No opt-out web filtering

[Garbage]

The black fella's managed Australia for several hundred generations,this white blip should come to an end.

[Yeti101]

Looks like the EROS association have formally joined the political fray over this issue: http://www.sexparty.org.au/

[Garbage]

Maybe i take a holiday and help needy Ozzies?

[Yeti101]

After weeks of dragging their feet, GetUp! has decided to launch a campaign on this issue: http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet/442

[WoodDragon]

Fetishes such as body piercing...

Erm, "body piercings" are getting toward RC? No clarification?

That's a handy clause for the Bro'...

So if I video my girlfriend wearing a short top whilst she's cremating the snags, and her navel piercing shows, and the morality police don't like the way I look, could I be hammered for using Flickr to show my mates what a great barbeque I had last weekend? Could they go that far if they wanted to crush some poor bugger's nuts?

If so... gawd, when did Iranian policing techniques wash up on our shores?

[WoodDragon]

And yeah, Codex Alimentarius is probably going to be a good excuse for the Bro and his corporate mates to try to push these filters on us, whether they work or not.

I'd love to see The Hollowmen do an episode on the whole issue of internet filtering. I reckon they'd need an hour just to use the top 10% of potential jokes...

Anyone know any of their writers or production team?

[Hex_OMEGA]

Don't know if I missed it or any thing but does any one have a "heads up" on a "set in stone" date that this will come into effect? Every where I look says 2008 but as we all know that is like only 5 weeks away!!

[Yeti101]

Don't know if I missed it or any thing but does any one have a "heads up" on a "set in stone" date that this will come into effect? Every where I look says 2008 but as we all know that is like only 5 weeks away!!

Trial starts on 10 January (rather than 24 December as promised). The trial will now also apparently include P2P filtering including BitTorrent ect. Implementation is claimed to be scheduled for November 2009.

[Teljkon]

adas

Edited December 19, 2021 by Teljkon

[MindExpansion]

Time to start downloading and sharing filter dodging programs pre-emptively.

Peace

Oh and just out of curiosity, would a protest be worth anything on this one?

Edited December 31, 2008 by MindExpansion

[Chiral]

Time to start downloading and sharing filter dodging programs pre-emptively.

Peace

Oh and just out of curiosity, would a protest be worth anything on this one?

Wouldn't they use anti terrorism laws to nail anyone who considers starting any kind of protest now...very clever the way have the ability to round up people under that anti terrorism guise..I mean even speaking here in public on this forum is enough to warrant them nailing people...correct me if I'm wrong but I would think a lot of the intelligence gathering is done by watching forums and chatting services to listen in and arrest peeps before they get it underway.

Probably speaking way out of my depth here but I don't think its even possible to protest anymore is it...the logistics of setting up a decent demo would be heard by the listeners constantly...

The land of the free...free to do what they tell us we can do.

nice.....real nice...

Rant over.

H.

[Garbage]

Porn DVD's by mail order from top shelf publications will take off,makes me wonder if a look into political party fundraising and cash for policy may be in order.

[Neoshaman]

Porn DVD's by mail order from top shelf publications will take off,makes me wonder if a look into political party fundraising and cash for policy may be in order.

Here's an idea who's actually with optus and iinet? I would advise you have a good look into the terms and conditions of your Broadband/wireless contracts with these carriers since they are the one involved in the trial. Now i would say there are arguable grounds to say a variation has occured in the company's term of service , now due to that variation they can no longer provide you with the service which you have contracted to, therefore they have an obligation to release you from your contract without penalty. Now i'm not one to make assumptions but I think if optus and iinet get a major influx of cancellations due to this trial , they will quickly re-consider trialling the net filtering.

This could be implemented against any ISP who decides to take the place of optus and iinet.

Just another thought I've heard only optus and iinet are involved in the trial , however considering Virgin Mobile and DoDO are both owned buy optus it will be a reasonable % of the market that are affected by the trials.

Edited January 5, 2009 by neoshaman

[MindExpansion]

iiNet actually amuse me with their statement about the filtering, I think you should all check it out cause its good for a laugh.

iiNet statement

Basically they say they are entering the trial ONLY so that when it fails, and they give reasons why they think it will, they can be part of the proof that it doesn't work.

Download this

Also, I think everyone should dl the above, it is another possible way to get around the filter when the time comes.

I am with iinet so I'll see how it goes, and let you all know. But i have the suspicion that the gov will be sly with this, the trial will likely only include a small chunk of what will be blocked in the final product, just so that they can say it worked and it was fine, and then they will turn up the sensitivity and start blocking more and more.

Peace

[Neoshaman]

I was thinking if you logged into a proxyserver not based in Oz would the filtering still work?

Optus is slightly more toolish with their responses do not kno0w about iinet but optus are doing it the smart way allowing customers to opt out of the trial and contacting them before they are effected , so that puts my last idea to rest with optus anyway , Although by doing this they effectively weed out people from the trial that are against net filtering , hence limiting negative feedback

may b e we should use the tool they are trying to take away in the form of a google bomb (creating blogs and links associating Kevin Rudd and Stephen Conroy with a certain phrase or term ) Its been done to that conservative wanker Bush by U.S citizens so its definitely possible, althoug it no longer works on google it works on most other search engines

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_bomb

http://www.optus.com.au/portal/site/abouto...00002cd780aRCRD

[MindExpansion]

Neoshaman, my suspicion is that proxy web sites will be considered 'inappropriate content' by the gov and will be blocked by the filter.

As such I think a software based proxy is necessary.

Peace

[kenny]

Well, I started with Bulletin Boards on my first 33.6kbps modem.. I have no problem going back down that path

Shall we all start trading phone numbers? Good luck to the Government censoring that!

[ayjay101]

Well, I started with Bulletin Boards on my first 33.6kbps modem.. I have no problem going back down that path

Shall we all start trading phone numbers? Good luck to the Government censoring that!

Hahahahaha, would be funny to see BBSs and telephone line modems back in the mix....

Seriously though, I suggest we download EVERYTHING that is precious and sensitive to us and keep offline copies. There used to be plenty of software around for downloading entire sites at a time. Erowid has whole site archives available as ISO downloads.....

[blog]

As mentioned a few posts above. In a worst case scenario , you'd have to pay about $15 extra a month for an overseas VPN. Then all your data is encrypted and routed through an overseas server. The downside is the extra cost, and surely the data will flow a lot slower. Example i'm on a 20mbit ADSL2+ connection, frequenly can download torrent files at 12mbit/s, if everything was routing through a VPN then my download speed would be dependant on the bandwidth of the overseas server, and any congestion on that route.

[JDanger]

Sartuday's top story on smh.com.au - Hey, Senator - leave us discerning viewers of pornography alone

[MindExpansion]

Cheers for the link JD, good to see it getting more attention, and good to see that at least in this case the media is on our side, FUCK mr conroy.

Peace

[Yeti101]

Yeah, good thing somebody's on our side, 'cause this thing just gets messier by the day. There have been reports that an anti-abortion site has been blacklisted by ACMA, only a day after Conroy said that political content would not be censored. That, and Jim Wallace of the Australian Christian Lobby has been in the SMH telling us that it will all be OK (largely in ignorance of the actual facts surrounding this issue, as usual).

FUCK mr conroy

Damn right!

[MindExpansion]

My friend told me today that the trial is in fact not for the public, that is, those ISP's that are participating will be filtering on a private level to test it out, so it is not even being tested in real world use, but in a controlled trial of a few selected and specifically set up consumer emulators. How ridiculous is this, what use is a trial when it is not under real world use?

And how the fuck has this shit gotten so far as it has already?

If it comes in, just a quick poll of who would participate in a protest against it? I for one most certainly would.

Peace

[JDanger]

^Yeah, I'd do it. Throw your computers at LE, we won't need 'em any more. Also, this whole thing can't possibly be helping the economy.

[MindExpansion]

My friend had the idea to try and draw some INTERNATIONAL attention to the issue, this is not the sort of thing places like America would support IMO, given their stance on freedom of speech. Here is an email I have just written to send to some international news providers such as the new york times, washington post and usatoday, along with some european papers:

Hi, I am a concerned resident living in Australia.

I am writing to you to make you aware of a situation in this country that should be worthy of international attention, but one which is not even receiving adequate national attention.

The Australian Government, under the direction of Senator Stephen Conroy (See his profile at: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/senators/home...ors.asp?id=3L6) are currently working on an internet filter that will restrict the access to information of every person in this country.

The Government is currently getting ready to trial the filter, but they will not be trialling it under real conditions, rather under controlled conditions. The filter is a two tiered system, the first filter is one that the public can choose to opt out of, and this blocks substance that is deemed by the Government to be inappropriate for children, the second tier will block all illegal content (including all X and R rated material under Australian law) as well as any material the Government deems to be 'inappropriate'. It is this latter which is most worrying, as the definition of 'inappropriate' is far too open to be used in the manner in which it has been used. This leaves what is banned entirely up to the government, without any grounds for blacklisting material other than the belief of one Government member that the material is 'inappropriate'.

Already there have been reports of an anti abortion site being blacklisted, this is one example of how the Government will be able to use the filter to serve their political agenda's. This second tier of the filter will be mandatory, and will be enacted at the level of the ISP so the consumer cannot choose to inactivate it.

More worrying still is that the public will not have access to the blacklist, nor will they be involved in the decision making process regarding what sites are to be filtered. This makes it further possible for the Government to use the filter to serve political or personal agenda's by preventing access to information that opposes any policies the Government wants to introduce or ammend, or that opposes any views individual politician's may hold, for example any religious views they may hold.

On another note, the Government's own investigation of this filter has shown that it may slow internet access by up to 70%, yet they are still proceeding with it. This highlights the hypocrisy of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who made the election promise of high quality, high speed internet access to the entire nation.

The effectiveness of the filter is also questionable, and it is believed that many people who are technically proficient will be able to find a way around the filter, with many possible solutions already to be found online. Thus the filter which has so far cost in excess of AU$44M, will likely not serve the major purpose the government is toting, being to 'protect the children'. This excuse for the introduction of the filter is a cheap attempt to prevent outcry by putting those that do protest at risk of being labelled as child abusers, pedophiles, or simply inhumane for not supporting something that would, according to the government, protect the children. How it would achieve this protection is, however, unknown to any logical thinker who gives the issue some thought, ,as I have mentioned, most technically proficient people will be able to dodge the filter, not that the filter really provides any means by which to reduce potential harm to children anyway. Also, there are already dozens of third party filtering programs available to parents, including a free package provided by the Howard Government, which can be installed on computers to filter the information that can be accessed online on that computer alone, and which can be configured with ease by concerned parents to block which information they see as 'inappropriate' for their child.

This is already an acceptable solution to 'protect the children', and the government could easily simply endorse and advertise the use of these programs by parents, rather than censoring access of information on a national level. Thus it is clear that their goal extends beyond 'protecting the children' and at this point you have to consider what their true motives are in introducing this censorship.

The simple fact of the matter is that this form of censorship is more in line with countries such as China than a country that supposedly represents freedom of speech such as Australia. Any form of censorship imposed on a nation's people without their consent or approval on an individual basis is plainly unacceptable, and censorship as is being implemented by the Government here demands outrage on an international level, because if Australia does it it is simply one case of precedent for other Western nations to use to justify any censorship of their own in the future.

My hope in writing this letter is to increase awareness and outrage on an international level, if an article could be written about this violation of freedom of speech, then my goal would be met, because thus far media coverage of this issue here in Australia has been woefully absent.

Thank you,

Wondering what all think of this idea? If you like it then I suggest you do the same thing. Not sure if it will achieve anything but hey, it only takes 10 mins to write an email, and it doesnt cost you anything, nothing to lose, lots to gain.

Edit: SHould I include a paragraph to mention the large numbers of people who have signed those online petitions floating around? Just to emphasise the point that this plan is far from supported by the public.

Peace

Edited January 27, 2009 by MindExpansion