 |
 | 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| Re: Hmmmm. Maybe no. said by Noah Vail  :Lots of folks here know how rabidly anti-porn I am. Even so, I'd like this a lot better as an opt-in. Railroading people into healthy choices usually doesn't work out too well. If they stuck to blocking sites offering up illegal material, I'd have no problem with it. But blocking sites that some pol might not like is venturing in to an area similar to the "Great Firewall of China" - blocking material unliked(but legal) by the admin in power.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | |
| | | 
John Galt
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Oceanside, OR
edit:
November 30th, @06:02PM
| Re: Hmmmm. Maybe no. said by Noah Vail :Maybe if the ISP's unilaterally offered up their own filtering option, the government would back off. I am curious why you find this to be any more palatable.
--
A is A | |
|
| | | 
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| said by Noah Vail :I'm liking the idea of government blocking, less and less. In Australia, of all places. This doesn't fit my stereotype of the Australian people, at all. Maybe if the ISP's unilaterally offered up their own filtering option, the government would back off. NV You don't know enough about the Australian people
--
Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not true conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 | |
|
| | 
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, & Pr..
| said by TK Junk Mail :If they stuck to blocking sites offering up illegal material, I'd have no problem with it. But blocking sites that some pol might not like is venturing in to an area similar to the "Great Firewall of China" - blocking material unliked(but legal) by the admin in power. The same threat exists with blocking "illegal" material. Many things can be called illegal by some line or other of specious reasoning. Trusting a government to be objective and minimal about such a list is like trusting an elephant to not eat much.
On the other hand, if they want to offer opt-in-only block lists and describe them openly, people could make informed decisions for themselves about what, if anything to block.
--
goodbye dad | |
|
| |
| 
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| said by Noah Vail :Even so, I'd like this a lot better as an opt-in. If they are going to do this, agree. Although there seems to be no reason for the Australian government to be in the business of creating and updating filters on offensive or illegal material. It is a massive duplication of effort in light of the long list of currently available products that perform filtering of content. Instead of making an opt-in content block, the taxpayers of Australia would be better served if that government educated internet users of their options for filtering instead of getting into the content filtering business.
--
---
Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
| james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| said by Noah Vail :Railroading people into healthy choices usually doesn't work out too well. Who says pornography isn't healthy? I think it's more unhealthy for someone to be so uptight about the nude body, the stress shortens your life and your quality of life is very much reduced when you can't see such beautiful things.
I do agree that it wouldn't go over well if I were to force my idea of a "healthy choice" upon those who disagree with me though. | |
|
|
| |
| SHABAZZ
join:2008-07-13
Seattle, WA | See what happens when conservatives run the government. | |
|
| | 
bentman78
Bentley
join:2004-04-16
Arlington, VA
edit:
November 30th, @06:23PM
| Re: illegal? Nice generalization but untrue.
Conservatives aren't in power in Oz..
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_po···ustralia
A little research is good before you sound like a complete asshat.
--
'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.'
Thomas Jefferson
| |
|
| | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: illegal? I find it interesting that the "Liberal" party is the conservatives. | |
|
freedomless
@tn.gov
thumbs down from:
TK Junk Mail
| church and state As soon as this starts, church an state will hold hands and soon, only certain choosen religions will be searchable on the net, as well as what they deem suitable to people to view.. Which usualy means.. No nudity, science, free random thoughts, creativity that doesn't bring in revenue for the churches... This sounds like the Catholics back in the midevil times come to think about it... Hmmm...
Has Hitler evolved? | |
|
| 
jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ | Re: church and state Godwin's law has been invoked. This thread is done. | |
|
| | yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
·New York Connect
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: church and state said by jjoshua :Godwin's law has been invoked. This thread is done. Only true if you have never lived in a totalitarian state, or never felt, sixty years after WWII the divisions over personal culpability and gesamtschuldgefuehl.
Even in 2001, there was contoversy over a sculpture in Aachen, due to its use of the hackenkreuz. We still forbid symbols out of fear.
Sorry, Goodwin's law is nonsense, most of us who have lived through Romnanian dictatorship, or stasi in the DDR would prefer anything at all to the government having any say at all in personal morals.
When the economy is the central issue in peoples' lives, decisions are very different than when pesonal freedom may be lost in one unfiltered word.
Yazdzik | |
|
| |
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| said by jjoshua :Godwin's law has been invoked. This thread is done. Your invocation of Godwin's law is misapplied. The comparison made is a valid one. Godwin's law is not invoked at the mere mention of "Hitler" or comparison thereto if they have some relevance or validity.
My understanding is that the OP is pointing out that the filters being put in place are very Third Reich-like in the effort to control information and the free access to it. The authoritarian nature of what is being worked out in Australia with these filters and the comparison to past authoritarian practices is valid.
--
---
Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
|
Jaye
@arpdriveonline.com | Sounds like the Catholic Church today. They have a fugged up sense of what is right and what is wrong still. | |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Mission Viejo, CA
clubs:
| Information Wants to Be Free The only folks who favor filtering are clueless politicians and fascists who love to tell everyone else what they can and cannot do, but who, at every available opportunity, do it themselves. (see also Larry Craig, et al. for the endless list of American hypocrites.)
Leave the Internet alone and let people decide for themselves what information they do and do not want to be exposed to. | |
|
| Aozora
join:2008-11-28
·Comcast
edit:
November 30th, @04:00PM
| Re: Information Wants to Be Free said by major marco :The only folks who favor filtering are clueless politicians and fascists who love to tell everyone else what they can and cannot do, but who, at every available opportunity, do it themselves. (see also Larry Craig, et al. for the endless list of American hypocrites.) Leave the Internet alone and let people decide for themselves what information they do and do not want to be exposed to. I could not agree more. They need to stop their rampant "I am God" attitude. People should make their own damn choices on what they want to view. The fact that second list of NON-ILLEGAL things is OPT OUT instead of OPT IN just shows their damn desire to have control of what the people should watch. What is deemed illegal anyway? What they chose? Why would anyone trust a bunch of tyrant minded people their choices and freedom? I would certainly not. | |
|
seropith
Rou
Premium
join:2002-11-12
El Paso, TX
clubs:
edit:
November 30th, @10:48PM
| The onion router Hmmm... Tor sounds like it might gain some speed in AU. It is already used to bypass the Great Firewall of China. Now... the Great Firewall of Australia? ... | |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA |  Constitution
-Tzale | |
|
|
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Constitution said by Tzale :Thank God I live in a country with a Constitution that actually means something. Unfortunately the Constitution has done little as of late to prevent expansions and abuses of government power.
--
---
Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| Re: Constitution said by NetAdmin :said by Tzale :Thank God I live in a country with a Constitution that actually means something. Unfortunately the Constitution has done little as of late to prevent expansions and abuses of government power. quite true, the government would just enact a law and use Homeland Security or "For the Children" as an excuse and none of our lawmakers would vote no for fear of voting against something to "protect us from terrorists" or "protect the children from porn". and this would get it around many of our rights, just like the DMCA and Patriot act have done.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| |
| james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| Re: Constitution said by Tzale :Thank God I live in a country with a Constitution that actually means something. The funny thing is that for the past 6 years they've been saying the same thing in reference to the U.S.
The scary thing is that you're both right, neither constitution is worth the paper it's written on anymore, and people are too content to do anything about it (for now). | |
|
|
Bathroomvalet
@softlayer.com | Sorry, but the Constitution is now being used to "wipe the asses" of the "haves", as apposed to the "have-nots".
Rights? Don't make me laugh, again. | |
|
FastiBook
join:2003-01-08
Newtown, PA | No. Just no.
- A | |
|
ISurfTooMuch
join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL
| ISPs should refuse to adopt it Perhaps what ought to happen is for the ISPs to simply take out an ad and simply say, "We'll offer both of these filters on a strictly opt-in basis, but we refuse to force any of our users to use them. If the government disagrees, then let them sue us, and we will do everything in our power to publicly ridicule and embarrass the politicians involved." I'm curious to hear from anyone in Australia about whether they think, given this scenario, the politicians would back down or try to steamroll this through.
Perhaps a little civil disobedience would solve this entire thing. | |
|
Red Dragon
Imagine BBR in 20 years
join:2005-04-30
Scarsdale, NY | net slow downs 20-70% Is that in ping itmes or throughput. So then in that case is this is where the hocus-pocus "exaflood" comes from?
--
Money brings about more change then you could possibly imagine | |
|
|
|
blackdog66
@com.au
| Re: Opposition Grows To Australia Internet Filters Yes but you forget my friend Chairman Rudd thinks and believes that he has been elected by divine will, perhaps even as a God himself. He'll not back down because like all despots and dictators, he feels that he has the right to impose his will on his people. The only thing that we as a nation can do is oust this turkey before our gooses really cooked! As Australians, we are responsible for electing an inept and communist-ideal and aligned bunch of idiots, so now we as a nation have to do something about it. VOTE THEM OUT! | |
|
|
|
|
Opposition Grows To Australia Internet Filters
·
·
