Anyone who thought we might have cut a break when Gillard took control of the country - and Labor Party - against the Rudd Govt's plan to introduce a net filter needs to think again. Gillard has stated that she is happy with the policy, though acknowledges concerns over its implementation.
"I understand that there's a set of concerns," she said (via
ABC News). "Technical concerns about internet speed, and also concerns that this somehow [moves] into taking away legitimate use of the internet - it's not my intention that we in any way jeopardise legitimate use of the internet."
The government has faced strong opposition on the proposal, which would put Australia in line with stringent countries like China. Google, Yahoo and various other organisations have spoken directly to the government regarding their concerns, while an independent body, the
EFA (Electronic Frontiers Australia) are constantly going in to bat against the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Stephen Conroy, who is the proposal's evangelist.
I wonder if we'll at all see a change to the R18+ debate?
Posted 02:50pm 07/7/10
Posted 02:52pm 07/7/10
Posted 02:52pm 07/7/10
Posted 02:55pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:00pm 07/7/10
It's Labor.
Posted 03:01pm 07/7/10
If this filter is "forced" on us, who will be the first to have a crack at it? :) Be an interesting time thats for sure...
Posted 03:02pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:03pm 07/7/10
But of course I won't be voting for Labor so that's not really my concern.
Posted 03:04pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:05pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:06pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:08pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:12pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:15pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:18pm 07/7/10
They already had/have their own Government supported parental filter. I like their model much better then a Labor Governments.
Posted 03:21pm 07/7/10
Problem solved.
Posted 03:22pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:24pm 07/7/10
the next thing will be losing demerit points from ur licence for looking at "bad" sites
Posted 03:24pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:25pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:25pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:26pm 07/7/10
(no not that type of party)
Posted 03:27pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:28pm 07/7/10
And posts like that will get your PC cubed under a Neffo Government Australia.
Posted 03:29pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:31pm 07/7/10
"Here's a better idea, lets ban anyone under the age of 18 from using the internet."
Don't give anyone ideas! Next they'll refuse the internet classification, and sever all our connections!
At least if they do this their filter will be easier to configure.
Posted 03:33pm 07/7/10
Posted 03:44pm 07/7/10
Posted 04:02pm 07/7/10
and now Rangalard lacks the same credibility.
Posted 04:06pm 07/7/10
leave my nets alone ffs :|
Posted 04:24pm 07/7/10
Posted 04:34pm 07/7/10
Posted 02:20am 08/7/10
I'll just bypass the filter anyway, but I'll be damned if someone else will decide what I can and cannot look at on the internet.
Posted 02:48am 08/7/10
Posted 08:43am 08/7/10
and more generally, I would like to see a party with a policy of only giving ministries to people with knowledge in that field (at least for technical ministries).
Posted 10:43am 08/7/10
Posted 10:46am 08/7/10
Posted 10:46am 08/7/10
Yes, a lot of people charged with possessing, sending, or creating child porn are children.
Posted 10:51am 08/7/10
yer I know it will be easy to bypass, I had to do it in China when they blocked the use of Google when I was there. By "have a crack at it" I meant attack it.
Posted 10:59am 08/7/10
That's not the point. I shouldn't have to break the law to have full access to the internet.
Posted 11:01am 08/7/10
You make it sound like the internet so some sort of right.
P.S It's not.
Posted 11:03am 08/7/10
Isn't it? Maybe it should be :)
Didn't finland (or a similar country...) just pass legislation where every person has the right to have at least 1 mbps connection ?
Posted 11:04am 08/7/10
Posted 11:06am 08/7/10
exactly, and that's the right direction that people should be going in. by making it a right as a person to have a "decent" connection implies that they are also free to use it as they wish.
granted, i don't support child porn, but i think that's a very small fish in a big sea.
Posted 11:17am 08/7/10
GL with trying to make the filter work though, it will get attacked from sources that are not just local :)
Posted 11:20am 08/7/10
it's upsetting, really.
Posted 12:05pm 08/7/10
no none of this opt-out s*** then your moving all the power into their hands i don't trust the gov with that.
last edited by Corrupt at 12:05:02 08/Jul/10
Posted 12:06pm 08/7/10
Which Australian Media Magnate is a major contributor to both political parties?
Which Australian Media Magnate would be really happy if all News on the internet in Australia was only read from his sites?
Child Porn and other stuff isn't the issue, it is censorship of content that is the issue the Child Porn or Pedo labels are only there to scare Mr and Mrs dumb f*** middle class into wanting it for the safty of their 2.4 children because they are too f***en lazy to monitor their own children. So society get royally screwed again and freedom of expression is once again controlled.
The filter will allow the government to filter subversive material, problem is who and what is subversive and who will watch the watch dogs to make sure it used correctly. But these arguments are being stiffled by labeling those that ask the questions as pedophiles and wanting access to child porn. Lets put it clearly only China and North Korea have internet filters, and soon Australia.
Posted 12:10pm 08/7/10
Johnny made a client filter for everyone to download.
Posted 01:16pm 08/7/10
I don't want the government or a chosen body to decide what I can or cannot look at and I'm sure many other law abiding citizens don't either.
Pedophiles are disgusting, but our rights shouldn't be impacted because of some sick bastards or because moron parents don't monitor their children's internet activity and then go crying when something goes foul.
If a pedophile can't access media on the internet don't you think it might increase the likeliness of them acting upon their sick desires and abducting a child?
Posted 01:22pm 08/7/10
Posted 01:22pm 08/7/10
Wait.. i think that's what they want us to do..
Posted 01:22pm 08/7/10
Posted 01:26pm 08/7/10
I lol'd ...
monstrous humanoid aberrations with psionic powers - Conroy?
Posted 01:29pm 08/7/10
Thats funny cause you already do http://www.classification.gov.au/
Posted 01:32pm 08/7/10
If i want a game that wasn't allowed for release I buy it from overseas, same goes for any other media.
Posted 01:34pm 08/7/10
Posted 01:34pm 08/7/10
Posted 01:36pm 08/7/10
Posted 01:38pm 08/7/10
Posted 02:00pm 08/7/10
Posted 02:05pm 08/7/10
this concept intrigues me, tell me more!
in relation to earlier posts=-
They may not be able to stop you now... but once they put in the infrastructure for the filter, it's a slippery slope heading to controlling what and where we can go.
Posted 02:07pm 08/7/10
not if it's broken
Posted 08:21am 09/7/10
This is just trying to stop digital delivery of the content.
Posted 08:26am 09/7/10
Posted 08:32am 09/7/10
Posted 08:42am 09/7/10