Mandatory filtering

Old, inactive threads
austdata
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:38 am
Location: Melbourne

Post by austdata » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:51 pm

pjb42 wrote:@ austdata (Mike)

.. snip ..

It is very easy to be smug and make invalid assumptions, especially about others misfortunes and problems, many people do constantly. :) Of course, if you have an in with Telstra, and don't mind paying the costs... by all means, please do! :) Australia is fast becoming a rather intolerant, ignorant and bigoted society sadly, particularly the last decade or so. (that's simply a general comment on my part about the direction I see Australian society in general heading BTW).
So I don't get your vote for father of the year then?
Oh, in case you wish to make another erroneous assumption... no, they are not wealthy just because they have their own business. ... snip ...
No need to use my business name as well. :wink:

Cheers,

Mike

tocpcs
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:01 am
Location: Online

Post by tocpcs » Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:32 am

Mandatory Filtering is just another coughed up bit of mucous that makes the uninformed public appear like the government is doing something to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

Anthony Michaud
Posts: 128
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:59 am
Location: Victoria
Contact:

Post by Anthony Michaud » Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:47 am

tocpcs wrote:Mandatory Filtering is just another coughed up bit of mucous that makes the uninformed public appear like the government is doing something to fix a problem that doesn't exist.
There is a problem, however this is the wrong way of tackling it. For the oblig. comparison - its like using a shotgun to kill flies, instead of fly spray.

Same result (dead flies), and initially using the shotgun may even be more entertaining, but you're going to end up with bigger problems with the shotgun approach.

ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Post by ForumAdmin » Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:53 am

There is the same problem with mis-use of the internet as there is with mis-use of fire arms or automobiles.

In the hands of criminals a car, shot gun or an internet connection multiplies their dangerousness.

That isn't the issue.

The issue is whose responsibility is it to curb the mis-use of the internet.

The dumb as dogs*** comments and suggestions by the Labour Party/Senator Conroy are so ludicrous as to trivialise any discussion or, eventual, addressing of this very real problem.

For that sanctimonious piece of stupidity to be able to say this:

"If "you" (people who find his suggestions laughably ludicrous) want to support child pornography you will find that this government doesn't".

What incredibly insulting 'word twisting'; just how dishonest and morally bankrupt is that silly man?

pjb42
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:06 am
Location: Victoria

Post by pjb42 » Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:12 pm

ForumAdmin wrote:There is the same problem with mis-use of the internet as there is with mis-use of fire arms or automobiles.

In the hands of criminals a car, shot gun or an internet connection multiplies their dangerousness.

That isn't the issue.

The issue is whose responsibility is it to curb the mis-use of the internet.

The dumb as dogs*** comments and suggestions by the Labour Party/Senator Conroy are so ludicrous as to trivialise any discussion or, eventual, addressing of this very real problem.

For that sanctimonious piece of stupidity to be able to say this:

"If "you" (people who find his suggestions laughably ludicrous) want to support child pornography you will find that this government doesn't".

What incredibly insulting 'word twisting'; just how dishonest and morally bankrupt is that silly man?
It's esentially the same kind of argument Howard and Bush used to get us all into the Iraq war. The same kind of black/white argument those who would control others have used for centuries.

"If you are not with me, you must be against me" (or substitute "us" for "me").

I would love to see the feasibility study that was used to prove to the Gov that this would work. :)

Oh... right, there wasn't one. My bad.

This will not work in any case, whatever the real motives. Ask the Chinese. :) It's simple a huge waste of resources, time and money that could be better used to deal with the problem and others.

I did some IT forensic work for the Police for a couple years (as an external consultant). I stopped because in two years, only one of the many offenders discovered was ever actually prosecuted. It's soul destroying. I once spent a week reconstructing an erased 250GB external HDD, and found a LOT of child pornography. The Police said there wasn't enough of a certain kind required to guarantee a conviction. He got away with it. And most of them know they will. I have seen some smug faces hand other their computers or drives, knowing that it doesn't matter what I found anyway. Many of these criminals know the law as well as a lawyer.

Whatever the motivations, at best, this will simply inconvenience the criminals a little. Mostly, it will be an invasion of innocent peoples privacy. And given the recent revelations of over 200 cases pending against CentreLink staff for abuse of privacy rules and regulations (and that's only the ones that were too serious a breach to ignore, slap on the wrist, or simply fire). I wouldn't trust any Gov or Business, unless they can absolutely prove otherwise, too keep my confidential information confidential. There have been so many cases over the past few years where people private information was allowed to be stolen, or abused in some way. That's what I'd rather the money was spent on!

Cheers.

Post Reply