Mandatory Internet Censorship in Australia (1 Viewer)

[SnowFox]

I trust the government's filter will not get in the way of internet usage for the every-day australian

-_- i should have known people would use this thread to discuss pornography sites -_- (edit)

Absolutely pathetic responses. You ignore the fact that i am not directly addressing the question. I am relating material to it. Im curious as to how or if you all passed your HSC because the level of response I am getting is simply elementary.

Issues surrounding internet censorship that may be addressed and become effective in the PUBLIC INTERNET (no proxies) could be child porn.... I see you all saying how nerdy you are... thats fine - but talking about pornography strategies is low.

My statements were general, your responses were specific, pathetic and totally not the responses I could have expected would come from older, more experienced sophisticated individuals. Obviously not. I have nothing more to say to you sad loners.

Well, we passed, something you can not say yet for another two years, so sit down, shut up and pay attention to what we are saying.




The filter is being implemented because of the so called CP floating around on the free internet. The websites are already blacklisted through ISP's voluntarily you ignorant cunt stain. I have mentioned other topics that will be banned with this filter but you somehow over looked them on you redbull induced power trip. I see CP as a more detrimental problem then Euthanasia sites/information. You might not, but for all i know you could be hiding Yiff in a hidden partition.

And by calling us nerds you only just showing how fucking immature you really are, you have no idea how the filter works, you have no idea how the filter will effect daily life, and you have no fucking idea how fucking wrong you are in terms of the effectiveness of this filter battling CP. The AFP are dealing with it, they dont need some goofy cock muncher pushing the industry even further underground.




Or you simply dont understand them.

The general public is ill-informed. 7PM project, he practically side stepped every question thrown at him, pretty sure CP was mentioned every time.


$5 Conroy is a fucking christian.

Stephen Conroy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Born 18 January 1963 (age 47)
Ely, Cambridgeshire, England, UK
Nationality Australia, British
Political party Australian Labor Party
Religion Catholic

Fuck me, i was right lol.





Oh hello, political censorship.



Couldnt get anymore fail.

prove it

Proven with your own stupidity, now disprove wikipedia's reliability to internet censorship to your own arguments reliability.




On a different note:

Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy has been appointed to a new United Nations commission on broadband.

Senator Conroy was announced as a founding member of the Broadband Commission for Digital Development.

The appointment was announced in Geneva by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the UN specialised agency for communications.

Senator Conroy said the commission would define strategies for accelerating broadband rollout worldwide.

The commission has the support of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who will receive its findings at a summit in New York in September.

'The appointment recognises the Australian Government's commitment to provide all Australians with affordable high speed broadband, no matter where they live,' Senator Conroy said.

'The digital economy presents social and economic opportunities that have never before been possible and making the most of these opportunities will be crucial for nations around the world.'

HOW!!!

 

[SnowFox]

BTW omar comin, you say this

stop abusing your little toddler brother. Boy.

to my face and see what happens you incoherent cum gurgling spastic.

 

[SnowFox]

Good to see the moron has run off.

 

[nevery]

Omar-Comin, I would promote an attempt to weed out chld porn - but ONLY child porn. The problem with this filter is that it will block more than child porn. The technicals of this filter are also not promising. I would advise you to try and get a copy of the 4 Corners program that aired on the ABC last night. I don't think the filter is the right way to go about it. I don't believe many would not support an attempt to get rid of child porn.

 

[Lauchlan]

As you are ill-informed, you make completely pointless statements that don't prove anything. Yeah so what if he uses Wikipedia. In most cases it is reliable. Furthermore, even if Stephen Conroy, is not that bad a person, it doesn't remove from the fact that it's a crap policy.

you just gave an example of "completely pointless statements that don't prove anything" (refer to bolded).

 

[Lauchlan]

Proven with your own stupidity, now disprove wikipedia's reliability to internet censorship to your own arguments reliability.

its common knowledge - for the academic it is not considered reliable. FACT. why? because ANYONE can edit it.

my point is proven - thats how its done.

 

[tommykins]

its common knowledge - for the academic it is not considered reliable. FACT. why? because ANYONE can edit it.

my point is proven - thats how its done.

lol actually lecturers use it quite alot for superficial teaching of the subject.

here we go, are you going t o say the lecturers are shit now? hahaha

 

[Absolutezero]

For a general overview of anything, wikipedia's the way to go.

 

[Jazuzi]

Fuck don't attack the source attack what he said.

 

[Lauchlan]

lol actually lecturers use it quite alot for superficial teaching of the subject.

here we go, are you going t o say the lecturers are shit now? hahaha

not all lectures (again you liberals try to make huge assumptions) - just those that rely on wikipedia

 

[Lauchlan]

For a general overview of anything, wikipedia's the way to go.

a general overview is sometimes not good enough. in that case wikipedia is NOT the way to go.

 

[Lauchlan]

Fuck don't attack the source attack what he said.

its basically the same thing, because what he said was based on what wikipedia says.

 

[tommykins]

not all lectures (again you liberals try to make huge assumptions) - just those that rely on wikipedia

what the fuck are you retarded? ALL my lecturers (that is, 12/12 thus far) have ALL used wikipedia as a superificial explanation for a topic.

of COURSE they wouldn't use it for a bloody academic paper or whatever, but the discussion here isn't to that level, and i'd laugh in your face if you think you'd warrant that level of sources.

and i'm not a liberal btw, i'm left wing moron.

 

[SnowFox]

its common knowledge - for the academic it is not considered reliable. FACT. why? because ANYONE can edit it.

my point is proven - thats how its done.

If you believe i'm going to start on a academic level you have got more shit in your head then you do in your small intestine.

Your point wasnt proven, it was just masked behind a smokescreen of utter bullshit. Kindly tell me how the fuck this argument started to become a academic level or piss off.



Just to throw down FACTS.

When a URL is submitted to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) it will cost between $173 and $685 per item to investigate, regardless of whether it is "refused classification" or not.
Blacklist costs could beat filter - Gen Why? - Blogs

Any of these products can do the same as the filter-
Internet Filter Software Review 2010 - TopTenREVIEWS

And adults can choose what they wish to view.

$10 P/H and you have effectively got a $60 package ready. Aus gov can send this to everyone and those recipients can choose to install it or not.

 

[Lauchlan]

If you believe i'm going to start on a academic level you have got more shit in your head then you do in your small intestine.

Your point wasnt proven, it was just masked behind a smokescreen of utter bullshit. Kindly tell me how the fuck this argument started to become a academic level or piss off.



Just to throw down FACTS.

When a URL is submitted to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) it will cost between $173 and $685 per item to investigate, regardless of whether it is "refused classification" or not.
Blacklist costs could beat filter - Gen Why? - Blogs

Any of these products can do the same as the filter-
Internet Filter Software Review 2010 - TopTenREVIEWS

And adults can choose what they wish to view.

$10 P/H and you have effectively got a $60 package ready. Aus gov can send this to everyone and those recipients can choose to install it or not.

cool story bro

 

[Schroedinger]

Censorship is neccesary for a society to function and prosper. Without censorship, chaos ensues and a government will be unable to implement policies it sees fit to enact. Free speech is not an unassailable right - it is a pragmatic means to acheive and end. Thus, when the end is true and just, as censorship of child pornography is, the means (curbing of free speech) is perfectly reasonable and justified.

 

[scarybunny]

Haha I wonder how many times this thread will have to go back and forth and explain that the filter will do nothing to prevent the creation or distribution of child porn?


At least once more, clearly.

 

[Lauchlan]

what the fuck are you retarded? ALL my lecturers (that is, 12/12 thus far) have ALL used wikipedia as a superificial explanation for a topic.

of COURSE they wouldn't use it for a bloody academic paper or whatever, but the discussion here isn't to that level, and i'd laugh in your face if you think you'd warrant that level of sources.

and i'm not a liberal btw, i'm left wing moron.

regardless who you are, ive given my view - and i stand by it.

 

[Lauchlan]

censorship is neccesary for a society to function and prosper. Without censorship, chaos ensues and a government will be unable to implement policies it sees fit to enact. Free speech is not an unassailable right - it is a pragmatic means to acheive and end. Thus, when the end is true and just, as censorship of child pornography is, the means (curbing of free speech) is perfectly reasonable and justified.

+1

 

[Schroedinger]

Haha I wonder how many times this thread will have to go back and forth and explain that the filter will do nothing to prevent the creation or distribution of child porn?


At least once more, clearly.

A quantifable amount of child pornography is distributed on the world wide web, throughout websites and such. It's not much, but it's there. As a matter of fact, I was browsing through 4chan the other day, and I saw a picture of a penis approaching a baby. It made me sick.

And you're against this filter? For shame.