SOPA retards a good butt fucking before sending them home to their mighty "home of the free"

Re:Sickening

[crutchy]

guns don't kill people, but stupid fucking irresponsible redneck retards kill people, and these people will always be a danger to the community around them as long as they have access to guns

there are lots of other bad things out there, but getting rid of a lot of guns was a bloody good start

Re:Sickening

[FormOfActionBanana]

Really? How many people were killed by redneck gunfire? And how much of that was accidental vs. malicious? I'm really curious.

In the US, gun control is a big issue. Mostly it's white people who don't want black people to shoot them. The rednecks are sort of caught in the middle of the debate, and generally live in different locales.

Re:Sickening

[ocularsinister]

The people with the biggest guns win, and trust me your poxy little pea shooter is nothing compared to a tooled up marine. You'll hit the dirt before you so much as see the guy piloting the drone that killed you, let alone get to actually shoot the damn thing at a government official.

They didn't take your guns away because they were scared of you, they took them away because too many people were going postal with them.

Re:Sickening

[rohan972]

guns don't kill people, but stupid fucking irresponsible redneck retards kill people, and these people will always be a danger to the community around them as long as they have access to guns

Well, since it's Australia we're talking about, how do you explain this. Queensland would by far be considered the "redneck state" even more so back when gun control came in, yet it was NSW, Victoria and Tasmania (all of which had tighter gun control than Queensland) that had the massacres that prompted the introduction of nation wide (state implemented) gun control.

Since the acquittals of Susan Falls and Claire Margaret MacDonald we have the absurd legal situation where self defense is not a legal reason to obtain a firearm, but you may use a firearm for self defense if you are a woman. If you are a man who provides a woman with a firearm which she uses to kill someone (apparently legally) you will be charged with supplying the firearm to her.

Our gun laws in practice are absurd and sexist. The murder rate was already declining before their introduction, there is no evidence that gun laws have lowered the murder rate. Support for the laws is just one more example of the triumph of emotionalism over reason.

Re:Sickening

[FictionPimp]

It is illegal in chicago to carry a handgun (it's almost illegal to own one). In fact, chicago is probably in the top 3 most gun controlled cities in the USA. Yet there were 41 shootings last week. Gun control NEVER works.

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

After the gun buy-back in 1996, the violent crime-rate increased and stayed elevated for the following 4 years. The Australian media didn't say a word about the true effect of gun control. Contrary, to what the press usually says, the crime-rate rarely increases.

Re:Sickening

[Canazza]

Gun control never works in a country that already has an abundance of guns.
The UK has absolute gun control.

All we have are stabbings. Attempts to curb knife ownership have failed. People still get stabbed all the time.
Keeping weapons off the streets is simple. Getting them off the streets once they're there is next to impossible.

Re:Sickening

[JockTroll]

The UK has absolute control over its own citizens/subjects.

FTFY.

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

Keep in mind the biggest guns only matter if you can shoot them...

If enough people were get together for an insurrection, the guy with the drone won't have enough gas to fly on. The threat of a modern military relies on its ability to maintain logistical support. Who do you think provides that? A military can only do so much on its own without relying on a productive civilian populace. Without food, sundries, fuel and other maintenance support items, you're back to square one and fighting dumb battles with dumb weapons. Imagine what also happens when troops don't get their rations for too long.

In such a fight, a resistance movement only having small arms would actually stand a chance. A modern army assaulted with guerilla tactics and having no safe ground to fall back on while big weapons are rendered too expensive to operate would seriously level the playing field.

But it seems not too many people are aware of that, nor are we that far towards being over the edge yet. If it ever gets to that point, you'd also be likely to see divisions occur within the military itself. It's something that would be messy and ugly, so let's be glad it hasn't happened yet. And let's hope enough common sense is exercised in the future such that it never will. (The responsibility mostly falls on the government, such that needs to learn its limits and not providing the public a good reason to take action.)

Re:Sickening

[Geeky]

All? Er, no, I think you'll find we do have gun crime. Not at US levels, sure, but I think it's a stretch to say we have absolute gun control.

Re:Sickening

[Ksevio]

Or maybe localized gun control doesn't work very well. It's not that difficult to transport guns into the city, but who knows how many shootings there would be if guns were sold openly.

Looking at the shootings from this weekend, the "but if only everyone had guns" excuse doesn't seem to fly:
- A guy called over to a car and shot in the head
- A guy shot while riding in a car
- A bunch of drive-by shootings
- A 6 year old girl shot

In none of those situations would LESS control of guns have prevented them. What's needed is better community programs to prevent gang violence and stop people wanting to shoot each other. Fewer guns on the street will of course lead to fewer opportunities to kill each other.

Re:Sickening

[MoaDweeb]

At the Port Massacre Arthur in 1996 in Tasmania 35 people were killed and 21 wounded. Is that enough for you?

Re:Sickening

[sjames]

I'm sure the people who die from stabbing thank all that is holy that they didn't get shot!

Re:Sickening

[Anonymous Coward]

At the Port Massacre Arthur in 1996 in Tasmania 35 people were killed and 21 wounded.

Is that enough for you?

Using, I believe, illegally obtained guns.

Re:Sickening

[uninformedLuddite]

For those who aren't Australian (and those who are but don't pay attention) at a conference in 1987 Barry Unsworth (NSW Premier) said "There will never be uniform Gun Laws in Australia until we see a massacre somewhere in Tasmania". The following is quoted

As a direct result of this excessive secrecy there are very few Australians aware of the awesome performance demonstrated by the gunman in the Broad Arrow Cafe, with the normal excuse being the politically correct line that disclosing full details would lead to more distress on the part of the relatives of the dead. Unfortunately, this is also an extremely effective way of silencing dissent on the part of those who might take a very different view of events in the Broad Arrow Cafe. All Australians have the right to know what happened that day, and a brief summary follows. It is a very unpleasant matter, and those readers with a weak stomach or a nervous disposition are advised not to read beyond this point.

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING MAY DISTURB SOME READERS

The gunman rose from his chair at one of the tables in the Broad Arrow Cafe,removed the AR15 and spare magazine from a sports bag, immediately killing Mr Yee Ng with a shot to the upper neck, and Miss Chung with a shot to the head.

Swiveling on the spot and firing from the right hip, the gunman fired at Mr Sargent who was wounded in the head, then killed Miss Scott with a shot to the head. The gunman continued through the Broad Arrow, next killing Mr Nightingale with a shot to the upper neck and Mr Bennet with a shot to the upper neck, with the latter bullet passing straight through and hitting Mr Ray Sharpe in the head with fatal results. Next Mr Kevin Sharpe was killed by a shot to the head and was also hit in the arm, with shrapnel and bone fragments from the second intermediate strike on Mr Kevin Sharpe then apparently wounding Mr Broome, and possibly Mr and Mrs Fidler.

Still firing from the hip the gunman swiveled and killed Mr Mills and Mr Kistan with single shots to the head, with shrapnel and skull fragments from those shots apparently wounding Mrs Walker, Mrs Law, and Mrs Barker. Again the gunman turned, shooting and wounding Mr Colyer in the neck, before swivelling and killing Mr Howard with a shot to the head. Next he shot Mrs Howard in the neck and head with fatal effect. The gunman turned back, killing Miss Loughton with a shot to the head, and wounding Mrs Loughton in the back. Moving towards the rear of the building the gunman shot Mr Elliot in the head, causing serious injuries.

ELAPSED TIME 15 SECONDS...

The above sequence is the best the forensic scientists could deduce from the crime scene and there may be small variations, but in the final analysis they matter little. What does matter is that at this precise juncture the gunman had killed twelve victims and wounded a further ten in 15 seconds flat, using only 17 rounds fired from the right hip. Such a staggering performance is on a par with the best combat shooters in the world, and two retired counter-terrorist marksmen ruefully admitted they would be hard pressed to equal such awesome speed and accuracy. Both agreed that attributing such a performance to an intellectually-impaired invalid with an IQ of 66 and severely limited cognitive functions, amounts to nothing less than certifiable insanity on the part of Bryant's accusers. In military terms a fatal shot to the upper neck counts as a head shot, so for all practical purposes those who died during the first 15 seconds were killed by head shots fired with lethal accuracy from the gunman's hip.

It's All About The Anal Rape

[Greyfox]

Most people know that corporations in general and the copyright industry in particular are out to anally rape them. What the government doesn't want you to know is just how much they support the copyright industry in their quest to anally rape the citizens the world. Politicians have to be elected, and people tend not to want to vote for politicians who help others anally rape them. However politicians also want money, and anal rape is a lucrative business. So politicians both try to help their corporate friends anally rape regular citizens and at the same time try to hide the fact that they're doing so. This really should come as no surprise to the citizens of the world.

You'd think people would get tired after being anally raped for so long (Really, you can only rape someone for so long before it's just sex...) and found a "No Anal Rape" party. I think most people would agree that not being anally raped by corporations and politicians is a cause worthy of getting behind.

Re:It's All About The Anal Rape

[neiras]

I think most people would agree that not being anally raped by corporations and politicians is a cause worthy of getting behind.

I see what you did there.

Re:It's All About The Anal Rape

[hateu]

Solar Traffic Warning Light

Re:It's All About The Anal Rape

[martin-boundary]

So... you're saying the Aliens in the spaceships... they're really politicians from another planet? Explains a lot.

Re:It's All About The Anal Rape

[WrongSizeGlass]

I think most people would agree that not being anally raped by corporations and politicians is a cause worthy of getting behind.

I see what you did there.

Well, it's certainly not something you want to get in front of.

Re:It's All About The Anal Rape

[George10s]

Thats very true. It's amazing how sexual innuendo can describe things like politics.

Re:It's All About The Anal Rape

[Anonymous Coward]

You lost me i think I am in the middle?

terrorism and piracy is always confusing

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure the honorable public servant can explain how getting a free copy of finding nemo is equivalent to national security concerns as information regarding terrorists and how its justified to withhold the government's activities regarding piracy.

Re:terrorism and piracy is always confusing

[Phrogman]

I suspect the problem is the Western world's reliance on Intellectual Property as a money making mechanism. Already a lot of innovation is being done outside of the big western countries, so our businesses are increasingly relying on IP laws to protect their business interests. Thus the push for draconian legislation to ensure those who obtained patents can milk them for all they are worth and simultaneously stifle research in the same area to ensure they get the most cash from their patents at the same time.
Certainly the RIAA/MAFIAA is a very powerful lobby group with massive influence over the US Government - enough to ensure secret treaties with other nations etc, but I have always suspected they are mostly riding the wave of government enforcement of IP laws and the US push to make their version of copyright/patent law the universally accepted one. There are a lot of businesses with a lot riding on their ability to enforce patents. If they can't enforce those patents a lot of them might fail - or at least their CEOs would get a lot fewer millions in severance.
Of course the media conglomerates are facing the complete collapse of their industry if they don't adapt, and they adapt very slowly if at all. My wife and I were just discussing the other day the fact that we can't think of anyone who subscribes to cable TV. A few folks with Netflix but no TV, its just not worth paying for.

How do you spell korupshun?

[kawabago]

Hollywood

Re:How do you spell korupshun?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hollywood is in the same bed as the klepto-fascists bankrupting the US. It goes from the president on down and to the lobby groups in washington, to wall street, and the City of London.

Re:How do you spell korupshun?

[Anonymous Coward]

"korupshun is spelled Hollywood"

You actually think "Hollywood" has more of an influence on government than say, Goldman Sachs? You think there's more corruption in "Hollywood" than there is in government, on Wall Street, and in large corporations?

Re:How do you spell korupshun?

[nu1x]

But jew owned hollywood is a propaganda / mind control / opinion forming arm of jew owned banks.

So it is all the same really, but calling out jews are unpopular (result of successful mind control) is is bound to get you ostracized, by same people who are victims of jews.

Such is the life of poor goyim.

Re:How do you spell korupshun?

[chilvence]

calling out jews are [sic] unpopular (result of successful mind control) is is [sic] bound to get you ostracized.[sic]

Or it could just be that people are slightly sensitive to the fact that 5 or 6 million Jews were systematically murdered in unprecedented computer administrated death camps for supposedly being the sole cause of all of Germany's problems. But hey I could be barking up the wrong tree..

That'd because it's probably discussing

[Anonymous Coward]

The Australian government has "a special room" in almost every single ISP with a machine capable of taking a full duplication of traffic for almost any customer. This applies to phone networks as well.

I know someone who installs this equipment, he will not even TALK ABOUT it online, he literally won't type it in an email, IM or messaging system of any kind. Offline it's difficult to get info regarding it out of him.

Those boxes, to my knowledge do not require a warrant, the government can just remotely log in and start recording. Obviously they can't use the data in court without some kind of warrant but the equipement is there.

Posting this anonymously I will assume is enough - I don't have much more information than that unfortunately. If anyone else does, please feel free to reply.

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[bug1]

More than a few years ago worked for a company who made this sort of equipment (claimed to be of the two best), the story at the time was that not much sold in Australia (as opposed to the US and Europe). The issue was if there wasnt much deep packet inspection in Aus, or maybe they bought equipment from someone else.

But it doesnt really matter what nation the equipment is in, the internet doesnt respect borders. That means they can capture your data as it goes through the US/Europe, and with their "Intelligence sharing" agreements its all ok.

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting this anonymously I will assume is enough ...

No sorry mate, it won't help at all. You forgot about the government's "special room." Expect a knock on the door at any moment, there's another kind of "special room" where you are going.

Posting anonymously so the government won't ... oh damn!

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[Anonymous Coward]

You're assuming my traffic is going through US / Europe. With equipment at the ISP level they can capture the entirety of my traffic to and from multiple places.

Admitedly my information is anecdotal but a second network engineer who worked for a different company funnily enough reacted when the first one made mention of it, they both kind of had "ooooh" and "ahh" comments and nodded etc, a few things were said which sadly I forget but I'm quite confident one worked for the company manufacturing equipment, the other worked for a company installing it. Both confirmed there's a lot more out there in .AU than you think and both were EXTREMELY reluctant to discuss it, surprisingly so.

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[bug1]

If you really want privacy use encryption, vpn (to a "safe" country?), tor, whatever, pay for it with bitcoins.

There are benefits to pervasive surveillance;
  - Its hard to have a false identiy if you dont have a real one, try and throw away the false identity, not the real one.
  - If you looking for a needle dont put it in a haystack, the more "normal" traffic they capture, the further the target sinks into the noise.

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[complete loony]

Yeah I overheard a similar conversation at linux conf au in January. No idea who the guy was, or who he worked for, but Jacob Appelbaum seemed fairly interested for some reason...

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[Anonymous Coward]

This is flat out wrong. I work for a large ISP thats in the top 5 in AU - I design and build the core network. This does not exist. Its not in our datacentres.

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have a tap in your network? BS.

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[Anonymous Coward]

A room ? It's usually servers in a rack, "blackboxes". People who have them sign wavers with AFP and can't talk about it much.

Re:That'd because it's probably discussing

[Anonymous Coward]

What concerns me most is that the majority of people DO NOT BELIEVE this is factual. In fact, just a tiny bit of deductive reasoning essentially proves that EVERY government, including the "free" ones has been doing this since roughly WWII. If you didn't already know that ATT maps extra rack space into every single building they put up, just for the use of the NSA/FBI intercept gear, then you are foolish beyond words. To assume that this is not industry standard practice, and not automatically carried out in every major country on earth... well that's something else entirely. I believe we call it stupid.
 
Telecommunication intercept gear, installed by the government has been and will continue to be STANDARD PRACTICE. Figure out what that means on your own, but stop trying to pretend it isn't happening, in your country, with your email. It is, and denying it is beyond foolhardy. At this point, the only thing protecting your anonymity is the fact that no one in the government currently cares about you enough to order an intercept.
 
I swear, the first moron to talk about TOR, darknets, sneakernets or other cryptography/obfuscation/security will be derided as a fool. Do you use those things? Did you use one of the nodes that is run by the CIA/NSA? How do you know? Just who do you think is providing high speed data lines for TOR nodes, for free? Oh, some good Samaritan? You really are gullible. TOR was never secure, and it's long since been shown to be corrupted by exit nodes run by various agencies. Encryption is great, but in real life no one actually uses it. Face it we live, and work on an internet with EXACTLY ZERO protection from the people that RUN the network. Which includes the government of your jurisdiction. Can you demonstrate otherwise? I'd be terribly interested to see that data.
 
  For the record, my HDD's are encrypted with TrueCrypt and to the fullest extent of that software. I have 3 passwords. 1 unlocks, 1 deletes, and 1 opens a bunch of porn folders with celebrity photoshops (honeypot). I know what encryption is, and I know how to use it. I also know the real world doesn't use it in any significant way. (SSL/HTTPS/RSA that's it, and we all know they are all susceptible)
 
One more question... how do you create a point to point network connection with encryption that is secure, trustworthy and can't be intercepted by the persons who own/operate the network infrastructure? Now, how often does anyone actually do that? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Sickening,

[mjwx]

Conroy is not the biggest - he is one of many. Only 30% of the population support Labor (an organisation that can't even spell its own name correctly). A large percentage of the population dispise and detest them. However, short of civil inssurection, how the hell do you get rid of them? The people can't call an election and they have taken away our guns.

This person doesn't live in Oz.

We can call an election, it's just that no-one wants to. We dont need guns to do that, I suspect the GP is not Australian and doesn't realise Aussies can sort out their problems without violence. To get an election called, all we need to do is prove to the Governor-General that the current government is unfit, then she dissolves parliament. The thing is, no-one wants to, elections are a pain in the arse, a waste of a good Saturday and the Liberals are even worse then Labor.

The Labor party is actually preferred over the Coalition in the two party preferred poll, add the popularity of the Greens and they will retain control next election (ALP with the help of the Greens). If anything, I expect more votes to go to Green and independent candidates. The Coalition will never get in because Abbott's just a patsy for the Liberal power brokers and their economic policies are insane ($70 Billion dollar black hole the shadow treasurer cant account for).

Re:Sickening,

[bloodhawk]

You mean that same governer general who is appointed by the GOVERNMENT! besides which what the hell country are you living in if you think labor are the preferred party in two party preferred, I suggest you go look at the polls, Labor/greens would get absolutely annilated if an election was called anytime soon.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

ok I can handle not liking the liberals, cause lets face it abbot sucks donkey dongers. But how anyone can call there economic policies insane after the basket case the current labor government has put us into is beyond me. By comparison anything liberals do would be the height of sanity, even with there current 70 billion back hole. Not to mention I suggest you check your facts, labor is most definitely not ahead on a two party preferred poll, they are so far behind it would leave them crippled even as an opposition if an election was called today and I think you will also find a significant swing away from independents after the mess they have created, not a swing towards them. Even oakshot has all but admitted he could not retain his seat now even if he wanted to.

Re:Sickening,

[mjwx]

besides which what the hell country are you living

Australia, which is clearly very far from your location.

Labor/greens would get absolutely annilated if an election was called anytime soon.

They said that in the last two elections. As long as it's Anyone v Abbott, Labor is practically guaranteed to win. The liberal policy is to say "No" to everything that Labor does, this will lose them a lot of votes. Its far more likely Abbot would be massacred in any election as Julia Gillard is preferred PM, but as I said before it would just end up like 2010 with the balance of power being held by Greens and/or Independents because Australians are simply sick of the two major parties ruling by fiat for four years.

BTW. look up how polls are done and how inaccurate they are at election time. They go out and ask random people to answer a questionnaire, this is easily biased by going to specific areas. This is why Morgan polls look different to Nielson polls. The only semi-reliable polls are exit polls (basically the same thing, they ask people who they voted for on their way out, hence they are called "exit" polls).

Re:Sickening,

[mjwx]

But how anyone can call there economic policies insane after the basket case the current labor government has put us into is beyond me.

Um, pretty much the only growing economy in the western world. An actual plan to deal with deficit.

I suggest you check your facts instead of relying on things like News Limited.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

No Australian who voted in the last election did so knowing that they would be voting in a minority government.
I must have missed the meeting where all citizens sat down and divided up how we would vote in each electorate to together achieve the result that we did.

Re:Sickening,

[MisterMidi]

Be careful with your suggestions, someone might actually do it ;-)

A visit to Wikipedia (with recent numbers from the CIA World Factbook) learns that Argentina, Panama, Turkey, Estonia, Paraguay, Peru, Lithuania, Uruguay, Ecuador, Kosovo, Suriname, Colombia, Israel, Sweden, Costa Rica, Guinea, Latvia, Nicaragua, Mexico, Poland, Luxembourg, Honduras, South Africa, Austria, Slovakia, Macedonia, Brazil, Guatemala, Venezuela, Finland, Germany, Albania, Malta, Iceland, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Switzerland, The Bahamas, Belgium, El Salvador and New Zealand all have bigger economic growth than Australia.

Depending on how you define the western world, they might not all be part of it, and I may have forgotten a couple. But the point is, Australia is not by a long shot "pretty much the only growing economy in the western world."

Re:Sickening,

[bloodhawk]

ok, please show me ANY poll that currently shows labor ahead. Sorry but you are living in a dream land if you think they have actually increased in popularity since the last election rather than decreased and that is the only way they can be ahead. AS for Abbott, I could not agree more, he is a terrible choice and I hope to hell he never gets in, but right now he would be a certainty unless something significant changes between now and the next election.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

You fool the reason we stood any kind of chance in the GFC is because the liberal party payed of our debt and brought us in to surplus first.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

yeaha growing prospereous economy, yet in just 5 years they have sent us into record levels of debt. Increasing debt in prosperous times is perhaps the biggest economic sin this government has commited, it is a disgrace. Heaven help us if we have a true economic downturn as we will be well and truly FUCKED under labor as the current debt levels now give us no where to turn.I think you have been listening to the union/labor stooges a little too much, I suggest you actually read some economic theory.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

ummm you mean the deficit they created lol. someone certainly does need to check their facts. Only growing economy in the western world LMFAO. for fuks sake get out from your bubble, not only are we not the only growing economy their are many with significantly faster growing economies. Seriously man, you sound like you are reading a labor party press release. Try to at least check the garbage they spin the public against facts, it will take you a couple of minutes on google.

What really boggles my mind is you got marked as insightfull yet posted nothing but lies. Either a sad indictment on /. or a sign of labor/union members on here.

Re:Sickening,

[mgblst]

As an Aussie, I wish what you said is true, but it is not. You are ignoring the recent small elections, where there was a huge shift to the Libs. You are kidding if you think Labor will stay in, despite Abbott being a complete loser and religious zealot.

There are plenty of people who want an election called, the opposition, and the opposition supporters. The opposition and their supporters ALWAYS want an election called, since they can only lose again, and might win. It is very ignorant to ever pretend otherwise.

I am guessing you do not seem to hang around conservatives at all. I wish it was wrong, but Labor are going to lose, and you are lying or deluded.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

And since when is Australia part of the Western world?:)

Re:Sickening,

[Hatta]

I suspect the GP is not Australian and doesn't realise Aussies can sort out their problems without violence.

Then do it.

The thing is, no-one wants to

Sounds like you can't fix anything at all then.

Re:Sickening,

[Wildclaw]

I suggest you actually read some economic theory.

You too it seems. Paying back debt in good times should be done if you are using a gold or otherwise non-sovereign currency.

When you have a sovereign fiat currency (as in the euro need not apply), the rule is different. In that case you should decrease outstanding currency (calling it debt is a misnomer) by reduce spending when there is no unemployment or when the production capacity of the country is close to maxed out.

Re:Sickening,

[rjmx]

> You mean that same governer general who is appointed by the GOVERNMENT!

November 11, 1975.

Re:Sickening,

[whoever57]

You mean that same governer general who is appointed by the GOVERNMENT!

I doubt that the GP does. I think that he means the same Governor-General that is appointed by The Queen.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

all we need to do is prove to the Governor-General that the current government is unfit, then she dissolves parliament

Has the Australian Governor-General ever done that?

In Canada our Governor-General is supposed to have the same sort of power. That fairy tale gets told to schoolchildren about how the GG and LG are the last line of defence against a corrupt government that won't step down.

In practice the GG is just a rubber-stamp for the Prime Minister and his/her ambitions. Whether due to personal threats or general threats of causing a constitutional crisis, who knows.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

The Australian Governor General is only rubber stamped by the queen, the government chooses who takes the role nowadays.

Re:Sickening,

[Anonymous Coward]

And you also mean the same governor general whose son in law is Bill Shorten?!?!?!

Re:Sickening,

[cammoblammo]

Yes, in November 1975. The Whitlam government was sacked by the GG, John Kerr.

Public interest

[kingturkey]

Not that I disagree with their view here, but the summary makes the mistake of conflating 'the public interest' with what is 'interesting to the public'.

Re:Public interest

[Anonymous Coward]

Came here to say the same thing (modded you up instead.)

"Interest in" in this sense mean, "rights affected by". "Public interest" means affecting the common good. Which clearly applies in this issue.

Australian government to Australian Citizens:

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the way it will be. You have no say in it. You elected us so we make all your decisions now. Comrade.

We don't care if those decisions bankrupt the country or put it on the hook for a 50 billion dollar white elephant (The NBN) or commit a year of GDP to a dead cause (One trillion dollars - the Carbon Tax). You will like it. We don't care if you think the legislation for these and other critical policies (for example the mining tax) was rushed through parliament without due consideration, in fact with practically NO consideration at all. We don't care if government ROI is at an all time low and we don't care that, as a minority government hanging on to power by the skin of our teeth (literally a seat or two) we are able to make fundamental changes to the Australian economy by ramming home these policies without due consideration.

Australian People: Federalism in Australia is broken. The Australian constitution is broken if it can allow such things to occur. Call an election now. The Federal Labour government is a dead man walking, The Queensland state Labour government is a dead woman walking, NSW Labour is already gone and Bob Carr had better consider himself just a seat warmer.

- A disgruntled Aussie who thinks both major parties are living in Head-Up-Arse land.

"Public interest"

[sixtyeight]

From the brief: "It wouldn't be in the 'public interest' to release the information. Strange how the public seems to have a high degree of interest in finding out what's being talked about."

We get a lot of that disagreement between the citizens and the government here in the States as well. And when tax time comes along, I apply the same reasoning to whether or not paying them would be "in the government interest". Or the public's.

If everyone did that, governments would shape up PDQ out of sheer necessity. Even if the politicians and the courts don't work, the People still have recourse. Which reminds, tax time is almost here in the U.S.. Pay them any non-negative amount you think they're worth.

Re:"Public interest"

[AgNO3]

right. I prefer not to piss off the IRS. You know those anal probes you hear about from Aliens? Nope IRS.

Re:"Public interest"

[sixtyeight]

Possibly. They are the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and were started offshore because since they're a private corporation, they wouldn't be lawful within the U.S..

Re:"Public interest"

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure how Australian talks on copyright led to American conspiracy theories about the IRS, but it sounds like you need The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments (updated for 2012!), chock full of legal citations and evidence that won't convince you because you've already made up your mind.

But what could it hold against public interest?

[SuperKendall]

I can understand how you can redact portions of documents where release of information might lead to physical harm, like planned locations of troops or identities of informants.

But how on earth can there be ANYTHING not releasable in a talk on copyright? There is nothing that could be talked about that would cause physical harm to others.

This absolutely stinks and I hope the courts can be brought into release the information attempted to be hidden from the public.

So what has been hidden? My best guess is that the document shows a terrifying contempt for the common citizen in regards to rights they have, and they are really worried about how that would come across in the press.

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[AgNO3]

umm every heard of ANNONYMOUS? Maybe they are afraid that they won't like it and cause damage.

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[ozmanjusri]

This absolutely stinks and I hope the courts can be brought into release the information attempted to be hidden from the public.

More likely to be left to whistleblowers/Wikileaks.

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's actually about national defense. Nobody really wants to talk about this.

Look at the map, with a population overlay. Aus has a tiny 22 million people. And they're smack up against Indonesia's overflowing 240 million, with a whole lot more of similarly dense Asia beyond.

It's a very serous problem that's only getting worse over time. Australia desperately needs American as a firm ally. American, OTOH, doesn't have any deep investment on the outcome. They may like the Aussies, but they need to be friendly with all sorts of Asian nations. So that's an unbalanced relationship, so Australia has to do favours for America in order to call favours. And right now what America would like them to do is install insane copyright laws.

Australia's national defense problem a frigging huge Elephant In The Room. Neither Aus or America want to mention it out-loud and get called racist and generally really piss-off Aus's neighbours. Nor does any Australian want the loss of face of admitting how reliant they are on America in this. So it's never mentioned. But it's the backstory that makes a whole lot of weirdness down under make rational sense.

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[Thing 1]

There is nothing that could be talked about that would cause physical harm to others.

I think they're more concerned about "physical harm to the conspirators."

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[SuperKendall]

Very interesting, that provides a lot of context I had no idea of.

Populations these days though take over not militarily, but through occupation and then assimilation. There's really not much to be done about that unless you want to close off your country which is not a good idea either. The only thing you can do is try to maintain a strong national identity and not let people set up nations within nations...

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[muuh-gnu]

> This absolutely stinks

What absolutely stinks is that the electorate is voting in the same people turn after turn after turn. Not only in Australia but in all western "democracies".

After a certain number of cycles, the policians realize that _whatever_ they do, they'll be voted in anyway, so what exactly is stopping them from making a little bit of money by catering to special interests? The electorate doesnt seem to be mentally able to defend themselves anyway, so why not fuck them a little bit?

The root of all problems is this: The majority of people are too dumb. This so called "democracy" went well only as long as nobody dared or tried to exploit their dumbness. But politicians have now tasted blood and realized there's no consequences to expect, so they wont stop. In the mid to long term, we're fucked. We're heading straight into a nightmarish hight-tech dystopia. Thank the dumb idiots to your left and to your right.

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[microbox]

lol! That is the worst argument that I've ever heard. And I've been on the interwebs for years now.

Re:But what could it hold against public interest?

[Anonymous Coward]

Its not a valid argument but you don't think if you are doing something you know is not going to go over well with the public that they have a fear of ANNONYMOUS? Seems that its a legit fear if you are doing something pretty stupid. Especially after seeing what just happened to government agencies after what happened to you next door neighbors in NZ.

"industry-negotiated solution"

[TubeSteak]

In a briefing issued to Attorney-General Nicola Roxon regarding the meeting, the department noted that it continued to prefer an industry-negotiated solution to the issue of Internet content piracy.

Industry-negotiated "solutions" are the antithesis of a democratic process.
It's amazing that governments not only allow this to happen, but actively facilitate the process.

If the government had to step in and set up rules, they'd be forced to accept input from those annoying citizens they're supposed to represent.

Re:"industry-negotiated solution"

[gl4ss]

can you imagine a government entity first coming up with a drm solution and then enforcing that drm solution on people? it would be so obviously the stupidest thing in a century so that government would be finished no matter what.. these two solutions are the only things they're thinking of, a drm solution mandated and dictated either by the government or by the industry. shows how clueless they are trying to put the cat back in the bag. some drm company is going to make a boatload of money for a few years() and then it's back to the current status quo.

plus, if you'd start accepting input from citizens you'd notice how dead an idea it is to try to make unbreakable drm. you'd have to control all sold devices and parts.

Re:"industry-negotiated solution"

[Anonymous Coward]

if you'd start accepting input from citizens you'd notice how dead an idea it is to try to make unbreakable drm. you'd have to control all sold devices and parts.

That's kind-of the idea.

Re:"industry-negotiated solution"

[microbox]

Industry-negotiated "solutions" are the antithesis of a democratic process.

Doesn't this just hit the nail on the head when it comes to neoliberal philosophy. You can thank von Mises, Hayek, Rand and their legion of followers for "freedom" disguised as an anti-democratic breakdown of sovereignty.

Re:"industry-negotiated solution"

[gl4ss]

if you'd start accepting input from citizens you'd notice how dead an idea it is to try to make unbreakable drm. you'd have to control all sold devices and parts.

That's kind-of the idea.

you'd need to make recorders, dictating devices etc illegal too or add to them constant online connection and track recognition tech.

it's just not feasible. but the idea can be sold to few companies and a lot of money can be sucked out of few companies and burned on the issue. literally millions have been already spent on this snake oil - millions isn't enough, more like tens of millions of dollars - the money has come from companies such as microsoft, sony, nokia, real etc.

Reason:

[no-body]

They are chicken - afraid that people find out what they are up to.

Any public servant doing this kind of stuff should be penalized.

William Binney: ...after he realized that the NSA is now openly trampling the constitution, says as he holds his thumb and forefinger close together. "We are, like, that far from a turnkey totalitarian state."

The Public Interest

[AliasMarlowe]

The phrase "the public interest" does not mean the same thing to Government officials and to the actual Public. It's a sort of catch-all reason for hiding information or bending rules or otherwise ignoring the (usually legitimate) wishes of a group or indeed of the populace.

Re:The Public Interest

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's WikiLeaks when you need them .. oh joining in the fray I hear?

Re:The Public Interest

[Serpents]

If revealing what they're discussing is likely to cause protests and riots, than clearly keeping it secret is in the best interest of public. See, they're learning from the ACTA debacle.

Re:The Public Interest

[Anonymous Coward]

We want the public interest and we will have it !

Re:The Public Interest

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, no. If revealing what they're discussing is likely to cause protests and riots - then perhaps they shouldn't be discussing it in the first place. It'll have to be revealed at some point so the riots and protests will still happen. The only reason they want to keep it secret is to hopefully ram it through ASAP against the public's wishes.

Re:The Public Interest

[gr8_phk]

Everything the government does is of public interest. There are a few things like national security or war planning that perhaps should be kept secret. However, everything that isn't explicitly exempted should be made public. It's also interesting that the companies involved in these discussions are alleged to be "people" or more specifically as "non government organizations" they are supposed to be in the same "public" group, yet they are part of the secret discussions... Of course TFA is about Australia and I thinking American.

Re:The Public Interest

[Anonymous Coward]

The public interest is what is of benefit to the public as a body, that is not the same thing as what interests the members of the public as indiviuals.

Re:The Public Interest

[ultranova]

It'll have to be revealed at some point so the riots and protests will still happen.

Revealed? Whatever for?

Website not working

[SecondCobra]

The delimiter page is not loading. Is our government blocking the story now?? This sucks in every way. Time to write to the local MP.

Re:Website not working

[gl4ss]

works from finland..
the general jibe of the article is that for some reason, the government considers that it's negotiating(!!!!!) with an industry/foreign power that could withhold something from it!! it's fucking entertertainment industry! they won't stop shipping shows to .au if you don't do as they want.

the real reason is probably some bullshit drm company not wanting other bullshit drm companies to get a hint that they're trying to push their bullshit drm for some pie in the sky dream. and network inspector shit sw which doesn't actually even do what it promises.

Governments represent Corporations not people.

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Governments represent Corporations not people.

The government will KILL every human being if it means satisfying a corporate interest.

Re:Governments represent Corporations not people.

[Anonymous Coward]

People *ARE* corporations under maritime law - look it up. Governments know this but choose to use people as collateral instead. All government concerns are about serving the corporate interest first and foremost.

Vivienne Westwood www.viviennewestwoodinuk.com

[canadagooseprovide]

The famous designer who is called Vivienne Westwood www.viviennewestwoodinuk.com has received high praise in the design Vivienne Westwood handbagsfield. In 2012 in summer, Vivienne Westwood will produce its new and gorgeous style of bags. Vivienne Westwood Vivienne Westwood bags will make full use of red peach element this time. You can compare the classical and original logo bag with this season's Vivienne Westwood Handbags. No matter the red peach handbag or the bowling bag Vivienne Westwood jewellery can reflect the fashionable attitude of many ladies. If you are desired to catch up with the fashion and you are the person who knows well about fashion. Vivienne Westwood bag can be a not bad choice for you.

Physical harm to corporations

[Namarrgon]

Remember, corporations are people too, and if the public gets an interest in these talks, that could seriously damage the corporate bottom line, which is about as physical as you can get.

Re:Physical harm to corporations

[freaker_TuC]

No, corporations ain't people, they are businesses. Entities with people responsible for its running.

There is no such thing as privacy in public negotiations. If such would damage a corporation, they apparantly are aiming for the wrong income.

Re:Physical harm to corporations

[0-9a-f]

Remember, corporations are people too, ...

Not in Australia, they're not. That's an (almost) uniquely American artefact.

Louboutin www.christian-louboutin-shopping.com

[canadagooseprovide]

High Christian Louboutin www.christian-louboutin-shopping.com heel boots are shoes with long heels that provide support to the heels and provide an elevation to the feet. Though this form of shoe was introduced keeping in mind women with short christian louboutin shoesheights, today these are popular among all women across the world. These sexy looking boots are among the hottest fashion items and are available in a variety of designs and sizes. In the world of fashion, christian louboutin outlet trends do not last long and keeping that in mind, the shoe and boot designers and manufacturers keep introducing new collections. Though high heel shoes or boots are meant mainly for women, this footwear is christian louboutin bootslargely popular between both genders. A baby shoes we’re bringing up www.louboutinonlinefactory.com aren’t the actual Christian Louboutin but simply a baby copies, christian louboutin shoes may just be according additionally accustomed and christian louboutin boots stylish. Alexa actually absorb the right amount about adorable certificate, about it cinema a baby central factor in the concept of shoes.christian louboutin sandls But they don’t bills all of us lots of money a free absolute Christian Louboutin an existing. A few of these clones a bit hinderance a huge selection of bucks and is also a bit affordable.

Louboutin www.christianlouboutinladyshoes.com

[canadagooseprovide]

Christian Louboutin, www.christianlouboutinladyshoes.com known best for his heels with the iconic red bottoms, is helping Neiman Marcus celebrate its 20th anniversarty with the launch of "Sole Seekers," christian louboutin pumps a social media challenge that asks users to upload Christian Louboutin images into a growing online pictorial spread. The challenge,christian louboutin shoes which will feature entries from Instagram and Twitter, will also be hosted on the Neiman Marcus Facebook page and NMdaily, The Neiman Marcus Blog, according to a company press release. christian louboutin sandals "Sole Seekers" runs Feb. 10 through March 10 when one winner will be selected to receive a pair of Christian Louboutin shoes. Fashion women www.christianlouboutinonlineshop.com do not miss the opportunity to own Christian Louboutin shoes at reasonable prices. Christian Louboutin's shoes for every woman elegant. christian louboutin shoesIn the fashion industry, christian louboutin pumpsChristian Louboutin synonymous with high fashion and quality. What's the first thing you think when you hear the name Christian Louboutin? christian louboutin bootsYour first thought is a fantasy and charm, right?

Louboutin www.christian-louboutin-shopping.com

[canadagooseprovide]

The fashion style Christian Louboutin www.christian-louboutin-shopping.com shoes can make people become charming and sexy, that is recognized. Christian Louboutin christian louboutin shoes is a famous women shoes brand, it provide many of different style shoes, including fashionable cheap Louboutin pumps, sexy Louboutin sandals,christian louboutin Sandals elegant Louboutin slingbacks, warm Louboutin boots and so on. This time, let me show you a pair of elegant Christian Louboutin christian louboutin Slingbacls Duvette 120mm Nude Pumps, it is made of nude patent leather. This Christian Louboutin pumps with 5 inches - 120 mm approx heel and 5 inches - 120 mm approx arch, plus a sexy signature red sole. If you are a elegant lady,how christian louboutin boots can you miss this charming Christian Louboutin pumps. This time, just click on this picture and you can easily find it from our discount Christian Louboutin online shop, christian louboutin 2012 welcome to have a visit, I believe our online shop will help you to save much more time and money. It is worth you to try!

What the fuck happened to the world

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't even pretend we're not all corrupt as fuck anymore...

Not even a song and dance about how its in our own best interest.

Has it always been this insanely corrupt? And we're just now noticing because of all the small media attention on things? Or is it actually getting worse?

Westwood www.viviennewestwoodinuk.com

[canadagooseprovide]

Vivienne Westwood www.viviennewestwoodinuk.com arrived on the red carpet today wearing an unironed silk gown paired with a beige Vivienne Westwood handbagsvintage frame handbag, dramatic chocolate brown pumps, silk gloves and a 1980’s style side ponytail. The avant-garde designer attended the premiere of Cosi Fan Tutte Vivienne Westwood Necklace which was held at the Haus Fuer Mozart in Salzburg, Austria. Vivienne Westwood’s ensemble seemed as if she had cut and sewn it a few hours before the event and then paired a few Vivienne Westwood bags neutral accessories with the gown to complete the look. Vivienne Westwood' vintage frame handbag was feminine and beige with a classic clasp closure and short strap. The handbag appeared Vivienne Westwood Earringsto be the inspiration behind her fall 2011 Chancery Purse which is a vintage inspired frame handbag currently for sale in Vivienne Westwood’s online shop.

Corruption

[locopuyo]

Passing laws for big businesses and not letting anyone know the details? Why would he be doing that? Obviously it is corruption. Put this man in prison.

It's an outrageous outrage

[TapeCutter]

Your wasting your breath, at least half the people here know for certain that whenever government meets with anyone behind a closed door they are plotting against we the people. Closed door meetings have got nothing to do with speaking frankly and protecting sensitive commercial information. It a plot, a UN conspiracy...or something....but most of all it's an outrageous outrage that must be fought. Our method of attack is to buy plastic masks from our enemy, smash the windows of small merchants and steal their wares, and top it off by vandalising establishment web pages. Sure it's going to take a while to scorch the Earth where the establishment now stands, but overthrowing the status-quo is not the only thing we do, new releases don't just rip themselves you know.

Protesting against greed while wearing hollywood masks and shitting in the town square is going to be about as effective as flower power was at "solving" the same issues 40yrs ago. One of the largest internal migrations in the US was in the early 70's when the hippies left the cities in droves to establish communes that shunned political hierarchies and political alliances between members. Virtually none of the communes lasted more that a couple of years. Most people assume it was because of jelousy brought on by the "love thy neighbour" attitute to sex, but it was nothing of the sort. They failed because the lack of political structure created a power vacumn allowing the one slightly more agressive member of the group to rise to the top by brow beating individuals into submission one at a time, when that stopped working things got physical. Coincidently this was all around the same time that the Stanford prision experiments demonstrated that we all have an evil dictator lurking in our phyche just waiting for the opportunity to fill a political power vacum and we also all have a cowering slave in our phyche that given the right conditions will emerge and chose security over liberty.

In other words, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

The mayor hides the crime rate
council woman hesitates
Public gets irate, but forgets the vote date
Weatherman complaining, predicted sun, it's raining
Everyone's protesting, boyfriend keeps suggesting
you're not like all of the rest.

Garbage ain't collected, women ain't protected
Politicians using, people they're abusing
The mafia's getting bigger, like pollution in the river
And you tell me that this is where it's at.

Woke up this moming with an ache in my head
Splashed on my clothes as I spilled out of bed
Opened the window to listen to the news
But all I heard was the Establishment's Blues.

Gun sales are soaring, housewives find life boring
Divorce the only answer, smoking causes cancer
This system's gonna fall soon, to an angry young tune
And that's a concrete cold fact.

The pope digs population, freedom from taxation
Teeny Bops are up tight, drinking at a stoplight
Miniskirt is flirting I can't stop so I'm hurting.
Spinster sells her hopeless chest.

Adultery plays the kitchen, bigot cops non-fiction
The little man gets shafted, sons and monies drafted
Living by a time piece, new war in the far east.
Can you pass the Rorschach test?

It's a hassle is an educated guess.
Well, frankly I couldn't care less.

- This Is Not A Song, Its An Outburst (AKA The Establishment Blues ); Rodriguez - 1970

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Anonymous Coward]

"Your wasting your breath"

I stopped reading here. If you don't know how to use apostrophes, I'm not sure I care what your opinion is. Have a good day, sir.

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Anonymous Coward]

"you and I have differing views, but I am too lazy to debate so I will just use the excuse of lousy grammar to blow you off"

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[chilvence]

I skipped straight to the song. From now on I propose all argument be null and void unless articulated in the form of a song.

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Anonymous Coward]

apostrophes

apostrophe's

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for your time, and I'll thank you for mine.
Forget it.

So, don't tell me about your success.
Nor your recipes for my happiness.
Smoke in bed, I never could digest,
Those illusions you claim to have going.

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Jawnn]

You guys modded this guy's ditto-head rant as "insightful"? WTF

Your wasting your breath, at least half the people here know for certain that whenever government meets with anyone behind a closed door they are plotting against we the people.

Your sarcasm is noted, but what facts have you to support the point you appear to be trying to make? ...I see.

Protesting against greed while wearing hollywood masks and shitting in the town square is going to be about as effective as flower power was at "solving" the same issues 40yrs ago. One of the largest internal migrations in the US was in the early 70's when the hippies left the cities in droves to establish communes

Again, citation needed.

Virtually none of the communes lasted more that a couple of years. On the other hand, many have survived to this day. Black Bear Ranch is a shining example of how like-minded people can make such things work. So your implied conclusion that such things are "virtually" impossible is flawed. The fact of the matter is that most of the communes that started in the 60's and 70's never had a chance. Drugs were the reason that most communes fell apart. A close second was ignorance. A band of city kids heading into the sticks to "live off the land" is almost laughably naive.

Most people assume it was because of jelousy brought on by the "love thy neighbour" attitute to sex

Really? Please cite your source for this "most people" claim.

They failed because the lack of political structure created a power vacumn allowing the one slightly more agressive member of the group to rise to the top by brow beating individuals into submission one at a time, when that stopped working things got physical.

You seem to be suggesting that only "normal" political structure's will work to keep a society from degenerating into chaos. Again, the many still thriving communes would put the lie to this suggestion. To be sure, they all have a political structure, but it is nothing like the one that th 1%, and their willing toadies, are fighting so hard to keep.

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Ihmhi]

Stargate SG-1 had a race called the Tollans with a very interesting concept on government.

There was no such thing as a "closed hearing". All council sessions were recorded in their entirety and available to all of the public instantly. In fact, &;ltspoilers> when it did inevitably happen (as they were conspiring with the Goa'uld</spoilers>, it was viewed as an aberration. A horrible crime that could never happen, like the Vice President walking up to the President and shooting him in the head. It was possible, sure, but it was unfathomable.

I really think that we need to, at citizens, leverage technology and demand the same compliance from our government - even if it's only starting with the local one. Bandwidth and servers are cheap, and most city halls have microphones and video equipment installed anyway. It would only be a matter of taking these already existing data streams, making them available to the public live, and then properly archiving them in such a way that they cannot be deleted easily (perhaps under the purview of a different department, maybe one run by a group of citizens or a nonprofit that has absolutely 0 incentive to tinker with data).

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Anonymous Coward]

at least half the people here know for certain that whenever government meets with anyone behind a closed door they are plotting against we the people.

Because when they're meeting behind closed doors without a good reason... they ARE plotting against we the people.

Especially when they go behind closed doors almost at the drop of a hat.

Especially when after coming out of the closed room they announce that Bad Thing is in the treaty because the Euros insist upon it. The Euros do the same, claiming the Americans insist upon it. They are lying.

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[ultranova]

Your sarcasm is noted, but what facts have you to support the point you appear to be trying to make? ...I see.

I dunno about the "half the people" part, but the part about secred deals being against public interest is simple logic: if the rumours were worse than the truth, the politician would simply leak the deal - it's in his best interests to look as good as possible, after all. Thus, as long as the deal remains unknown, we know for certain that the people who know it consider it worse than whatever speculation we engage in here.

That secret deals make a mockery of democracy is also worth considering. How can we hold our leaders accountable, if we don't know what they're up to?

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[L3370]

Please tell me this is a joke...

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[TapeCutter]

You seem to be suggesting that only "normal" political structure's will work to keep a society from degenerating into chaos.

No, I'm telling you that humans build hierarchical societies, ALL non-hierarchical societies that have been built in the past have failed miserably. There is fuck all your's or anyone else's ideology can do to change what millions of years of evolution have made us. No matter what type of society you want to build it will be subserviant to this ancient part of human nature so you best be careful not to set up the conditions that will awaken the default master-slave behaviour that is deeply rooted within us all. Once you do set up those conditions humans will rapidly turn to their default fudal warlord society and any social engineer will have a hell of a time dragging them back out of it. This is why the communist experiments of the 20th century rapidly devolved into totalitarian governments, they created a power vacum in society that was just begging for a demagogue to fill it.

the 1%, and their willing toadies

Splitting society into "us and them" is an autonomic reflex of the master-slave dichotomy within you, your non-pyhcopathic wetware bios insists that you dehumanise the enemy long before you can start killing them for fun and profit. This doesn't mean you're evil or that you want to kill people, it means you're a human, doing what humans do.

The one benifit I see from western democracy is that it has a tendency to turn real wars into a war of words, since, like religion, political ideology can bond disparate fudal tribes into the trully wonderous civilizations that surround us, problem is that humans (particulaly teenagers and young adults) have a hard time enjoying the fruits of civilization because the slave side of our wetware makes us believe we are insignificant and powerless (cough-monotheisim-cough) in such large tribes .

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[TapeCutter]

How can we hold our leaders accountable, if we don't know what they're up to?

What's wrong with the traditional method of taking their words with a grain of salt and holding them to account for their actions? Is this not the treatment you would expect for yourself?

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[TapeCutter]

Ok, to summarise my post, "We didn't start the fire".

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[Capsaicin]

the part about secred deals being against public interest is simple logic

Mate, if you consider that logic simple I suggest you seek professional help (and not from a logician)!

Let's challenge the assumption that the minister is concerned about "look[ing] as good as possible" in front of a largely unattentive voting public and is instead concerned about how good he looks in front of the interested (in both senses) parties with whom he is in direct negotiation. Will a leak prove beneficial?

You give the impression of someone who has no familiarity of what they are talking about. I'd hazard a guess that you've never been in a meeting with a minister of the crown. :)

Thus, as long as the deal remains unknown, we know for certain that the people who know it consider it worse than whatever speculation we engage in here.

I'd prefer to play the ball, but that my friend is diseased thinking. You are systematically sending yourself into cuckoo land if you persist with this reality defying "logic." As far as "whatever speculation we engage in here," maybe we just need to wait till Conroy reads your comment here on slashdot ...ya reckon it'll cause him to leak? I mean, if the truth isn't as bad as your paranoia.

Neatly proves GP's point though.

That secret deals make a mockery of democracy is also worth considering. How can we hold our leaders accountable, if we don't know what they're up to?

Now here you have a really good point! The problem is this:

It has been deemed in the public interest to have successful private commercial undertakings to provide Australians with goods and services, as well as employment. Consequently the concept of commercial confidence is also held to be in the public interest.

In the 1980s Australian governments (of both complexions) largely abandoned the use of Government Business Enterprises deciding that private commercial / government partnerships (which were ultimately to be completely privatised eg NBN) would better serve the interests of the nation. This naturally brought into conflict, even more than before, the public interest in commercial confidence and the public interest in transparency of government.

Life sometimes involves compromise between conflicting principles. Just how and where such compromised is to be reached remains a matter of opinion.

Re:It's an outrageous outrage

[cffrost]

Please tell me this is a joke...

Seem's like one.

Freedom of information

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay
So what happens when someone submits a freedom if information request?

Besides being charged$10k to have the foi request actioned ..... Stamp duty my ass

Hiding something means there's something to hide

[xenobyte]

Why do various governments and government institutions feel it's necessary to hide and keep secret these kinds of talks?

Just think - they have no issues talking about defense spending, health-care and so on in public, but when it comes to anti-piracy at all of a sudden has to be secret.

It's obvious that they're hiding things because they have to. They're doing things that violates both basic democratic rules and their mandate, maybe even taking bribes in the process. They gotta be stopped! - and fast!

People are mental

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you expect? a list of actions your government is willing to commit to and who was invited to a fancy party?

Politicians represent your interests, but only if there's no better alternative.

War

[Anonymous Coward]

The only documents a government can say it's not in the public interest to release are ones related to war strategies and defense of the country. This only confirms what everyone already suspected; governments will go to war with their own people if corporations ask for it.

Everything's there

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no other content... they just "redacted" it to make it appear that there was something substantial that's missing, when in fact they had nothing to begin with and just talk crap and everything is there and just want to be the net nanny capital of the world.

Re:Hiding something means there's something to hid

[Anonymous Coward]

I neither a lawyer, nor Australian, but it's surprising that it's possible to redact because something relates to the "deliberative or consultative processes of the government", or for a right-to-privacy is invoked by a public servant *conducting business in their capacity as a public servant*. How can their be accountability without information?

Here in the US, there was a flap about Vice President Cheney's secret "Energy Task Force" talks, involving the oil industry he has such close ties to. Not sure what happened with that. So I guess the redaction strategy worked that time.

So it's OK if you shoot them by accident?

[Anonymous Coward]

And, yes the redneck are responsible for INSISTING that Guns Be Holy and all that crap about "I needs to defend myself!" bollocks that ensures that people need guns in your society because everyone has guns in your society ("everyone" enough to make it a generalisation that is a reason to carry).

If those retards stopped worshipping their guns, you could remove 90% of the guns and there would be fewer deaths from guns.

Re:So it's OK if you shoot them by accident?

[FormOfActionBanana]

I think most Americans who own guns (I'd estimate 10%) have them for recreation, not defense.

Do you know anybody shot by an American gun enthusiast or redneck? If so, my sincere condolences.

Re:So it's OK if you shoot them by accident?

[sjames]

Believe it or not, many Americans never actually see a gun in person.If guns are banned, the missing gun violence will be quickly and completely replaced by knife violence.

Eventually, we could ban enough to get to board with nail violence, but the violence will remain and be just as bad as ever.

Re:So it's OK if you shoot them by accident?

[Anonymous Coward]

gun accidents happen so often in america they aren't even newsworthy any more. if you want to see rednecks shooting each other, your best best is youtube, and there are plenty, and yes, mostly americans.

Re:So it's OK if you shoot them by accident?

[Anonymous Coward]

rape is also a problem, and nothing will prevent it outright. i guess based on your argument we should stop trying to prevent rape too.

Re:So it's OK if you shoot them by accident?

[sjames]

Nice strawman there. We have little evidence that a prevented rape just becomes some other equally harmful crime.

If you want to launch a program to make people less likely to want to hurt and kill others, that might actually address the problem.

Pirates must be terrorists

[msobkow]

If they're redacting the information from the talks, they must think "pirates" are terrorists.

Because the only excuse that's even vaguely valid for redacting government information is "national security", and even that gets applied with too broad a brush in most nations.

The decision

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

As always, an important facet of any informed debate is comprehending all sides to a given issue. With that in mind, you can download the decision, as well as the rest of the documents, here (warning: 11.3Mb, pdf wrapped in rar). I'm assuming the following is the controversial bit:

Subsection 11A(5) of the Act provides that if a document is 'conditionally exempt' it still must be disclosed unless the decision maker is satisfied that, on balance, its disclosure would be contrary to the public interest. I have decided that disclosure of these documents, in absence of any solution or agreement, would be contrary to the public interest. My reasons for so concluding are, essentially, that the discussions that are taking place are at an early stage involving various industry representatives. The discussions, therefore, are at a very delicate, sensitive and important stage. Disclosure of documents while the negotiations are still in process, would, in my view, prejudice, hamper and impede those negotiations to an unacceptable degree. That would, in my view, be contrary to the interests of good government - which would, in turn, be contrary to the public interest.

(Copied manually and quickly, so don't take as gospel)

I see her point. As I'm sure we're all aware, there is a very vocal group of people who are against the idea of these talks occurring in the first place. The early stages of the talks could (and most probably do) contain aspects that are unreasonable and will not be present towards the resolution. These points could well be exploited by people who would like to see these talks not go ahead.

Think of it like couple counselling. The couple might start out angry and at each others throats, but that doesn't necessarily reflect how they feel about each other, and the compromises they're willing to make. If someone were to make the initial proceedings public, it would potentially send completely the wrong impression out to everyone. Anyone who is genuinely interested in the outcome of the counselling would prefer to hear about the latter stages.

Anyway, now you have the information, make up your own minds.

Re:The decision

[Anonymous Coward]

in fact in this case it spares the public the blatent door in the face techniques that will be happening here. eg usually copy right groups attempt to claim for far more outrageous terms eg 75 trillion dollars initially to make their later claims seem more reasonable even though they are still outrageous. in this case the public wont see the original super outrageous claims and thus when they see what they negotiate down for it will still seems as exactly outrageous as it actually is and thus still be motivated to rebel against it.

if this is in fact her intents then bravo.

The Bane of Democracy

[hemo_jr]

What does the Australian government fear? And informed public?

Re:The Bane of Democracy

[Anonymous Coward]

What does the Australian government fear? And informed public?

It sure doesn't fear people who can't write properly.

A lie said enough times

[microbox]

The liberal policy is to say "No" to everything that Labor does, this will lose them a lot of votes.

Seems to have worked pretty well for the Republicans. Congresses approval is around 10%, yet half the population still supports this now reactionary political philosophy. Who's to say that Abbott cannot make ground out of contrarian hatred. After-all, plenty of people hate the Labor and the Greens, and Abbot has a large media complex that will back him all the way. A lie said enough times... just saying.

Public interest

[Anonymous Coward]

It wouldn't be in the 'public interest' to release the information.

None of this is in the public interest.

What FOI laws?

[doccus]

Sounds to me like you have useless freedom of information laws down under.. I am pretty sure that it would require a threat to national security, or exposure of classified information, to get out the black marker, in America. Possibly the same here in Canada, and the UK, too.

Distributors are dying

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop downloading pirated movies and music and other content controlled by restrictive copyrights. In the end they are probably right... they own the work and they can restrict its usage as they see fit. So just stop it. You know it is wrong

Instead free yourself from the corporate advertising that puts the desire in your mind in the first place. If you were not constantly bombarded by advertising on TV and in print, you wouldnt even know it existed. So just ignore it, dont watch it.

Get yourself a TV capture card to record TV to your computer. Find yourself an auto commercial skip software to playback without all the brainwashing. Skip over the pages in the news paper and magazines called "entertainment section". This section is filled with made up titalating stories about sex, alcohol and drug abuse just to capture your eyes anyways.

There is a ton of free and open music and video already on the Internet which is now approaching the quality of commercial entertainment. These laws are not really designed to be protecting what is already controlled by distributors, but rather to squash the channels of free and cheap distribution. For example, the death of mega-upload killed off a lot of completely legal quality content.

If you keep seeking out copyright controlled content by the big distributors, you are just playing into the hands of those who want all entertainment to be filtered through the limited channels of these same distributors.

Reality is that distribution is dirt cheap. It is a $0 cost endevour now, because the brunt of the cost is paid for by you already. I mean you pay for your ISP connection and the bandwidth requirements for distribution... don't you? So what do we even need distributors for? The only advantage an artist has of using a distributor is for big dollar advertising and a legal team for fighting off all means of cheap distribution.

Conclusion: If you want free movies and music... then download free movies and music and stop stealing the commercial stuff. Because if you keep stealing the controlled content, then you will find the free channels will all disappear.

Privacy?

[PuZZleDucK]

“”it is firmly in the public interest to uphold the rights of individuals to their own privacy,” Purcell wrote.” Ha. So can we just have the IP address of the attendants?