Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Daily flights from Canberra
to Singapore and the world

The Thought Police – Internet Filtering

By PeterStyles 24 December 2009 63

Stephen Conroy

Now you may be thinking by the picture above that I’m not in support of the Internet filtering scheme.  Well I’m here to tell you that you’re entirely wrong.  I went out to the streets of Tuggeranong the other day and asked the question “What do you have against the idea of an internet filter?”  The response I received was overwhelming.  There were many relevant responses, which included such things as censorship and thought control.  All very good points, which I shall be getting to later in this article.

The one response that stood out to me was “I won’t be able to download songs from Limewire”.

Let me tell you something sport, Limewire can give you VIRUSES, and the sharing of copyrighted works is ILLEGAL.

What needs to be put into action when such places are blocked, is a system by which the user can download music, as much as they want.  A place like what.cd .  However, there should be a catch.  There should be forced DRM where the user can only keep the song for a period of up to 2 months, and after this time, it is up to the users discretion whether they want to buy the song or not.

This is a completely fair system, however the record companies are too blind to see this.  Perhaps the Australian government should pass a law in the senate that allows them to create such a website and only have it available to Australians.

Now for the fun part of the article, talking about censorship and thought control.  If the blocking of websites is to happen, there should be complete transparency in what is blocked.  The Australian government should create, and maintain a full list of websites that are blocked.  If a website is blocked, and it is not on the list, I can guarantee that there would a public outcry and media attacks.  The same would apply to a website that shouldn’t be blocked.  This could include a website about abortion, euthanasia, or gay marriage.

Another point that came up when I asked the question about Internet censorship was slow speeds.  This was relevant because compared to the rest of the world we already have slow Internet connections.  It doesn’t make sense to slow it down any further.  What the government needs to do before this filtering scheme exists is improve Internet speeds.  Once this is done, and the filter is in place, the price of an Internet connection needs to dramatically come down, and download limits abolished.

If all of these things are done, it will lead to a healthier country with happier Internet users.

Open Government – now I’d like to see that!

Peter Styles

21/12/09

ED – Canberra has the highest internet home access in the country according to the lastest ABS stats at 82%, 7% above the next highest state.
Although not a Canberra centric issue Riot hasn’t shied away for the discussion with numerous posts and comments about internet censorship. The case for stopping the clean feed and for more info on internet filtering can be found at No Clean Feed.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
63 Responses to
The Thought Police – Internet Filtering
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Postalgeek 11:08 pm 11 Jan 10

PeterStyles said :

We’re all entitled to our own opinion. That’s mine, but I’m not trying to force it down your throat, I was simply putting it out there.

Your opinion being in favour of a filtering system that will force the government’s position, and that of the lobbyists who endeavour to manipulate the government’s position, down our throats, or is that irony lost on you?

Don’t think you can piss in this pocket.

PeterStyles 10:17 pm 11 Jan 10

peterh said :

hi there. Been a while away, but someone mentioned this article to me and I thought, what the hey…

I believe that the inherent risk of the internet filter is that it is a censor making the decisions as to what should be banned and allowed. the sensibilities of some users will be challenged by some of the allowed material, and my attitude against some of the banned sites will be the same.

In order for internet filtering to work efficiently, the control needs to be put into the hands of the individual. Don’t clean the feed, educate the users to use a filter system effectively at their endpoint. don’t want the kids being visited by predators via chat? block the buggers at your end. Clean filters won’t catch rock spiders, it will actually make them harder to identify.

The old govt were talking about the deployment to australian households of internet protection software – i think it was netnanny, from memory. that solution is far cheaper than a content filter license per potential user – the government would need to identify each and every user in a household, a business and a cafe.

I agree with the idea to push more funding into the AHTCC, they do a great job, with limited resources.

PeterStyles, if it was such an accepted thing, why did we make international news with twitter and the #nocleanfeed posting? there were thousands of users who complained to a local member – Kate Lundy, almost instantaneously upon learning of the internet filter.

I am no doctor or lawyer, i didn’t complete college. I am not in your demographic, obviously.

They can pries my current internet connection out of my cold, dead hands. I am opposed to any form of refusal of freedom of choice. I am 38. I don’t need you or the govt telling me where i can or can’t go on the internet.

We’re all entitled to our own opinion. That’s mine, but I’m not trying to force it down your throat, I was simply putting it out there.

peterh 11:08 pm 05 Jan 10

hi there. Been a while away, but someone mentioned this article to me and I thought, what the hey…

I believe that the inherent risk of the internet filter is that it is a censor making the decisions as to what should be banned and allowed. the sensibilities of some users will be challenged by some of the allowed material, and my attitude against some of the banned sites will be the same.

In order for internet filtering to work efficiently, the control needs to be put into the hands of the individual. Don’t clean the feed, educate the users to use a filter system effectively at their endpoint. don’t want the kids being visited by predators via chat? block the buggers at your end. Clean filters won’t catch rock spiders, it will actually make them harder to identify.

The old govt were talking about the deployment to australian households of internet protection software – i think it was netnanny, from memory. that solution is far cheaper than a content filter license per potential user – the government would need to identify each and every user in a household, a business and a cafe.

I agree with the idea to push more funding into the AHTCC, they do a great job, with limited resources.

PeterStyles, if it was such an accepted thing, why did we make international news with twitter and the #nocleanfeed posting? there were thousands of users who complained to a local member – Kate Lundy, almost instantaneously upon learning of the internet filter.

I am no doctor or lawyer, i didn’t complete college. I am not in your demographic, obviously.

They can pries my current internet connection out of my cold, dead hands. I am opposed to any form of refusal of freedom of choice. I am 38. I don’t need you or the govt telling me where i can or can’t go on the internet.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site