Rudd Filter: take 3
Elias Bizannes
http://eliasbizannes.com/blog/2009/12/why-im-angry/
I'm fairly confident this has to do with the fact it's an election
year, with the Rudd government thinking on calling an election now.
Great opportunity to get ahead with the Opposition is at it's knees,
and use this as a trigger for a double dissolution, due to those pesky
independent senators and the Greens who last year were against this
policy.
But politics aside, I've always said we need to make this policy a
political nightmare to be associated with. So much so that neither
party even has to guts to use this policy for politics again.
I remember a year ago, we all got into a flurry talking here and then
we took the conversation onto Twitter. Bronwen Clune made a protest
avatar which everyone copied and within weeks, we had the mainstream
media absolutely slam the government.
So let's do it again. Chris Redshaw suggested an SEO campaign, which
I think is a very effective way to get some public attention.
What do people think of SEO bombing some government websites? It will
generate attention, create embarrassment, and with the combined Aussie
tech community something very easy to do. :) Thoughts?
James Purser
#openinternet hashtag and #nocleanfeed (I prefer #openinternet, it's
more positive).
Are people willing to go on the public record (media wise) as being
opposed to this filter? If so, is silicon beach in a position to be
releasing PRs or anything like that?
What about the regional clusters such as ICT Illawarra? Do they want to
get involved?
--
James Purser
Collaborynth
http://collaborynth.com.au
Mob: +61 406 576 553
Skype: purserj1977
Twitter: http://twitter.com/purserj
Geoff McQueen - Hiive Systems
Would encourage everyone to take this up intelligently with their local MP and press them on the fact that this will do nothing to restrict access to RC content to people who want it, and even more dangerously, it will lull less technically-savvy parents into a false sense of security and meanwhile unsupervised kids will be even more at risk. This isn't just a bad idea and a waste of money: it is dangerous and completely ineffective to boot.
My $0.02.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach Australia mailing list.
Guidelines on discussion: http://tr.im/ujKF
No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself: http://tr.im/ujMm
To post to this group, send email to
silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
silicon-beach-aus...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en
James Purser
> I'm prepared to go on the record. My previous efforts and notes from taking the issue direct to our politicians: http://www.geoffmcqueen.com/2009/01/07/my-chat-about-nocleanfeed-with-sharon-bird-mp/
>
> Would encourage everyone to take this up intelligently with their local MP and press them on the fact that this will do nothing to restrict access to RC content to people who want it, and even more dangerously, it will lull less technically-savvy parents into a false sense of security and meanwhile unsupervised kids will be even more at risk. This isn't just a bad idea and a waste of money: it is dangerous and completely ineffective to boot.
>
> My $0.02.
at the end of this term and hasn't exactly been super helpful in the
past when it comes to this sort of thing.
Also this might be of use:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/16/dont-waste-your-time-waste-theirs-a-guide-to-writing-to-ministers/
Nick HaC
Chris Were
Craig Thomler
this article by Bernard Keane on how to improve the probability that
your view is taken on board.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/16/dont-waste-your-time-waste-theirs-a-guide-to-writing-to-ministers/
Cheers,
Craig
Bart Jellema
http://blog.bartjellema.com/2009/12/17/analysis-of-the-internet-censorship-a
nnouncement-what-does-it-really-mean/
-----Original Message-----
From: silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of James Purser
Silvia Pfeiffer
and report.
I think the "mandatory filtering" part is where it becomes a problem,
and the dodginess of the ACMA list.
If it could only be opt-in, then families can get what they ask for
(though: I'm a mother and still wouldn't want to filter).
It would also make a lot more sense to use the money for more police
action, to catch ppl who create such offensive content.
I do hope it doesn't come into action. :(
Regards,
Silvia.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:31 AM, Bart Jellema <bart.j...@tjoos.com> wrote:
> Ok, couldn't resist:
> http://blog.bartjellema.com/2009/12/17/analysis-of-the-internet-censorship-a
> nnouncement-what-does-it-really-mean/
>
> From: silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of James Purser
Michael Harries
-----Original Message-----
From: silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of James Purser
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach
Australia mailing list.
Guidelines on discussion: http://tr.im/ujKF
No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself: http://tr.im/ujMm
To post to this group, send email to
silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
silicon-beach-aus...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach Australia mailing list.
Guidelines on discussion: http://tr.im/ujKF
No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself: http://tr.im/ujMm
To post to this group, send email to
silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
silicon-beach-aus...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en
--
__
Michael Harries
Geoff McQueen - Hiive Systems
Sen Conroy has just had a his piece published today on The Punch at http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-truth-about-net-filtering/
There’s two pretty alarming bits to it. Firstly, the scope and ability for this filter to actually have a negative impact is worse than I initially feared: rather than a thousand or so URLs maintained by a handful of under-funded boffins and accidentally including the odd dentist, the list is now going to be a free for all based on public complaints. “Importantly, the RC Content list for ISP-filtering will be maintained through a public complaints mechanism. It will apply only to overseas-hosted material.”
While Conroy’s claim that it doesn’t slow down the internet – “Australia’s largest ISP, Telstra, undertook its own testing that showed the impact on internet performance would be less than one seventieth of the blink of an eye!” – this is still 5ms, presumably for every single http request that leaves the country. In case you’re not aware, this is a long time in internet terms.
Ash Angell
If there are people here who wish to be generals in this fight, deploy me where you wish! ;)
Ash
Silvia Pfeiffer
http://www.dbcde.gov.au/online_safety_and_security/cybersafety_plan/transparency_measures/consultation_paper
.
Silvia.
Dmitri
spot:
"America Online practices censorship on a large scale. ... It's
because they believe that practicing censorship is profitable. They
believe that it's what the majority of their customers want. Do you
think that's crazy? Think again. ... To a huge number of people out in
the real world, the Internet is a disgusting wasteland, full of rude,
cruel, nasty people, child pornographers, and photos of people having
sex with dogs. ...
Now, if there are people who truly want that, that's their
prerogative. ... I have no problem with that.
But what happens if the world changes, and AOL becomes even more
wildly successful than they already are? What happens if the
independent, non-censoring ISPs can no longer compete with the AOL
behemoth, and it turns out that the only practical way to connect to
the internet is through one of the large, international internet
corporations like AOL? ... what if to publish a document there, you
need to comply with their ``Terms of Service''?
Perhaps this is far-fetched. I hope so. ..." (from http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/aol.html)
Now, ten years later, is that still far-fetched? I wish it was.
On Dec 17, 10:09 am, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiff...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I think somebody has to make a serious and well argued submission onhttp://www.dbcde.gov.au/online_safety_and_security/cybersafety_plan/t...
> .
>
> Silvia.
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Ash Angell <angell...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I am happy to join the "Silicon Beach #NoCleanFeed Army" (does this make me
> > a freedom fighter).
>
> > If there are people here who wish to be generals in this fight, deploy me
> > where you wish! ;)
>
> > Ash
>
> > 2009/12/16 Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
Nathan de Vries
All Conroy and his ilk see in an article like that is an author who
has no problem with people who want access to bestiality content &
child pornography. This is why Labor gets away with describing the
anti-filtering crowd as people who "equate freedom of speech with
watching child pornography". Makes things much harder for people with
more tangible concerns about the plan.
Regards,
Nathan de Vries
Dmitri
Here is that common pattern again. Someone wants to achieve a goal.
They find an easy to sell and looking good cliche and use it to gain
our support, mind, money, etc. Huge number of people do not think much
and are deceived by the goodness of a proclaimed goal. When the real
goal is achieved it is often too late or impossible to roll things
back.
> > Perhaps this is far-fetched. I hope so. ..." (fromhttp://www.jwz.org/gruntle/aol.html)