GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Australia ISPs will have to filter porn .... (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=796024)

Damian_Maxcash 12-31-2007 11:31 AM

Australia ISPs will have to filter porn ....
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/7165987.stm

Quote:

Australia is planning tough new rules to protect children from online pornography and violence.

The new Labor government wants internet service providers to filter content to ensure households and schools do not receive "inappropriate" material.

Civil libertarians have condemned the plan as unnecessary, and say it will erode the freedom of the internet.

But telecommunications minister Stephen Conroy said more needed to be done to protect children.

Family-friendly

The Australian government's aim is to ensure that children only have access to family-friendly websites.

Service providers will be expected to stop the flow of pornography and other X-rated or violent content.

The government is set to compile a list of unsuitable sites, although at this stage it is unclear what will be deemed unsuitable.

Australians wanting unfettered access to the web will have to contact their supplier to opt out of the new regime.

Critics of the proposals have insisted they have no place in a liberal democracy, and have accused Canberra of being oppressive.

But Mr Conroy has been unmoved by their arguments.

The minister stressed that if people equated freedom of speech with watching child pornography then he would always disagree with them.

Concerns have also been raised that the government's filters could slow down access to the net, in a country where connection speeds are often below international standards.
Thats fucked up......

Curious wont be able to look at his own sites!! (JK He can opt out)

FredIsMe 12-31-2007 12:57 PM

Omg We Need To Protect Teh Children!!!!

notoldschool 12-31-2007 01:01 PM

"The minister stressed that if people equated freedom of speech with watching child pornography then he would always disagree with them."

Are they talking about filtering porn or just child porn. Is he is equating child porn with regular porn?

Socks 12-31-2007 01:47 PM

He is, and he did.

NewbieNudes 12-31-2007 01:53 PM

This is TOTALLY fucked.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...31/2129471.htm

Happy new year fellow aussies - we now join the ranks of china and the middle eastern block.

Here we were bitching about 2257!!!

:S

papill0n 12-31-2007 01:54 PM

OH SHITT!!!

what a way to hit 2008!

papill0n 12-31-2007 01:56 PM

Damian does the UK have something similar to this already in place?

Sarah_Jayne 12-31-2007 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RageCash-Ben (Post 13584120)
Damian does the UK have something similar to this already in place?

no it doesn't

borked 12-31-2007 02:32 PM

Quote:

The minister stressed that if people equated freedom of speech with watching child pornography then he would always disagree with them.
I'm lost here - I think this minister is using CP for his own cruisade and mixing words as he goes

L-Pink 12-31-2007 02:32 PM

It's all in the name of "children"

papill0n 12-31-2007 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarah_MaxCash (Post 13584279)
no it doesn't

Just curious because he says this....

Quote:

"The internet hasn't ground to a halt in the UK, it hasn't ground to a halt in Scandinavian countries and it's not grinding the internet to a halt in Europe.
To me that implies such a scheme already exists in parts of Europe.

rowan 12-31-2007 04:21 PM

There's already legislation for opt-in filtering that came in around the end of the 1990s, but it was so technically nonviable that it didn't seem to go anywhere.

Filtering is a fine balance between outraged parents and excessive collateral damage. A computer program is not a replacement for proper parental supervision.

It is still a difficult technical issue. This will fail just like the other law did, but it will still be yahoo'd about at every opportunity so that Australians think the govt is taking care of them.

NewbieNudes 12-31-2007 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowan (Post 13584584)
It is still a difficult technical issue. This will fail just like the other law did, but it will still be yahoo'd about at every opportunity so that Australians think the govt is taking care of them.

I think you might misunderstand. It isn't a technical issue to build a blacklist of sites and mandate the ISPs don't allow traffic on those domains. This is the type of thing they are suggesting, ISP level filtering! Not the client side software solution that was a complete joke.

This development is wrong on so many levels it is staggering! Where is our constitution embodying free speech when we need it!!

papill0n 12-31-2007 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewbieNudes (Post 13584655)
I think you might misunderstand. It isn't a technical issue to build a blacklist of sites and mandate the ISPs don't allow traffic on those domains. This is the type of thing they are suggesting, ISP level filtering! Not the client side software solution that was a complete joke.

This development is wrong on so many levels it is staggering! Where is our constitution embodying free speech when we need it!!

It sure seems like a ridiculous knee jerk reaction to me.

I thought howard was ultra conservative but this is just so over the top its embarrassing.

Barefootsies 12-31-2007 04:44 PM

ouch...
:Oh crap

NewbieNudes 12-31-2007 04:48 PM

This effects everyone with English speaking traffic, you will roughly lose 2-8% of your traffic (australian surfers - numbers guessed based on our traffic)

Some maybe lots more!

Steve Awesome 12-31-2007 04:49 PM

I'm sure the voters will eat it up.

NewbieNudes 12-31-2007 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Awesome (Post 13584683)
I'm sure the voters will eat it up.

The election is over. This is the new elected government announcing policy - not pre-election banter.

aico 12-31-2007 04:51 PM

yay! more responsibility taken away from the parents.

notoldschool 12-31-2007 04:53 PM

sucks to be australian. Im sure huckabee or romney will accomplish alot more in a short time.

Diligent 12-31-2007 05:00 PM

That's just retarded... but it's how politicians choose to tackle the issue - it's not like they've seen their "moral" voters be against such "solutions".
Seems rather typical of "better-than-thou"/"higher moral valuing" people to be clueless on how the internet works, and who's to blame...
like the internet is broadcasted/"push content" as opposed to "pull content", pff!

What's gotta happen is; both politicians and people need education around these matters, or all-&-ANY adult goes into a mandatory,web-coexisting, opt-in protocol
(like http://XXX.porn.com ).

The first method just isn't happening, we've all learnt that the past.. what, 5 years?
The second method... I think the industry really needs to both propose, back & push it! Or else we'll be stuck with stupid decisions like this worldwide soon.

tony286 12-31-2007 05:05 PM

This is only the start, the more tube sites showing full pornos to anyone with the click of a mouse. Plan on more and more countries doing this. Now to me I think instead of doing this they should make it law you got kids you have to have a filter on your system.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123