Internet filtering: You can't opt-out (2 Viewers)

Will you be voting labor?

  • Yes, because i support the internet filter

    Votes: 9 5.7%
  • Yes, but it has nothing to do with the filter

    Votes: 36 22.6%
  • No, because i'm against the filter

    Votes: 61 38.4%
  • No, i was never intending to vote labor.

    Votes: 53 33.3%

  • Total voters
    159

Aquawhite

Retiring
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
4,946
Location
Gold Coast
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
Uni Grad
2013
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.
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
3,411
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Uni Grad
2013
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

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
5,455
Location
gone
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2009
A leaked copy of banned sites included several dentists.
 

Uncle

Banned
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
3,265
Location
Retirement Village of Alaska
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
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

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
5,455
Location
gone
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2009
talk about mucilaginous hypocrites who are supposedly against child porn and are apparently in a position of care and responsibility.
HAHAHAAHA fucking owned.
 

51684

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
137
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
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

Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
7,536
Location
Camden
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
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

:mad:
 

SnowFox

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
5,455
Location
gone
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2009
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

Beyond Godlike
Joined
Nov 10, 2004
Messages
3,123
Location
Wollongong
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
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.

world
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
941
Location
Unknown
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
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

Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
7,536
Location
Camden
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
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

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
48
Location
Chatswood
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
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

Beyond Godlike
Joined
Nov 10, 2004
Messages
3,123
Location
Wollongong
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
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

Active Member
Joined
May 6, 2008
Messages
1,466
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
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

Active Member
Joined
May 6, 2008
Messages
1,466
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
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.

world
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
941
Location
Unknown
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
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

Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
166
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
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.

world
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
941
Location
Unknown
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
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.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top