Tony Abbot and Coalition to impose internet filter if they win the Australian Election.

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:18 AM
link   
A Liberal National government in Australia would adopt the opt-out UK approach to filtering the internet for all Australians. Attached are links with the second link being a subsequent follow up. Disappointing but not surprising this was only announced 2 days before the election and not giving everyone the opportunity to be made aware of this.

www.zdnet.com...

www.zdnet.com...




posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Those B****urds. I'm voting labour.

Not that I've got anything to hide........Honest!



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Trubeeleever
 




But didn't labour want to introduce this years ago until Stephen Conroy decided against this?



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:32 AM
link   
you can opt out....grow a set, and simply option out of it, the filter sets up as the default. maybe parents don't want 9 year olds looking at German porn



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:34 AM
link   
I'm done with the clowns that make up both major parties. I'm voting Pirate Party and Julian Assange, not because I think they'll win but because they are the best of the choices given to me.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:40 AM
link   
No-one should have the right to filter the internet!

However, IF they should enforce such a thing they should start with the television! Young children, still in their prams, are subjected to a never ending stream of swearing, screaming, fighting, violence, and sex, and thats just the soaps!

Start with the TV. No sex or violence until after 10pm. Then maybe we might be able to raise kids who's minds havent been conditioned to seek out violence and sex.




posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
you can opt out....grow a set, and simply option out of it, the filter sets up as the default. maybe parents don't want 9 year olds looking at German porn



My set is grown. How about yours?

But this goes beyond porn. It starts with porn and then there is no limit to what they can censor. And once one does "opt out" as you state then no doubt your name will draw attention.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by VoidHawk
No-one should have the right to filter the internet!

However, IF they should enforce such a thing they should start with the television! Young children, still in their prams, are subjected to a never ending stream of swearing, screaming, fighting, violence, and sex, and thats just the soaps!

Start with the TV. No sex or violence until after 10pm. Then maybe we might be able to raise kids who's minds havent been conditioned to seek out violence and sex.



I take it you don't have kids. Kids in prams are usually in bed by 7.30!

This is optional! It is a good idea for parents with kids! Opt out - it is an option!

P
edit on 5/9/2013 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:53 AM
link   
This is the bit that caught my eye: "more importantly, the filter will also censor websites that mention alcohol or smoking, “web forums” and “esoteric material”."

Information can be illegal, so pretend that it doesn't exist, hide all references to it regardless if it helps people or hinders them and the problem goes away, GENIUS


Im an adult and i like to think i make my own choices.

Australia - dont let this stupid crap happen to you do.

EDIT: as ive said before on this topic, you should be opting IN for a block, not opting OUT

People have to be adults to live alone therefore any house has an adult in charge of the internet line, IF they have kids and want to block content than it upto THEM to do it. Are we going to have a standard parental block on all TV unless you opt in for the gory/sexy/dangerous/drug reference parts? Can you imagine the classic movie pulp fiction in such away, the movie would be about 7 minutes long
edit on 5-9-2013 by Biigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by tarzan
 


I was watching him answer this question on the ABC news this evening and it appears he's done a backflip. ( shock - horror )

He is suggesting some confusion between "opt in" and "opt out".

His current position is one of "opt in" and he goes as far as saying it would be impossible to censor the internet as the previous govt. explored this and abandoned the idea due to its 'impossibility' !

Ya, smoke, mirrors and loads of bullhockey all around ...



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:58 AM
link   
Problem is the internet is putting some serious dents in war preparations and other nasty govt activities they were always going to address this eventually,I guess now we have to decide whether to seriously push back or hold our ankles and let them have their way.
Incrementally they will keep taking more rights and as always use the ( Wont someone think of the children ) routine to sway public opinion



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 06:17 AM
link   

jimmyx
you can opt out....grow a set, and simply option out of it, the filter sets up as the default. maybe parents don't want 9 year olds looking at German porn


Maybe I donm't want your 9 year olds on my german porn site? How about you look after your 9 year old brats who are making adults pay for YOUR inability to control them?

How about you be a parent and sto pmaking the rest of an entire continent be a defacto parent for you?

How about you filter your own internet? That's opt IN. How about you stop having kids if you can't be arsed looking after them.

How about we let the government come along and put locks on your front door that you can ask them nicely to remove. You don't want your 9 year olds running out into oncoming traffic do you? Locks on the door, from the outside, that you can ask nicely to remove. But then, why would you want to remove those locks? Youw ant your 9 year olds on the street at midnight?

Some sort of problem in your house, you want your kids playing on busy roads... you need locks on the door.

blah blah blah... In a world without chains, everyone is a slave owner...



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 06:24 AM
link   

pheonix358

Originally posted by VoidHawk
No-one should have the right to filter the internet!

However, IF they should enforce such a thing they should start with the television! Young children, still in their prams, are subjected to a never ending stream of swearing, screaming, fighting, violence, and sex, and thats just the soaps!

Start with the TV. No sex or violence until after 10pm. Then maybe we might be able to raise kids who's minds havent been conditioned to seek out violence and sex.



I take it you don't have kids. Kids in prams are usually in bed by 7.30!

This is optional! It is a good idea for parents with kids! Opt out - it is an option!

P
edit on 5/9/2013 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)


I opted not to have kids. I opted out already. I do not intend to opt to opt and opt opt, opt opt opt..

I get all the responsibility of being an adult as soon as I turn 18. You know, I can join the army. Die for the country. Kill innocent people. Drink alcohol. Drive a car. Vote. Work. And a whjole range of things. I get that without having to OPT in. I get that by being an adult.

No, if people want to protect their innocent little darlings, then they need to sto pbeing careless and irresponsible. They need to ne adults. Adults who can already OPT out of porn.

And if anyone thinks that this filter will do anything besides make the internet slower, cause congestion, create issues with yet more interference with personal data, and still not be as easy as anything to bypass, well I have a website to sell you. I'll sell you www.microsoft.com and throw in www.google.com for free.

Just as with all the other obnoxious and ignorant attempts to control human nature, it will not prevent the problems it seeks to remedy and will only affect people who had nothing to do with it in the first place.

I mean, how is that illegal pirate software industry going... isn't it about time they made it illegal to pirate games and movies?



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Biigs
This is the bit that caught my eye: "more importantly, the filter will also censor websites that mention alcohol or smoking, “web forums” and “esoteric material”."

Information can be illegal, so pretend that it doesn't exist, hide all references to it regardless if it helps people or hinders them and the problem goes away, GENIUS


Im an adult and i like to think i make my own choices.

Australia - dont let this stupid crap happen to you do.

EDIT: as ive said before on this topic, you should be opting IN for a block, not opting OUT

People have to be adults to live alone therefore any house has an adult in charge of the internet line, IF they have kids and want to block content than it upto THEM to do it. Are we going to have a standard parental block on all TV unless you opt in for the gory/sexy/dangerous/drug reference parts? Can you imagine the classic movie pulp fiction in such away, the movie would be about 7 minutes long
edit on 5-9-2013 by Biigs because: (no reason given)


I worked in a government tafe around 2000. A college. A learning environment that caters to adults. It does have a component of younger people, but generally it is considered an adult learning environment.

We had this come up around that time. It was ridiculous. And being at a government level, we were told to implement a white list. We attempted to use a third party list of accepted websites that could be accessed from within the college.

Now, adult education. we ran hospitality courses.

Ohhhh it was hilarious the number of complaints we received when suddenly you couldn't look up BEER at tafe. Nope, thats on the list. And we had to go through a process of requesting specific websites be removed from the list before it would be implemented. Not a very fast process. Pretty much making it useless to do any research from the college if you were interested in the hospitality industry.

Or if you looked up breast cancer. Bam. Restricted. No tits.

Drug harm. Bam. Restricted.

Anything that adults use in any adult related context, who cares, some 16 year old might see a nipple.

More recently, in looking for information for a course I am doing, I was at a government organisation and using their laptops. I tried to look up Alcohol and other drug related information, as I was asked to put together soem details of what work the courses may lead to.

Cant access the dirty naughty devious drug and alcohol websites, because silly me might means "How can I get so wasted man, I'm really looking to get high dude.." with "alcohol drug course employability" related searches.

White lists...

So yeah, every one who thinks this is a good idea, is just blatantly ignorant of the ramifications of the entire scheme. It *WILL* be you, dear user, who can't access the silly thing on the internet because it fits the criteria. It will be you, dear user, who wrings his hands in the air at the stupidity of it all. And it will be you, dear user, who wonders where all these restrictions came from... it was after all, only to stop the kiddies from accessing boobs.

"I don't want my kids on german porn sites, so this internet filter is brilliant. Hey why can't I get to this embroidery website about studs?"



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by winofiend
 


I see you and I clearly are on the same wavelength here.

The beauty of the internet is a vast amount of information, ripe for the searching.

What our governments are suggesting is taking a black maker pen to an encyclopedia, nothing short of a mild case of book burning!

Chemistry in school to block all dangerous elements from the periodic table?
Biology to apply censorship to the human anatomy in class?

You have to be able to read up and understand dangerous things to avoid them! All this putting ones fingers in ones ears to pretend the bad stuff doesn't exist is idiotic to the extreme.


We are human, we do good things bad things and ugly things, embrace it all or nothing at all.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
you can opt out....grow a set, and simply option out of it, the filter sets up as the default. maybe parents don't want 9 year olds looking at German porn


then maybe parents should check on whether their kids are watching porn, german or not. i'm fed up with with people expecting the state to do their job as they cant be ar5ed



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by tarzan
 


So YOU are the reason I couldn't get my own name when I signed up in 2006.

You filtered me from my identity.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 07:49 AM
link   
I hope liberals don't get in.

We need no filters here, we are all good. I remember when I was a kid we found the porno mags of a mates dad, so whats the big deal boys will be boys.

This in my opinion is a start of a censorship program. Next it will be blocking alternative news.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 08:00 AM
link   
keep up kiddies and stop panicking....its an "opt in".

i really hope some of those that made comments here are too young to vote.

i have never seen a campaign with so many lies.

no wonder the nigerian scammer love australians so much..some of you pelicans would believe anything.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by bellagirl
keep up kiddies and stop panicking....its an "opt in".

i really hope some of those that made comments here are too young to vote.

i have never seen a campaign with so many lies.

no wonder the nigerian scammer love australians so much..some of you pelicans would believe anything.


Be a bit more specific.

Which campaign are you talking about?




top topics
 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join