What is Digg?382 Comments
- anks329, on 10/16/2008, -7/+232This sounds like the Great China Firewall
- phillipfry, on 10/16/2008, -3/+199Luckily our government will know what is right and wrong. Won't they? I am sure big business won't try to help them decide what is "illegal" either. Surely not, they wouldn't be evil like that, would they?
- inactive, on 10/17/2008, -1/+153WTF Mate?
- KaiserArny, on 10/16/2008, -0/+127Would they even ban Digg if the deemed some of the subjects 'iIlligal"? I can't believe a free country like Australia would give the mandate to a government agency to decide what is legal or illiegal. This is like declaring you guilty until proving otherwise.
- Spuy767, on 10/17/2008, -1/+121Great Firewall of China.
- jako91, on 10/16/2008, -0/+114This firewall sucks so much. we are going to end up like China
- inactive, on 10/16/2008, -3/+70Good thing that nothing like CGIProxy exists that would allow people to quickly install a simple SSL proxy on any website running SSL, otherwise all that money spent would be futile.
http://www.jmarshall.com/tools/cgiproxy/ - inactive, on 10/17/2008, -0/+62This is *****. I regret voting for Rudd, that smarmy bastard...
- TrellSaracen, on 10/17/2008, -11/+71This is NOT a surprise.
Prior to the 2007 election, it was ALREADY KNOWN that BOTH major parties had plans for a nationwide Internet filter. The difference was that the Liberal Party's plan would be opt-out, while the Labor Party's would NOT.
This was ALREADY KNOWN.
So thank you, to all those who let their vitriol towards "Rodent" Howard direct their votes to Fearless Leader KommRudd. Thank you.
You morons. - Krapulator, on 10/17/2008, -0/+58Stephen Conroy is a lying weasel and I intend to fight this!
Any Aussie who is angry about this should go and make donation to the EFA:
http://www.efa.org.au/ - eruin, on 10/16/2008, -0/+56Let's hope insane ideas like that spread no further.
- Devilboy666, on 10/17/2008, -2/+58The Great Barrier Firewall
or maybe The Krudd Filter - araza13, on 10/17/2008, -1/+54nope kangaroo porn will be filtered too.
- inactive, on 10/17/2008, -4/+55***** kangaroos...
- chrislewis, on 10/17/2008, -0/+50Another problem this article doesn't mention is that there is a 30% overhead on the best filter. This will not stop the proliferation of CP, people who are doing this are probably using a more secure means that this filter cannot stop.
Trying to stop children accessing inappropriate material? Supervise them. The government has already provided a filter for free to families - this blacklist is unnecessary. This blacklist is too slow-moving. Tubgirl will simply move to a different url. People leaching images will have them suddenly change to goatse.
A pointless waste of money, impacting everyone else. - dvsbastard, on 10/17/2008, -0/+49"Australians all let us rejoice, for we are young and free..."
Not anymore! :( - darthfluffy, on 10/17/2008, -0/+45That's scary...you expect it from China, but Australia?
- zspears, on 10/17/2008, -0/+44you sir have found the real reason for the firewall. its just the government grabbing back media control they lost to the interwebs sometime in the 1980s. this will spread around the globe. the internet is like Gutenberg's printing press, welcome to your first book burning.
- troc, on 10/16/2008, -0/+44victorian draconian
- halohunter, on 10/17/2008, -0/+42I've read all the reports from testing and there's a few key points not mentioned in the article:
1. All filtering products tested could not filter P2P, including bit-torrent. Some could block it however.
2. Only one tested product could filter email
3. The reports recognise that HTTP filtering can be easily circumvented through proxys
4. All products slowed down HTTP traffic by 20-90%
In the end, those who want illegal material will get it and the law abiding citizens will be censored and slowed down. Despite these reports. Conroy (dimwit) still decieded to go ahead. - fuzzlog, on 10/17/2008, -0/+41They can't do that. On the internet, we're one big global nation. ***** the rules!!!
- lopla, on 10/17/2008, -0/+40How the ***** did this happen? INSANE!!!
- wakeup82, on 10/17/2008, -3/+41Too many crimes of the government and New World Order have been exposed on the internet.
Time to shut down free speech. - Harrison88, on 10/16/2008, -6/+43Might decide to cancel plans to move to Oz when I'm older. All depends on how extreme the filtering is.
- mwalker52, on 10/17/2008, -0/+37I see a day soon when the internet will be a network of our own computers. Tech will be so cheap and mesh networks so advanced we won't need ISPs. Throw in a few private space companies willing to launch a few satellites and hopefully no more net neutrality issues.
- gobbleplex, on 10/17/2008, -1/+36I've said this before, but it bears repeating:
One of the great hopes that the West had for China was that in opening itself up and becoming more capitalistic that China's citizens would rise up and demand social freedom to match their economic freedom. Of course, that hasn't happened. Now that the 'leaders' in the governments of the west have seen that it's possible to both become more capitalist and yet also remain authoritarian, it will not be long before every last one of the Western 'democracies' travels down that same road. - Macskeeball, on 10/17/2008, -2/+3709 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
- Jeayese, on 10/17/2008, -0/+33This Idea fails in so many ways.
- jjmckay, on 10/17/2008, -2/+35I think politically sensitive information should be filtered too, now that they are going to control it so wisely. Its for the children! Responsibility is for those nut job (civil) libertarians.
- jimmyJMs, on 10/17/2008, -0/+33A friend of mine wrote a great open letter to Stephen Conroy: http://ben.hoskings.net/post/54941567/open-letter- ...
***** you Stephen Conroy! - Khast, on 10/17/2008, -0/+28[this comment was deemed illegal by the internet overlord please refrain from using such terms in the future...have a nice day]
- Vich, on 10/17/2008, -0/+27And I might decide to cancel my plans to stay in Oz. This is ridiculous.
My friend linked me to http://www.nocleanfeed.com/ and I thought it was a joke. - asskey, on 10/17/2008, -2/+29I may not agree with your taste in fetishes, but I will fight to the death for your right to get off!
- Vich, on 10/17/2008, -1/+26Well Kevin already speaks Mandarin...
- inactive, on 10/17/2008, -1/+25they should filter out The Wiggles...
- strictnein, on 10/17/2008, -3/+26Just finished watching Oz. I wouldn't move there either.
- akchrs, on 10/17/2008, -18/+40Sadly if Obama gets elected that may happen in the US too.
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Biden_dislikes_F ... - CamperBob, on 10/17/2008, -1/+23The fact that you don't understand why it's so important is also a little odd.
Hint: it's the principle. An Australian is a subject, not a citizen. - earthtoandy, on 10/17/2008, -0/+20Sneaks up on you doesn't.... censorship, spying on the public, totalitarianism...
Theres another country I heard about where this kinda thing could happen... where was that? - CaptainBryan, on 10/17/2008, -1/+20Really, noirhawk? You're cool with your Internet being censored?
- haikuFU, on 10/17/2008, -0/+19Why don't the pussy ISP's stage a mass revolt and refuse to implement them. They can't take down the internet for the whole country, too much business depends on it.
- kestrel7e7, on 10/17/2008, -0/+17rofl @ Krudd Filter
- tim000, on 10/17/2008, -0/+17This is the beginning of the end of "freedom" on the Internet.
Net Neutrality!!
This is no joke seriously disconcerting.
This is not about Australia sucking - this will be happening in every country. Slowly, but surely. We won't notice until it's too late if we don't wake up. This is absolute control of information. This is banning books from the library. Worse, maybe. Once we let the government tell us what we can't google - what's next?
How many laws do you disagree with? How many websites do you think you should not be able to visit?
This is bad. - wakeup82, on 10/17/2008, -0/+17Rudd's a smug douche.
- deedee316, on 10/17/2008, -0/+16Internet regulation here we come... the last free speech we have, gone.
- jazduck, on 10/17/2008, -1/+17What happens if a site, oh for example like digg, has some content illegal in Australia, as everything is user submitted it's quite easy for a user to submit an article on say, making an IED. Should we blacklist the whole of digg for that?
It's a damn slippery slope and I for one don't want religious nutjobs dictating what I can and can't look at, not that they can really as myself, and any other technically inclined people who don't like being treat like kids can just set up an encrypted proxy out of country and put all our web traffic through it.
Costly and stupid to implement and easy to bypass, and all because people can't take personal responsibility for their own crotch droppings. - Svenagen, on 10/17/2008, -0/+15Harden the ***** Up, Australia
- inactive, on 10/17/2008, -0/+15That's the worst part. All it is useful for is wasting money and slowing our already pitiful internet speeds down when we go through proxies.
- joshman5k, on 10/17/2008, -1/+16Because the biggest ISP is majority owned by the Government.
- inactive, on 10/17/2008, -0/+15Um, no.
I love my country, the government is just full of *****. -
Show 51 - 100 of 386 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