Internet filtering: You can't opt-out (1 Viewer)

[Aquawhite]

I'm not all that much against filtering the Internet.

From what I know, they are only going to have a filter for the kiddies which I won't use of course and then the blacklist one which has rape websites, incest and child pornography which should not really be on the Internet or done at all. It's immoral.

If they filter more than that then I'm opposed.

 

[SnowFox]

New Technology Fights Child Porn by Tracking Its “PhotoDNA”: To fight the distribution of child-exploitation images, Microsoft donates PhotoDNA technology to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children.


^^ that would stop child pornography better then any stupid filter would.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

I also agree with Aquawhite, my only concern is that when they get a taste of this new power they will become tyrannical and block a fuckload more.

 

[SnowFox]

A leaked copy of banned sites included several dentists.

 

[Uncle]

Cannibal Corpse is good, i crank up 'rancid amputation' when I'm left alone with the kiddies (I work part-time at a day-care centre).

lyrics:

Dying slowly never to rest, nerves are quivering as I trip
Removal of life on the blade of my knife
Inserted in your spine, smashing through bone
Feel my hell, I feed on fright
Rape the limbless cadaver

really great stuff, the kids tend to go silent, and some try run outside, by I hold em down and make em listen

"I'm left alone with the kiddies"

"the kids tend to go silent, and some try run outside, by I hold em down and make em listen"

talk about mucilaginous hypocrites who are supposedly against child porn and are apparently in a position of care and responsibility.

 

[SnowFox]

talk about mucilaginous hypocrites who are supposedly against child porn and are apparently in a position of care and responsibility.

HAHAHAAHA fucking owned.

 

[51684]

No form of media should be government regulated...something called freedom of speach

Disagree. How can you maintain a TV channel for instance when anyone could just broadcast on that frequency? Same for radio

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Hey never mind Kevin Rudd's internet censorship, the admins and whatever of BoS have decided that the members of BoS shouldn't be able to view anything that's anti-Israeli!

THE ANTI ISRAEL LEAGUE HAS BEEN DELETED

CENSORSHIP!

i want a number I can ring to complain

 

[SnowFox]

Disagree. How can you maintain a TV channel for instance when anyone could just broadcast on that frequency? Same for radio

Find signal, trace back to source. Ban.

 

[Serius]

I'm not all that much against filtering the Internet.

From what I know, they are only going to have a filter for the kiddies which I won't use of course and then the blacklist one which has rape websites, incest and child pornography which should not really be on the Internet or done at all. It's immoral.

If they filter more than that then I'm opposed.

How come incest porn is always grouped together with child porn, rape, bestiality etc when it comes to talk about the filters?

I dont really think its on the same level....its almost exclusively all fiction anyway, and even if it wasnt, is sex between two consenting adults really as bad as rape and child porn?

Just hashing out ideas here, see what people think on the matter.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

I'm not all that much against filtering the Internet.

From what I know, they are only going to have a filter for the kiddies which I won't use of course

No, the 'filter' will be for everyone, and compulsory. It's called censorship.

It will also block 95% of porn websites out there since most are Refused Classification in Australia, even though they are legal.

Other things it will block are euthanasia and abortion material (both for and against) as well as sites describing recreational drug use (it wouldn't surprise me if something like Erowid were blocked).

That's in the beginning at least. You can bet your bottom dollar it would expand. And we'd never know what's on it, since the list itself is part of the banned material.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

even if 95% of porn websites were blocked, there'd still be an endless supply of internet porn
let's face the facts: shodan smells liek poo

 

[jiratic]

It's nearly impossible to censor the internet, and this will only eat money, and slow our already 3rd world internet.
Heck here's a list of commonly known filter evasion tecniques:
proxy services, TOR, online chat rooms that give out megaupload type website links, then close down, in person meets, IIRC chats, posts in random forums in code, private messaging.
and this info is freely avaialble on news publications detailing the subjects.

if you really are for this internet censoring, you obviously don't value freedom of speech/expression, and are a 'oh noes think of the children' type alarmist.

 

[Serius]

dont forget embeding an image inside another innocent looking image and then distributing that mule image around.

I used to do it with ebooks.

 

[Lukybear]

No, the 'filter' will be for everyone, and compulsory. It's called censorship.

It will also block 95% of porn websites out there since most are Refused Classification in Australia, even though they are legal.

Other things it will block are euthanasia and abortion material (both for and against) as well as sites describing recreational drug use (it wouldn't surprise me if something like Erowid were blocked).

That's in the beginning at least. You can bet your bottom dollar it would expand. And we'd never know what's on it, since the list itself is part of the banned material.

It wouldnt be 95% of all porn websites... they can never achieve such a ban, unelss utilising a "white list".

And last time i checked, euthanasia and abortion material were both illegal? Just like child porn and rape. So why shouldnt they be blocked?

 

[Lukybear]

if you really are for this internet censoring, you obviously don't value freedom of speech/expression, and are a 'oh noes think of the children' type alarmist.

Freedom is good to the point of harming society. That is the rasonale behind laws, protecting society. Internet censoring too will benefit society. It will only censor those breaking laws.

If however, our oppostion are against actions that are currently illegal, i.e. ethuanasia, abortion etc..., then the rigthous thing would not be opposing censorship, but rather opposing the legislation that makes this illegal.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

It wouldnt be 95% of all porn websites... they can never achieve such a ban, unelss utilising a "white list".

And yet the majority of perfectly legal porn websites would be at risk of being added to the filter and one could reasonably expect any such porn site reported to the filter to be added, one at a time.

Quite an environment of ambiguity, risk, and unfairness. Not to mention this would clearly be outright censorship of legal material.

And last time i checked, euthanasia and abortion material were both illegal?

No, they are not illegal. Get your facts right before posting. And it's not just the stances for euthanasia and abortion which fall under the blacklist, consider that.

 

[Cazic]

Freedom is good to the point of harming society. That is the rasonale behind laws, protecting society. Internet censoring too will benefit society. It will only censor those breaking laws.

I don't get it. How does me viewing "blah" content harm society, or how does society benefit from me not viewing "blah" content? I'm pretty sure society will be no better or worse as a result of me viewing some porn, or anything else this filter is supposed to block.

To Rudd: Fuck off mate. How dare you presume to tell me what I can and can't look at. Do you really think you know better than everyone? Do you really think that what I look at will result in some negative change in the outcome of the universe, this country or your life? I realise censorship already exists, but the existence of one open medium is enough to keep me happy. To bring down censorship on that one open medium too though, again I say: fuck off.

To all you downies that keep defending this policy as a method to reduce the distribution of child porn: Do you honestly think pedos browse www.kiddyporn.com or something to get their material? This measure will not stop child porn being distributed in the slightest. Even supposing it does, even if worked perfectly, pedos aren't going to give up on their sexual urges any more than I am going to give up on my sexual urges because Ruddfucker blocks redtube, or a gay person will give up on their sexual urges because gay porn is blocked, or a dying patient will lose interest in dying with some dignity because euthanasia material is blocked, or a fundy Christian will lose interest in "the abortion debate" because abortion material is blocked. And honestly, I'd rather pedos be getting off to some pictures at home than having to "develop their own material", so to speak. We can't do anything about the existence of pedos, but we can sure as hell make a difference in how they get off.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Freedom is good to the point of harming society. That is the rasonale behind laws, protecting society. Internet censoring too will benefit society. It will only censor those breaking laws.

Ever heard of "evidence-based policy"?

Obviously not.

 

[Anderson101]

Freedom is good to the point of harming society. .

fuck society. I only give a shit about myself.