Uproar In Australia Over Plan To Block Websites

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The Australian government has people up in arms over a proposed internet filter called the “Great Aussie Firewall” that promises to make Australia one of the strictest Internet regulators in the world. Australia? Really? I thought one of the things everyone loved about Australia is that everything is so laid back.

Consumers, civil-rights activists, engineers, Internet providers and politicians from opposition parties are among the critics of a mandatory Internet filter that would block at least 1,300 websites prohibited by the government — mostly child pornography, excessive violence, instructions in crime or drug use and advocacy of terrorism.
Click to expand...
 
I can see where the government is coming from... but seriously the internet needs to be a free communication tool...
 
While it is not a bad idea to block those sites, I can easily see this towards starting to block other sites in the future.
 
Hey, they are already cut off from the rest of APJ by language and geography. Why not go for the trifecta?
 
Once the mechanism is in place, does anyone not think there will be "mission creep"?

Down the slippery slope they go!
 
people are a wee bit looney in the land down under (yes I have a family there...and yes they are looney)
 
So true, it goes from being a good idea for the common sense of reason to someone deciding what's good for others and what's not.

xBanzai89 said:
While it is not a bad idea to block those sites, I can easily see this towards starting to block other sites in the future.
Click to expand...
 
Why not? Especially in cases of child pornography and "advocacy of terrorism."

What are the arguments to condone, let alone support such practices.
Usually these two areas imply harm to others. And that is untenable!
As far as the rest goes, as long as it only involves those willing, why should people interfere??
 
aShrubbery! said:
Why not? Especially in cases of child pornography and "advocacy of terrorism."

What are the arguments to condone, let alone support such practices.
Usually these two areas imply harm to others. And that is untenable!
As far as the rest goes, as long as it only involves those willing, why should people interfere??
Click to expand...

Some people still believe in free speech. Also history's taught us that politicians and governments can't be trusted with power. Governments are the #1 cause of unnatural deaths.

For those who believe in freedom, we don't want big brother and the thought police watching over and trying to control everything people think and say. The book 1984 was suppose to be a warning, not a suggestion guide.

Australia is starting to sound like China.
 
I am all for free speech. There is nothing wrong with free speech.

But freedom of speech should not be a vehicle for those who commit certain crimes to show off, or encourage such behavior. Nothing wrong with debating why anybody should feel a certain way, but there is no room for child molesters, terrorists to spread their vile acts.
There is nothing wrong to discuss even the most horrible topics, but there is something wrong to giving a voice to those who boast and brag about hateful acts. If they feel like talking about the weather, then by all means, let them do so.
 
xBanzai89 said:
While it is not a bad idea to block those sites, I can easily see this towards starting to block other sites in the future.
Click to expand...

Once they can block something they don't want you to see, they can block anything they don't want you to see. Free speech, not just for things you like.
 
The idea reeks of theocratic morality pandering... pretty soon they'll ban things like legal pornography, followed by news cites critical of the ruling parties, followed by literature, followed by music, followed by the news stories criticizing how their tanks are running over protesters in Aussie Square... oh wait.

On a 2nd note, and by no means do am I willing to go to bat for child pornography, but I can see certain things getting banned for being "child abuse" that would not be considered so by world cultures that dont practice our US-based Child Worship. What I had in mind is stuff on MySpace and YouTube thats posted usually by the same idiots, doing idiotic things that'd land them in jail. I think that as broader and broader definitions of child abuse are enacted by a government hellbent on pandering to the most paranoid and fearful, that we'll find ourselves with fewer and fewer liberties.

I dont like this slope because our western ideas of child innocence and child worship dont jive with reality of children really being a reflex of their societies and family... just as good, just as evil... and our worship of their innocence is a part of a bigger problem of giving them license to behave like they had no parents.

I'm seeing this in a different light than most probably, I'm imagining this idea was sold to the govt under the "protect our children" directive of the paranoid masses, and I'm personally afraid of where that goes. To give others perspective, in our culture (US), at which civil liberty would you stop if the Govt kept telling you that they needed to over-ride it in order to help them catch people like pedos? ... free speech? speedy trials? warrants? maranda rights? torture? privacy at work? privacy at home? privacy in your bedroom?

I'm not sure many know exactly where they would stop aiding the Govt if the Govt told them it helped them catch child abusers. But I'm pretty sure the Govt wouldn't give those liberties back, especialy not in the form they were before you let them take them away.

My 2 kopeks.
 
They 'forgot' to mention the most important issue. P2P filtering . Besides most of the uproar comes from people who knowingly supported the party during last election (filtering has been labour's agenda for years). So really they should just STFU and take it.
 
Thailand's list got leaked onto the net awhile ago. I'm not going to link it out of fear I missed something that actually was related to child pornography or something, but I looked it over and 99% of it are videos/articles criticizing King Adulyadej. I didn't see anything that would be considered illegal anywhere else.
 
aShrubbery! said:
Why not? Especially in cases of child pornography and "advocacy of terrorism."

What are the arguments to condone, let alone support such practices.
Usually these two areas imply harm to others. And that is untenable!
As far as the rest goes, as long as it only involves those willing, why should people interfere??
Click to expand...

Yeah, because up until now, both of these have been condoned and supported.. err.. wait.. oh yeah.
 
aShrubbery! said:
Why not? Especially in cases of child pornography and "advocacy of terrorism."

What are the arguments to condone, let alone support such practices.
Usually these two areas imply harm to others. And that is untenable!
As far as the rest goes, as long as it only involves those willing, why should people interfere??
Click to expand...

Knowledge is power. Do you think people shouldn't know Kung Fu, Ninjitsu or Muay Thai because they teach you how to kill people? The government doesn't want you to know how to defend yourself, it wants you stupid, it doesn't want you to know how to fight for anything, it wants you passive.
 
What a waste of time. The people that frequent these websites will find ways around the filter, making the benefit null. Even if there is no creep, and they don't block other sites, to effectively stop something like the distribution of child pornography would require blatant invasions of privacy to be effective.
 
coolxboxgamer said:
I can see where the government is coming from... but seriously the internet needs to be a free communication tool...
Click to expand...

The government is coming from the stupid view of a magical filter that will protect children from everything without bothering anything else. Something that will never happen and is a big waste of time and money and which will only lead to "mission creep", the exact same way Tasers are now used to taze the fuck out of people who stand still doing nothing, when they were put in place to ONLY be used when an officers would have otherwise used a gun to shoot and kill.

Things are put into place with specific "reasons" and "goals" and they end up being used for everything else.

In other words, don't say you see where they are coming from or else you better enjoy your radically censored internet 10 years from now.
 
aShrubbery! said:
Why not? Especially in cases of child pornography and "advocacy of terrorism."

What are the arguments to condone, let alone support such practices.
Usually these two areas imply harm to others. And that is untenable!
As far as the rest goes, as long as it only involves those willing, why should people interfere??
Click to expand...


define child porn in absolute terms.
my gf in hs (me 15 her 16) used to write me sex stories mit us and send nude pics. some countries you can be fuckin at age 12, auch married. you have to consider the fact that prehistory, people fucked asap, amap. necessary for survival.


or advocacy of terrorism.
is it direct advice? bomb making info? basic chemistry?
ideas? block all literature?
 
Martyr said:
define child porn in absolute terms.
my gf in hs (me 15 her 16) used to write me sex stories mit us and send nude pics. some countries you can be fuckin at age 12, auch married. you have to consider the fact that prehistory, people fucked asap, amap. necessary for survival.


or advocacy of terrorism.
is it direct advice? bomb making info? basic chemistry?
ideas? block all literature?
Click to expand...

yeah, really.. In the US the definition of child porn is so abstract that prosecution is erratic, when it manages to even go to trial, guilt and innocence wind up relying more on if the prosecution can prove the person is a pervert or not.. And if they do, even fully clothed of kids will be considered "child porn" just based on if the guy got off on it or not.. Now how could somebody create a filter based on that??
 
I am not advocating abuses of power or condoning them. I am not talking about consensual practices.
I am talking about acts that involve harm to others - and NO it does not include martial arts. In those cases it should be blocked at the root. Any rogue servers should be tracked and blocked. Period.

Unless of course some would like pedophiles and terrorist organizations to have their right "freedom of speech." It's one thing to be 15 and share nude pictures with a 16 year old gf and it's another to force an 2 - 17 or even older to sexual intercourse. Just like it's one thing to agree to prostituting oneself and to force someone to prostitute his/herself so some pimp can make money.
I don't have to tell you what you should think is repulsive. I think any sane mind can do it on its own. And dodging the issue by saying "Well, what if... " or "Certain laws already consider this and that repulsive..." just goes to expose the frailty of the freedoms many fear to lose. If those freedoms rest on such weak arguments , then you might as well just let it go, because you're just lying to yourselves.
It would take much more, and especially your passiveness to allow such things to happen. Only because a majority refuses to put their "frail" freedoms at risk to protect the "freedoms" of an oppressed minority. Who here has been sexually abused? Who here has been the victim of a terrorist attack? Who here has been a victim of a hate crime? The majority of us have never come close to such situations? Yet we're so scared to lose those freedoms we say we enjoy. How superficial these freedoms are if they could not withstand the attacks of a minor group of sanctimonious hypocrites out there.

Besides, I got news for you. Where was the outrage when the Bush administration decided it was legit to spy on their own for the sake of national security. The majority went silent and took the "I have nothing to hide" stance. And that issue involves more than just a right to freedom of speech. It goes at the core of freedom itself.
 
aShrubbery! said:
I am not advocating abuses of power or condoning them. I am not talking about consensual practices.
I am talking about acts that involve harm to others - and NO it does not include martial arts. In those cases it should be blocked at the root. Any rogue servers should be tracked and blocked. Period.

Unless of course some would like pedophiles and terrorist organizations to have their right "freedom of speech." It's one thing to be 15 and share nude pictures with a 16 year old gf and it's another to force an 2 - 17 or even older to sexual intercourse. Just like it's one thing to agree to prostituting oneself and to force someone to prostitute his/herself so some pimp can make money.
I don't have to tell you what you should think is repulsive. I think any sane mind can do it on its own. And dodging the issue by saying "Well, what if... " or "Certain laws already consider this and that repulsive..." just goes to expose the frailty of the freedoms many fear to lose. If those freedoms rest on such weak arguments , then you might as well just let it go, because you're just lying to yourselves.
It would take much more, and especially your passiveness to allow such things to happen. Only because a majority refuses to put their "frail" freedoms at risk to protect the "freedoms" of an oppressed minority. Who here has been sexually abused? Who here has been the victim of a terrorist attack? Who here has been a victim of a hate crime? The majority of us have never come close to such situations? Yet we're so scared to lose those freedoms we say we enjoy. How superficial these freedoms are if they could not withstand the attacks of a minor group of sanctimonious hypocrites out there.

Besides, I got news for you. Where was the outrage when the Bush administration decided it was legit to spy on their own for the sake of national security. The majority went silent and took the "I have nothing to hide" stance. And that issue involves more than just a right to freedom of speech. It goes at the core of freedom itself.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. You are already doing the exact same "mission creep" the government will do. You start on about child pornography then go on to talk about adult rape being included. Thank you for so beautifully proving my fucking point.

And there was plenty of outrage about all of Bush's bullshit and there still is. There are still lawsuits going on because of it and that is why Bush is trying to keep protection for all the telcos who violated the those rights.

On top of all of that, all this abuse stuff you are trying to block will not be blocked. It will continue on the same "black market" internet trading that is currently going on. The trading you and most everyone else have never even seen or know about. And the stuff you are trying to block, like normal porn, is still going to be seen. The same way I found my fathers Playboys and how other people's friends showed them their father's playboys, ITS STILL GOING TO HAPPEN. Either the kids will look for it and find it or be shown it my their friends.

What's even worse, is that you are using child pornography, which doesn't even appear on normal websites as an excuse to pass this all encompassing and overbearing, Government-controlled internet filter. If you really want that, it already exists in China :rolleyes:
 
You can bet your ass china filters alot more than just innapropriate material.


It always starts out as an honest program to do soemthing everyone believes is a good idea....then slowly turns into something more.
 
Kristofff said:
HAHAHA .... You start on about child pornography then go on to talk about adult rape being included. Thank you for so beautifully proving my fucking point...
Click to expand...

Allow ME to "HAHAHA!"
Are you trying to downplay rape???
Let us know when you or anyone close to you gets raped and the videos are on the net. (Highly unlikely but possible!) Maybe you'd like to share for the sake of "freedom of speech." Tell us then how amusing it is.
Rape is a serious crime and any filth bag propagating it on the net shouldn't just be tracked and blocked, but should be serving a sentence with same class sexual predators.
It would be interesting to know what their take on the matter if they are on the receiving end.
Read the whole post again... intently! If you can't focus on all of it at the same time, read the first sentence only.
Again, if your freedoms hinge on something so weak that you'd fear your own rights could be at risk, if they limited the <cough> freedom of speech<cough> - read spreading of scum material - of criminals then your own rights are just an illusion.
 
aShrubbery! said:
Allow ME to "HAHAHA!"
Are you trying to downplay rape???
Let us know when you or anyone close to you gets raped and the videos are on the net. (Highly unlikely but possible!) Maybe you'd like to share for the sake of "freedom of speech." Tell us then how amusing it is.
Rape is a serious crime and any filth bag propagating it on the net shouldn't just be tracked and blocked, but should be serving a sentence with same class sexual predators.
It would be interesting to know what their take on the matter if they are on the receiving end.
Read the whole post again... intently! If you can't focus on all of it at the same time, read the first sentence only.
Again, if your freedoms hinge on something so weak that you'd fear your own rights could be at risk, if they limited the <cough> freedom of speech<cough> - read spreading of scum material - of criminals then your own rights are just an illusion.
Click to expand...

So are we going to block all videos that record crime, or just the ones you don't like, Boss? How about news repostings that show footage of crimes taking place? I need to know for when we start adding onto our list once we have it in place.

Rape is a crime just like any other. You don't see me trying to outlaw fight videos just because I got the fuck beat out of me when I got jumped for no reason, do you? Crimes happen, so why does your crime get special treatment? I'm sure my pain was way worse than your rape ever was.

In hopes that I can convince you to stop being a brainwashed shill, heres a little quote from one of those guys who kinda founded this entire country...
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
Click to expand...
 
aShrubbery! said:
Allow ME to "HAHAHA!"
Are you trying to downplay rape???
Let us know when you or anyone close to you gets raped and the videos are on the net. (Highly unlikely but possible!) Maybe you'd like to share for the sake of "freedom of speech." Tell us then how amusing it is.
Rape is a serious crime and any filth bag propagating it on the net shouldn't just be tracked and blocked, but should be serving a sentence with same class sexual predators.
It would be interesting to know what their take on the matter if they are on the receiving end.
Read the whole post again... intently! If you can't focus on all of it at the same time, read the first sentence only.
Again, if your freedoms hinge on something so weak that you'd fear your own rights could be at risk, if they limited the <cough> freedom of speech<cough> - read spreading of scum material - of criminals then your own rights are just an illusion.
Click to expand...


so, ignore his point, and go of on a rant?


typical
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top