The Ruddite Revolution has begun!

[weemadando]

aka: In Soviet Australia computer watches you.

The "Great Firewall of Australia" went live today for trials. With 6 ISPs. Only one of which I'd even HEARD OF before. And one of which sounds like an ISP run for fundies anyway.

Here's some interesting points:
Not one of the ISPs selected is in the Top 10 in terms of subscriber base.

Not one of the ISPs which had voiced opposition to the plan was selected, despite volunteering for the trials.


Optus and iiNet snubbed in web filter trials

Green light for filtering trials


Op-Ed pieces from The Australian IT on the topic from the past few days:

Why Australia needs to trial net filters

Blanket ban on the internet a folly

ISP filters still a mystery

Education, not filtering, the answer

Mandatory filtering won't slow net access

It's not at all shocking that the reasonable, measured and logical arguments are put forward by the opponents while the white-washing "it won't be a problem - look at other countries which have an exponentially better developed IT infrastructure to go along with it" or "WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN" stuff is put forward by the proponents of the scheme.

Me? I just hope that this all goes to the dogs and honesty goddamn prevails in this.

[atg]

From what I've heard the liberals and the Greens are against the filter - so it could easily be defeated in parliament. I think Turnbull especially will ram it down Conroy's throat about none of the top ten ISPs or any of the doubters being chosen.

[weemadando]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the real life Helen Lovejoy

Yes, she actually made the argument: "it is up to some of us to think about the children." during an argument at a debate.

It's so reassuring to know that such balanced individuals are the one's who Senator Conroy actually listens to.

And in news this morning - Conroy is refusing all media contacts to do with the filter. Yay. Open, honest, transparent gov't. Can we please not have the Ruddite's anymore? Or at least can Family First, Nick Xenophon, Stephen Conroy and all the other retards behind this go die of gangrene?

Web filter debate descends into slanging match at Kickstart Forum 2009
By Chloe Lake, Technology Editor
NEWS.com.au
February 24, 2009 03:45pm

DELEGATES at a major technology conference were left slack-jawed and embarrassed after debate over the Government's proposed web filtering system descended into a public slanging match.

Discussion of the plan got personal when filtering advocate Bernadette McMenamin, chief executive officer of Child Wise, took part in a debate in front of a room full of technology journalists and professionals from Australia and New Zealand at the Kickstart Conference on the Gold Coast this week.

Ms McMenamin accused filtering opponents of spreading "hysteria" – a reaction that drew a hostile response from the room.

"Yes, there's been an awful lot of vitriol, there's been an awful lot of misinformation, and certainly I think there's been an awful lot of hysteria, and most of that hysteria is not coming from the child protection advocates, but it's coming from all these anonymous bloggers and people that write to you and just call you every name under the sun, and it's not helpful," she said.

Angus Grogan of Brisbane "I certainly don't spend my day in, day out, lobbying and attacking the opponents of the filtering," she said.

"I think there's probably only a few hundred of you in this country, you're vigorous, you're loud, you're technologically smart, but I still believe that filtering is something we should trial and then leave it up to the public to make that decision."

An anti-filtering petition hosted by online advocacy group GetUp! titled "Save The Net" has been signed by almost 100,000 people.

"I don't know why people are so afraid of the trials if you think they're going to be completely ineffective," Ms McMenamin said.

Her comments were slammed by internet service provider (ISP) expert Mark Newton, who said the Government's current trial filtering system was vulnerable to circumvention, reverse-engineering and even blacklist leaks.

"I think we all agree it won't work, and the blacklist will become public once this thing goes into production, if not earlier," he said.

"If its contents are as bad as the Minister (of Communications) says, we'll have an anonymously-published official list of child pornography sites and no official means of preventing people from exploiting it.

"Does that sound like a good idea Bernadette, does that sound like something you want your name to be associated with?"

Under the Government's plan, all Australian internet providers will be forced to block a secret blacklist of websites maintained by the media watchdog.

A secondary filter will be created to block material inappropriate for children, but users will be allowed to opt-out of this tier.

One journalist got so upset he entered into a new debate with Ms McMenamin.

"(Senator Stephen) Conroy himself said that anyone who disagrees with this policy is a supporter of child molestation," he said.

"That is so insulting to disregard everyone with a family who works in tech in this country. Why do you think we've all got our backs up? I've got a six-year-old son and he's the most important thing in my whole world.

"You say you're not a technical expert, you say you've got an open mind – maybe you should start listening to all the technical experts who are saying it won't work to the point of being stupid. Maybe you should start listening to them so you can have an open mind."

Ms McMenamin responded by saying she doesn't speak for Senator Conroy, and she was "disappointed that you think like that, because I didn't accuse you of being child molesters".

But both sides of the debate agreed an effective filter system – not necessarily the current one about to be tested – could help solve the issue of child pornography.

Ms McMenamin's argument relies heavily on evidence of Swedish and Norwegian filter trials.

A web filtering system in Sweden blocked 15,000 requests in its first few weeks of operating, Ms McMenamin wrote in The Australian recently.

Despite the personal arguments, Mr Newton said the acrimony needed to stop before any progress can be made.

"Proponents of the scheme need to stop treating opponents as if they're somehow disinterested in the welfare of children," he said.

"We are not, it is ridiculous and frankly juvenile to suggest that political opponents have faulty morals or support child molesters."

Yet Ms McMenamin cried foul on similar name-calling from the filter critics.

"I think it's really incredibly arrogant to call people and those who support internet filtering stupid and the scheme stupid, and it's a very simplistic approach to something that is in discussion by a lot of different people," she said, later adding that critics seemed to be focused on the business, not human, impact.

"In all the debates, you're not thinking about the children, you're thinking about the internet, you're thinking about the profits, you're thinking about the slowdown, you're thinking about technology – so, yes, it is up to some of us to think about the children."

Mr Newton said he supported a different form of filtering outlined in the SAGE-AU proposal.

"I think providing government resources to enable the private sector to contribute to a solution that parents who think it's important can opt-in to is probably a good idea. And I don't think anybody would actually be against that, although people who are against the scheme are often portrayed as extremists."

"There's no suggestion that the opponents of the current scheme are actually opposed to optional filtering."

Links

Full debate video (argument after 51:00) - http://www.viotv.com/#d9f3e80c-d66e-44d ... ,Views,All

[Stark]

It's pretty sad that vocal and informed opponents weren't selected, but hardly surprising. I just want the Liberals to run giant ads about how much this white elephant cost, once the dust has settled.

[Xon]

I know of one of those ISP's in the initial trial who went for it because of the $90k hardware and $10k labor grants given by the government for those who go into the trail.