Anti-Censorship protest

[Noblesse]

hmmm, for those who think you can bypass it....

Look how fast mini nova went down.....98% of content removed in one day....

Huh? They are completely different issues.

[GerrySly]

I concede defeat here.  I endorse a built-in censor for adult material which can be easily turned off, as well as a mandatory censor which blocks content which directly harms people.

I think you're right about that. A censor which is automatically enabled but you can disable it if need be. That or no censor at all, anything else and I'm renting an ovh box and running all traffic through that.

My thought is that with the "hacker" community going at it, I'm sure there will be circumventions popping up all over the place for it

[xXNovaxX]

hmmm, for those who think you can bypass it....

Look how fast mini nova went down.....98% of content removed in one day....

Huh? They are completely different issues.

Im saying don't fall for the trap that some how if you agree to the plan, you can stop it, bypass it etc etc.

Who would have thought the Courts could bring down illegal file sharing (they haven't broguht it down compltely, but mininova was one of the most popular torrent sites)

The company was successfully able to evade the law by moving its servers from one country to another, but in the end they got brought down.

I was replying to several claims in the articles posted on here (well links) who said "we can bypass it"

EDIT: the above post exemplifies what I mean.

[Noblesse]

hmmm, for those who think you can bypass it....

Look how fast mini nova went down.....98% of content removed in one day....

Huh? They are completely different issues.

Im saying don't fall for the trap that some how if you agree to the plan, you can stop it, bypass it etc etc.

Who would have thought the Courts could bring down illegal file sharing (they haven't broguht it down compltely, but mininova was one of the most popular torrent sites)

The company was successfully able to evade the law by moving its servers from one country to another, but in the end they got brought down.

I was replying to several claims in the articles posted on here (well links) who said "we can bypass it"

EDIT: the above post exemplifies what I mean.

A quick Google search found me numerous ways to bypass Australia's (in particular) internet filter. You underestimate the power of the internet (I know that sounds lame).

Mininova was brought down because it was eventually successfully sued, and told to remove all copyrighted content, they had a fair while to comply, and therefore, it only appeared to disappear in a day because that is when they when enforced to comply.

[xXNovaxX]

LOL, I don't really know the technicalities of all this ><

But mmm, figured as much (that the internet is more powerful than I realise)

[excal]

Why restrict the liberties of all of Australia because of the irresponsibility of a minority ("negligent" parents)?

I'm (ahahahaha JSM) a utilitarian; if it's for the greater good, so be it.  

At this stage, I think I'll just declare that I've shifted my position a bit; you guys are right in saying that there are some kinks in this filter which definitely need to be worked out a bit.  I don't endorse censoring all porn (there's your question answered, /0), but I think the people in general need to have some sort of filter which is a lot more "immediate".  Perhaps a pre-packaged internet filter which can be switched off (if you read the manual...) would be good, so long as there is a more active "shielding" of questionable content in general.

What is the 'greater good'? Who defines what the 'greater good' is? Who ensures that the watchers are watched? Who watches them? I've always had a problem with people using this term to justify things like this.

My take on it? It's why we have a democracy you know. Majority rules; it's how our society was designed to work. The 'greater good', therefore, is anything that is good for the majority of people. This certainly isn't.

I still don't like the term, though.

What about other institutions - scientific research, legal, medical? This would just create a whole lot of extra red tape.
What about those who want to do their own private research at home? Government should not control what I am interested in.

I concede defeat here.  I endorse a built-in censor for adult material which can be easily turned off, as well as a mandatory censor which blocks content which directly harms people.

What material 'harms' people? Looking at the list, apparently WikiLeaks can harm me. I probably won't be able to access sites that talk about anonymous browsing (e.g., Tor), as it might be used to bypass the filter even though the software is otherwise completely legal.

And it will probably all fall into the mandatory filter.

[EvangelionZeta]

My take on it? It's why we have a democracy you know. Majority rules; it's how our society was designed to work. The greater good, therefore, is anything that is good for the majority of people. This certainly isn't.

You're assuming that a democracy is automatically a good thing.  What suggests democracy is "how our society was designed to work"?

Second point, you haven't justified why "This certainly isn't".  Under what principle is the act of censorship bad?  If anything, you'd figure removing harmful content would...y'know...mean that society/the majority is safer.

What material 'harms' people?

Child porn leads to child abuse. 

What material 'harms' people? Looking at the list, apparently WikiLeaks can harm me. I probably won't be able to access sites that talk about anonymous browsing (e.g., Tor), as it might be used to bypass the filter even though the software is otherwise completely legal.

And it will probably all fall into the mandatory filter.

I've addressed this in my "shifted position"; I agreed earlier that we should have the list on public domain so that people (ie. not just one figure or whatever in the government) can argue for and against keeping things banned.  Ideally, stuff like "Wikileaks" won't be.

[excal]

I never said anything about a democracy being a good or bad thing. I'm merely stating that we live in that social construct that is democracy as it stands. What I'm trying to say is that the implementation of the filter does not benefit the majority (or is seen to have a benefit to society as a whole by the majority), thus it can't really be seen to be the 'greater good' in this context.

And the principle of why censorship bad has been repeated so many times that I sometimes wonder if these pro-filter people get the message. It's simple really - freedom is the core fundamental right of any person in a democratic society. Just take a look at China and North Korea. I wouldn't want to live in a kind of society where the government controls what I can and can't see.

And sure, child porn is something that ought to be restricted. However, as we've seen (and I'm talking pragmatically), the list is used for purposes other than simply child porn.

Based on that past precedent, it would be unwise to trust the Government with filtering choices. I would rather software-based filters being distributed to all Australian families - they can then choose what they want / do not want their children to see online.

[excal]

I quite like this quote:

"Parental responsibility cannot and should not be abrogated to government - if it is, our society will only become weaker ... Yes, illegal content should be banned from the web ... but it is wrong to give the government a blank cheque to determine what is appropriate for us to view on the internet." - Cory Bernardi

[xXNovaxX]

I quite like this quote:

"Parental responsibility cannot and should not be abrogated to government - if it is, our society will only become weaker ... Yes, illegal content should be banned from the web ... but it is wrong to give the government a blank cheque to determine what is appropriate for us to view on the internet." - Cory Bernardi

Exactly!! Perfect quote

Parents these days are icnreaisngly becoming the msot laziest, irresponsible, fat assed pieces of CRAP, I will not hold back in saying. They are becoming SCARED of their children, they LACK DISCPLINE, and let their children get away with so much rubbish (I saw a 9 year old smoking whilst waiting for a bus with his 7 year old sister.....has anybody watched "Super Nanny")

Lobbyists call for Govenrment to step in,  Govenrment JUMP at the Opportunity for MORE POWER, MORE CONTROL.

Our society is becoming weaker because parents are not LEARNING, they are having the Government "take over"

[xXNovaxX]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10418359-93.html

Coincedence I found this ><

It's about how "sex, porn and Jacko" top the most searched terms BY KIDS according to symantec

[ninwa]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10418359-93.html

Coincedence I found this ><

It's about how "sex, porn and Jacko" top the most searched terms BY KIDS according to symantec

sex showed up fourth on the list for boys and fifth for girls, following YouTube, Google, and Facebook as the three top terms.

[xXNovaxX]

Yeah, but thats really high up, like all the top 4 ones are WEBSITES, u would expect people to search them especially kids.

Porn is the FIRST PHRASE to be searched (not company). Thats what I tried to point out, and yes I did fall for the headline, until I read the article to see what you pointed out, stupid journalism =P

[kaanonball]

This was my issue for my oral presentation this year, i got an A+ for it =]

nevertheless if i want to watch fucked up fetish porn that is my choice and right as a citizen, i pay for the service [this doesn't mean i endorse cp in anyway]. It's like if i go to a hairdresser and they tell me i can only get a few selection of haircuts because other people think other styles are too offensive...

this is my 5 cents thank you for reading

[crappy]

Fuck the filter........its time to get my sword out.