Posted by: dv8 [x] - (24.74.249.---)
Date: October 30, 2008 02:53AM
could plus613 be going away soon?

The Australian government is set to impose Chinese-style Internet censorship by enforcing a universal national filter that will block websites deemed “controversial,” as part of a wider agenda to regulate the Internet according to free speech advocates.

A provision whereby Internet users could opt out of the filter by contacting their ISP has been stripped from the legislation, meaning the filter will be universal and mandatory.

The System Administrators Guild of Australia and Electronic Frontiers Australia have attacked the proposal, saying it will restrict web access, raise prices and slow internet traffic speeds.

The plan was first created as a way to combat child pornography and adult content, but could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia,” reports the Australian Herald Sun.

Communications minister Stephen Conroy revealed the mandatory censorship to the Senate estimates committee as the Global Network Initiative, bringing together leading companies, human rights organisations, academics and investors, committed the technology firms to “protect the freedom of expression and privacy rights of their users”. (Complete black is white, up is down, double talk).

Human Rights Watch has condemned internet censorship, and argued to the US Senate “there is a real danger of a Virtual Curtain dividing the internet, much as the Iron Curtain did during the Cold War, because some governments fear the potential of the internet, (and) want to control it.”

Speaking from personal experience, not only are “controversial” websites blocked in China, meaning any website that is critical of the state, but every website the user attempts to visit first has to pass through the “great firewall,” causing the browser to hang and delay while it is checked against a government blacklist.

This causes excruciating delays, and the user experience is akin to being on a bad dial-up connection in the mid 1990’s. Even in the center of Shanghai with a fixed ethernet connection, the user experience is barely tolerable.

Not only are websites in China blocked, but e mails too are scanned for “controversial” words and blocked from being sent if they contain phrases related to politics or obscenities.

Googling for information on certain topics is also heavily restricted. While in China I tried to google “Bush Taiwan,” which resulted in ceasing to be accessible and my Internet connection was immediately terminated thereafter

The Australian government will no doubt insist that their filter is in our best interests and is only designed to block child pornography, snuff films and other horrors, yet the system is completely pointless because it will not affect file sharing networks, which is the medium through which the vast majority of such material is distributed.

If we allow Australia to become the first “free” nation to impose Internet censorship, the snowball effect will only accelerate - the U.S. and the UK are next.

Indeed, Prime Minister Tony Blair called for Internet censorship last year.

In April 2007, Time magazine reported that researchers funded by the federal government want to shut down the internet and start over, citing the fact that at the moment there are loopholes in the system whereby users cannot be tracked and traced all the time. The projects echo moves we have previously reported on to clamp down on internet neutrality and even to designate a new form of the internet known as Internet 2.

Moves to regulate the web have increased over the last two years.

- In a display of bi-partisanship, there have been calls for all out mandatory ISP snooping on all US citizens by both Democrats and Republicans alike.

- In December 2006, Republican Senator John McCain tabled a proposal to introduce legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned.

- During an appearance with his wife Barbara on Fox News in November 2006, George Bush senior slammed Internet bloggers for creating an “adversarial and ugly climate.”

- The White House’s own de-classified strategy for “winning the war on terror” targets Internet conspiracy theories as a recruiting ground for terrorists and threatens to “diminish” their influence.

- The Pentagon has also announced its effort to infiltrate the Internet and propagandize for the war on terror.

- In an October 2006 speech, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a “terror training camp,” through which “disaffected people living in the United States” are developing “radical ideologies and potentially violent skills.” His solution is “intelligence fusion centers,” staffed by Homeland Security personnel which will are already in operation.

- The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress. Criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year could be the punishment for non-compliance.

- A landmark November 2006 legal case on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America and other global trade organizations sought to criminalize all Internet file sharing of any kind as copyright infringement, effectively shutting down the world wide web - and their argument was supported by the U.S. government.

- A landmark legal ruling in Sydney goes further than ever before in setting the trap door for the destruction of the Internet as we know it and the end of alternative news websites and blogs by creating the precedent that simply linking to other websites is breach of copyright and piracy.

- The European Union, led by former Stalinist John Reid, has also vowed to shut down “terrorists” who use the Internet to spread propaganda.

- The EU data retention bill, passed after much controversy and implemented in 2007, obliges telephone operators and internet service providers to store information on who called who and who emailed who for at least six months. Under this law, investigators in any EU country, and most bizarrely even in the US, can access EU citizens’ data on phone calls, sms’, emails and instant messaging services.

- The EU also proposed legislation that would prevent users from uploading any form of video without a license.

- The US government is also funding research into social networking sites and how to gather and store personal data published on them, according to the New Scientist magazine. “At the same time, US lawmakers are attempting to force the social networking sites themselves to control the amount and kind of information that people, particularly children, can put on the sites.”

Governments are furious that their ceaseless lies are being exposed in real time on the World Wide Web and have resolved to stifle, regulate and control what truly is the last outpost of real free speech in the world. Internet censorship is perhaps the most pertinent issue that freedom advocates should rally to combat over the course of the next few years, lest we allow a cyber-gag to be placed over our mouths and say goodbye to our last medium of free and open communication.
Posted by: GAK67 [x] - (124.157.91.---)
Date: October 30, 2008 03:44AM
Nearly everything you said is happening there dv8 concerns me, although you have to remember most of these statements are 'proposals' or 'research'. I also believe there is a lot of scremongering going on over these sorts of regulations and your comments fit into that category.

The one that doesn't concern me is this one:

- The EU data retention bill, passed after much controversy and implemented in 2007, obliges telephone operators and internet service providers to store information on who called who and who emailed who for at least six months. Under this law, investigators in any EU country, and most bizarrely even in the US, can access EU citizens’ data on phone calls, sms’, emails and instant messaging services.

Given the illegal activity that goes on online (child porn, terrorist groups) I think it is good that there is a means of gathering evidence to convict these lowlife scum.
Posted by: pulse [x] - (Moderator)
Date: October 30, 2008 05:41AM
We don't host anything in Australia, however there's a significant risk that if the "family first" whack job senators get their way, porn613 will likely be blocked to Australians.. which would be pretty wacky.

But no, we're not going anywhere, worst that'd happen is we have to move hosting countries.. which would be expensive, but not beyond the realm of possibility.

I do, however, fundamentally disagree with the government's approach. And they've tried it before, nearly 10 years ago now. It failed then, and I expect it to fail now.
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (Moderator)
Date: October 30, 2008 09:36AM
*cough* [] scares me alot more.
Posted by: ORLANDO399 [x] - (Moderator)
Date: October 30, 2008 09:34PM
If the fuckin commie gets elected we will be next!disappointed smiley
Posted by: pulse [x] - (Moderator)
Date: October 30, 2008 09:41PM
That's what I always think is funny about Americans .. you actually think you have a choice and that both candidates aren't exactly the same smiling smiley
Posted by: Mrkim [x] - (69.152.15.---)
Date: October 31, 2008 02:15AM
I think dv8 has the right idea. The censors will always utilize whatever platform/idea serves their purposes best in trying to gather fear mongered followers to go along with their censorish leashes on free speech. Child porn, terroristic activities, and whatever else they utilize to further the basic agenda which really is to disallow folks to have a forum like the net to be able to espouse their thoughts are "sure fire winners" as aligning oneself against such censorship only exemplifies you as "one of THEM"!

Though some societies and governments are more or less prone to holding real freedom of speech on high, the bottom line is that truly free speech erodes all governments lock on what they would prefer to spoon feed us, so it's always going to be viewed as suspect, no matter what.

BTW, as I've stated previously, I find ALL CENSORSHIP to be vile and a tool of the weak minded sheep in trying to corral the ideas and thoughts outside their own realm of understanding. This in turn slows down social evolution and undermines individuality, neither of which seems beneficial to mankind as a species hot smiley
Posted by: h.....d....z... [x] - (71.204.84.---)
Date: November 05, 2008 04:58AM
what in the fuck would drive one to become a slave to what it itself creates?!?!?!

(and notice how the one itself has now become a thing, an object, whilst what it has produced, what it created, made, to take on characteristics of a being... although in certain instances the thing it creates (with the help of another - well depending upon the species, obviously, but in this particular instance it is human... so naturally it require the assistance of the opposite gender... well obviously) is a being... a being that is instantaneously converted into an object... a thing)

a commodity


you make a thing
a thing that has the potential
to free you (its worth, use value; physical and materialistic)
but instead you become enslaved
to it!!!
(its value, exchange value; metaphysical, immaterialistic or idealistic)

]the value of a thing is
Posted by: zxz555 [x] - (83.108.5.---)
Date: November 05, 2008 09:02AM
^^^ confused smiley I wish some girls would treat me as a thing, an object, a commodity, ho-hum. disappointed smiley
Posted by: blinkermann [x] - (70.253.148.---)
Date: November 06, 2008 10:25PM
Free is a thing and has value. You can't hold it, but you can flush it down the toilet.
Posted by: blinkermann [x] - (70.253.148.---)
Date: November 06, 2008 10:26PM
Freedom is a thing . . .

(and I am a loser)
Posted by: pulse [x] - (Moderator)
Date: November 06, 2008 11:26PM
Then there's the old Franklin quote along the lines of 'he who gives up freedom in exchange for security deserves neither and will lose both' ..
Posted by: John Hamcock [x] - (64.12.116.---)
Date: November 07, 2008 04:08AM
The Bushfucks did more to damage online porn (especially free online porn) than any anybody else did.

They believe in corporate freedom. Obama (The "commie" I take it....jesus....) will be more for individual rights and better enforcement of the laws on the books for the truly evil (instead of just beezare) than the real "government protecting you from yourselves" right wing doinks.....
Posted by: fossil_digger [x] - (76.185.240.---)
Date: November 07, 2008 05:52AM
i love that Franklin quote....all well and good in the 1700's. where attacks came from large sailing vessels, men on horseback rattling sabers and foot soldiers charging you with mussel loaders trying to run you through with bayonets. it just doesn't work in modern day, but that was a nice try
Posted by: zxz555 [x] - (83.108.21.---)
Date: November 07, 2008 08:51AM
probably time to scrap that constitution thingy, then, t just doesn't work in modern times, but nice try smiling smiley
Posted by: pro_junior [x] - (24.21.92.---)
Date: November 07, 2008 12:53PM
wtf is a mussel loader? is that some sort of clam gun? they shot clams at us?
Posted by: fossil_digger [x] - (76.185.240.---)
Date: November 07, 2008 05:08PM
the constitution is already in the fireplace, it has yet to be lit.
if you don't know what a mussel loader is i can't help you.
Posted by: GAK67 [x] - (222.153.174.---)
Date: November 07, 2008 08:30PM
You just have to excuse f_d's American spelling (why do Americans put z's where they are supposed to put s's and vice versa) - he means muzzle loaders - a gun where you load the ammunition through the muzzle, rather than through a breach!
Posted by: pro_junior [x] - (24.21.92.---)
Date: November 07, 2008 10:19PM
he means muzzle loaders - a gun where you load the ammunition through the muzzle, rather than through a breach!

no shit?

we really need a sarcasm font...
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (Moderator)
Date: November 08, 2008 12:12AM
GAK: actually i was recently surprised that the correct spelling for a number of words where i believed you should use s and americans use z is actually to use z. It's actually French influence to use the s's and correct (language that is written in the English parliament) spellings is with a z. take a look here.
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (Moderator)
Date: November 08, 2008 12:15AM
That all said mussel is just totally wrong.
Posted by: fossil_digger [x] - (76.185.240.---)
Date: November 08, 2008 12:18AM
ooooo, i did spell it wrong....sue me. smiling bouncing smiley
Posted by: fossil_digger [x] - (76.185.240.---)
Date: November 08, 2008 12:20AM
i hunt my deer eye popping smiley with a smiley
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (Moderator)
Date: November 10, 2008 04:29AM
And then you have things like this.. []
Posted by: fossil_digger [x] - (76.185.240.---)
Date: November 10, 2008 06:12AM
that's fucked up. no more bluetooth jackin' off fer junior. smiling bouncing smiley
Posted by: pro_junior [x] - (24.21.92.---)
Date: November 10, 2008 06:43AM
in yet another lame attempt at insulting me, you fail.
Posted by: fossil_digger [x] - (76.185.240.---)
Date: November 10, 2008 07:04AM
smiling bouncing smiley made ya respond. smiling bouncing smiley
Posted by: woberto [x] - (121.91.89.---)
Date: June 06, 2009 10:12AM
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (Moderator)
Date: June 08, 2009 02:19PM
404 wobby
Posted by: fossil_digger [x] - (76.185.252.---)
Date: June 08, 2009 02:40PM
i got 500. tongue sticking out smiley
Your Name: 
Your Email: