What is Digg?167 Comments
- yobboninja, on 10/28/2008, -1/+90I wish they would get the ***** message:
You won't win the next election if you keep this ***** up. - Burn, on 10/28/2008, -1/+83***** the FFP!
- inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+53***** CENSORSHIP
- muxaulo, on 10/28/2008, -0/+52The Australian government has also tried to gag web censor critics. Documents obtained by The Age newspaper show the office of the Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, tried to bully ISP staff into suppressing their criticisms of the plan; source: http://tinyurl.com/6kybnw%5D%5D
FTA, "Internet providers and the government's own tests have found that presently available filters are not capable of adequately distinguishing between legal and illegal content and can degrade internet speeds by up to 86 per cent."
This is on the back of Australia already having some of the slowest broadband speeds for a 'first-world' country. - aussiecarlos, on 10/28/2008, -0/+42The Family First Senator wants to ban anything over R18+. Does this mean that because Australia's politicians are so ***** clueless and backwards, because we don't have R18+ for video games, that content will also be blocked.
Everyone was fine and dandy with this net filter when it was first proposed that all it would block across the board was child porn and impose a "clean feed" for all households. The original plan meant you could opt out of the clean feed, now all this talk about what is illegal and inappropriate has blurred that line and that is what is getting most people pissed off.
The filter won't work, the tests have proven it. Conroy is a ***** idiot and Labor will be out at the next election. - Brododium, on 10/28/2008, -0/+40I've posted this in a couple of comment sections on this issue, most people who feel passionately about it will have done so already but to other Australians:
http://nocleanfeed.com/
Online Petition:
http://petitions.takingitglobal.org/oznetcensorshi ...
Donate to Electronic Frontiers Australia:
http://www.efa.org.au/support/donations/
Contact Minister Conroy:
(03) 9650 1188
Senator Stephen Conroy
Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
Level 4, 4 Treasury Place
Melbourne Vic 3002
(All information lifted from the first URL) - NixiePixel, on 10/28/2008, -1/+36Why in the world do "democratic" governments keep insisting on inserting themselves into the private lives of their supposedly free citizens?
- kestrel7e7, on 10/28/2008, -0/+35Family First 2007 election results:
House of Reps: 1.99% of the vote : 0 seats
Senate: 1.62% of the vote : 1 seat maintained
Can't believe these guys are pulling strings... - forthex, on 10/28/2008, -0/+33GOOOOOOD MORNING, CHINA!
- inactive, on 10/28/2008, -3/+32What the ***** is wrong with people?
No, SERIOUSLY, what the ***** man?! - darkstar949, on 10/28/2008, -0/+25I wonder if anyone out there is considering the privacy implications of having a government organization having access to a list of everyone that opts out of the family friendly feed? Can you imagine what would happen if it was branded as a "pervert list" and then some how certain names were "leaked" out into the public. This seems like multiple ways to control people by restricting their access to information for the sake of being family friendly and then having a social stigma (real or imagined) attached to requesting the non-family friendly feed.
- passedoutghost, on 10/28/2008, -0/+24This is ***** stupid. I'm an adult and it's legal for us to watch and possess R18+ content, and yet R18+ content is going to be blocked?! WTF is this crap?
- Togusa09, on 10/28/2008, -0/+21Course they will.
And for anyone in Aus who does try to contact their local mp, some do answer email, however mine just got a 6 month old press statement back from Conroy. So make sure you include explanation and mention how much a failure the test was... - freefallgrue, on 10/28/2008, -1/+20I've said it before, I'll say it again:
Religion ***** over people in every possible way, even the people smart enough to not partake in it directly. - inactive, on 10/28/2008, -1/+20If 4chan goes down, Anon will not forgive.
There will be shenanigans... - duggtodeath, on 10/28/2008, -2/+21As an Australian, I am outraged. Lemme call the Prime Minister..HEY, PETE!
- Stormwern, on 10/28/2008, -0/+19Insane, how on earth did they think filtering the internet would be doable. They should try a realistic project like sorting all muesli or cattle-branding ants.
- aussieNickuss, on 10/28/2008, -0/+18For non-Aussie diggers....Family First Party (FFP) are THE Ultra-Conservative Religious party in Australia.
- iticu, on 10/28/2008, -0/+17"News just in; the internet police have detained multiple teenagers in a conspiracy to watch porn. More news at 11."
- inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+16They'll eventually be blocked in Australia anyways
- FreddieD, on 10/28/2008, -0/+16Australia's internet policies are a prime example of how we DON'T want our internet to become: only pay as you go plan, unremovable filtering and soon to be tiered plans.
I feel bad for you Aussies. At least you guys kick ass in cricket. - bonjourmr, on 10/28/2008, -0/+16This is ***** insane. As an Aussie avid internet user, I think this is absolutely terrible.
Conroy is either ***** insane and way past his time, or someone is pulling his strings.
I would like to see Rudd's take on this. I know Howard put the plan into action and this government "is just going with it" but really, no excuses anymore...they are going to lose a tonne of votes and maybe even Australian citizens. - brickbat, on 10/28/2008, -0/+15I'll bet "illegal" will mean bittorrent trackers too.
- crackah, on 10/28/2008, -0/+15Last election I actually worked at a election booth where he was for a hour or two.
Quite interesting, I asked him on internet filtering and he just glared at me and said "there are alot of bad things on the net"
Didnt want to talk about it anymore. - CrazyChair, on 10/28/2008, -0/+14They largely campaigned and were successful with the youth vote last election too. They can kiss their support goodbye for the next couple elections if they pull this kind of stunt.
Are they intentionally trying to put a Liberal party leader in office longer than Howard? Trying to see if they can beat the record? - inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+13He probably poked a girl he liked over Facebook and they didn't respond.
- inactive, on 10/28/2008, -1/+14If the American election is any indicator, this won't matter. Joe Biden has a very similar stance on this topic, but I haven't heard it mentioned once. Biden wants to make downloading a pirated game a felony. He asked Congress to spend $1 billion to monitor peer-to-peer activity. (In fairness, much of this is to prevent child pornography, but the tactic is apparently a little blunt.)
• Two Biden bills have been explicitly anti-encryption, because you know, encryption makes it hard for the FBI to read people's e-mails.
• He has expressed support for internet taxes and internet filtering in schools and libraries.
• The RIAA seems to be one of his best buddies: Biden sponsored a bill that would restrict recording of songs from satellite and net radio, and another one that would make it a felony to "trick" a computer into playing back unauthorized songs or running bootlegged videogames. That latter one died when Verizon, Microsoft, Apple, eBay and Yahoo all argued against it.
• Biden was one of just four senators invited to attend a celebration of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act hosted by the MPAA's Jack Valenti and the RIAA's Hillary Rosen, two of American file-sharer's most wanted.
• When he was asked in 2006 about proposing net-neutrality laws, he said there was no need, since any bit-filtering violations would provoke such a huge public ruckus they'd have to hold congressional hearings anyway—and they'd be standing-room only.
If you ask him about any of these things you are told "this is not what the American people care about. The only thing we are going to talk about is the economy. By the way, did you hear how much Palin's wardrobe costs?"
If you think this will be an issue in Australia, then you're going to have to make it one.
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Biden_dislikes_F ... - passedoutghost, on 10/28/2008, -1/+13The PM's called "Kevo", not "Pete."
- inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+11Forget about winning and losing elections etc, this would lead to open rebellion, I'm ready.
- keithloughnane, on 10/28/2008, -0/+10You can be sure the control freaks in other governments are eagerly watching this to see what happens. This is coming to a nation near you, be ready.
- inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+10http://petitions.takingitglobal.org/oznetcensorshi ... *
You left off the p. - CrazyChair, on 10/28/2008, -0/+10Great interview with Mark Newton (with audio) below, outlining the recent controversy :
http://www.networkperformancedaily.com/2008/10/int ... - MariusAgricola, on 10/28/2008, -0/+9At what point does an ISP just throw up its hands and quit the game? If the Australian government wants to impose filters, then it should be the one operating the network. At least then the incompetence of it is understandable (it's the government, after all). But forcing ISPs to do the dirty work is just insane.
And anyway it's doomed to failure. - inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+9God dam family first.
I didn't vote for you so gtfo! - cambo125, on 10/28/2008, -0/+9In TOR we trust.
- bobsbones, on 10/28/2008, -2/+11But they don't need to. Once the infrastructure is in place, it doesn't really benefit either party to remove it as it allows them greater control of the population.
Oh, and for all the r-tards who voted for Rudd because of his promises of 'better internet': Nice going douches, you should have seen this coming a mile off. - Loserbait, on 10/28/2008, -0/+8A couple of things:
- Not all "Australians" are part British and/or descended from criminals. Multiculturalism, etc.
- Proximity to Japan? The distance from Darwin (north of Australia) to Japan is ~3375 miles. The distance between Hawaii and Japan is ~3580 miles. You Americans are not too far off from "nutball japan (sic)."
On topic: ***** the Family First party. We do not live in repressed China. It's bad enough that our Net is the worst for the "modern country", being beaten by New Zealand, but now they want to introduce mandatory filtering... Idiots.
If this bill passes, you bet your arse/ass that there will be protests. - redwolf, on 10/28/2008, -1/+9So far they refuse to even mention exactly what they mean by "illegal". Bittorrent trackers are likely a given, but of more concern are sites are protest the government or offer alternative views to the party line.
Loons like the Family First party, a front for the Hillsong cult, want to make everything but their own tiny world view illegal. - freefallgrue, on 10/28/2008, -1/+9If I wanted to live in a police-run nanny state where there's no free speech, privacy, or personal responsibility… I'd move to England.
- dirtridr, on 10/28/2008, -1/+8One word: proxy
This would NOT be happening in the states. - squaat, on 10/28/2008, -0/+7Didn't the liberal government try this in the early 2000's. Wasn't it largely a failure? From memory the proposed idea was a stop word list, which even blocked one of the senior party members online store because he sold whips! LOL oh the irony.
I don't live on Oz anymore, but from what I remember the Family First party is mostly seen as a joke.
And as an Australian in the Software industry, who left Australia for Nth America I can say that Australian internet access is way behind the times, moves like this only serve to put Australia further behind the times, in both the technological and censorship terms. What a bunch of prudes. Get with it Australia, you are embarrassing your ex-pats - Meesher, on 10/28/2008, -0/+7One of the most effective ways for a government to maintain and increase its power is to control the flow of information to the masses. We want to believe that only the dictatorships and the theocracies do this sort of thing, but the fact is all governments desire power and control over its people. Even supposedly democratic ones. The child porn angle is a convenient means of testing the process of furthering this control. Who dares oppose it, for fear of being labeled a pedo sympathizer? And if it works, the means is put in place for the government to limit dissemination of any information that it does not approve of.
We deserve what we get if we allow them to get way with it. - inactive, on 10/28/2008, -1/+8Online petitions are useless.
- jaxter2010, on 06/17/2009, -0/+7This is why there should be legislation for the .xxx/.cum tld's, because if the sites were easily blockable by parents, then these nutjobs wouldn't have a leg to stand on to push through this agenda.
- Canumbler, on 10/28/2008, -0/+6And they represent no one. A statement that seems ridiculous but is true.
FF Didn't garner enough first preference votes to get a goddamn seat on a local council, let alone one in the senate. It comes down to some unfortunate political maneuvering by the major parties with their preferences that I would humbly estimate they sincerely regret. As now they have to deal with this goddamn wingnut. - inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+6Weird, I don't remember the GOP Exclusively Responsible for Web Content Control Act.
- crackah, on 10/28/2008, -2/+8Its actually the leftie Labour government who is incharge of it. Wrong!
- inactive, on 10/28/2008, -1/+7or "Ruddy" or "The Ruddinator"
- futuremonkey, on 10/28/2008, -2/+7President Palin's Internet Decency Act of 2014 was unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court today. In the opinion written by Joe the Justice, "The Constitution talks all faggy and *****. Screw this, I'm going to go watch 'Ow My Balls!'"
- sfacets, on 10/28/2008, -0/+5Are there any marches/manifestations/riots planned? Many if not most Australians aren't even aware of this Firewall business.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 169 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is