Not off topic here, not related to caching, but IMPORTANT for anyone who enjoys the net.
As one of the election promises, the government committed itself to a "clean feed" ISP based filtering program prior to the election. Of course this was buried under all the hoo-haa about workchoices so didn't really get reported on. It was supposed to be an opt-out scheme where the ISP would implement filters based on what you could and couldn't see, with a mandatory level for child porn.
Now that all sounds admirable. But the goalposts have moved. Now we are talking two levels of mandatory filtering. One compulsory, anything the government considers illegal or undesirable. The second blocking anything inapropriate for children. That is the opt-in one.
Unluckily the tests so far have shown all filters let some sites through that should be blocked, and block sites that should be OK. Based on some computer algorithm that looks at the percentage of flesh tones in a picture as well as words rather than any human review. And even better the most effective filter has up toa 70% speed hit on the internet according to some reports.
Can this get any worse? Well yes we are talking the government here. Google "Mark Newton" and ignore the overseas posts about football coaches etc. He is a network engineer for Internode in SA and after voicing his concerns had Senator Conroy's department putting pressure on his employer to shut him up. Plenty of news stories on that one.
This is starting to get media coverage, and while we all support stopping child porn this is not what this is about. It is about government censorship of what we can and can't view online. And better yet - it won't work. It will simply filter http port 80 pages, Peer to Peer will still be uncontrollable. I can set up a VPN or Tor connection to the USA and bypass the filter completely.
So does Australia really want an internet tbat is mroe restrictive than governments like North Korea, China and so on? And buggers are connection speeds at the same time they are talking about the National Broadband Rollout.
And don't think it will come for free, the ISPs will have to employ major new boxes to do the filtering and will pass the cost on to us.
Please check out http://nocleanfeed.com/ for more info (which I have no affiliation with), and lobby your local MP, write a letter to the editor of your local paper and so on.
Clean Feed - PLEASE READ
-
team unicycle
- 3500 or more caches found
- Posts: 294
- Joined: 15 April 03 11:03 pm
- Location: Adelaide
- Contact:
-
strong-arm
- 500 or more caches logged
- Posts: 42
- Joined: 30 November 07 11:06 am
- Location: Carseldine, Brisbane
Your SSL connections will be susceptible to man in the middle attacks, which your ISP will be able to do and probably WOULD do if they had to enforce the filter as it would probably be required that any filtering worked over HTTPS as well as HTTP - that's if I've understood things correctly, which I might not have! 
-
Guest
Financial institutions would be suing the government if they start playing funny buggers with SSL, as they would be interfering with legitimate businesses both in and out of Australia so they would probably run afoul of the WTO and in the current economic crisis it would take a complete moron, not that I'm saying the good senator pushing for this isn't one, to risk financial and other trade sanctions over this.
If the whole point of this filtering is to block illegal material, they'll fail, if they want to tick most internet using voters off and give ISPs yet another excuse as to what's wrong and why it's not their fault, they will succeed beyond everyone's dreams.
At best the govt would be able to block IPs hosting SSL sites, but I very much doubt they will start trying man in the middle attacks since the browsers will go nuts with pop-up warnings and what not and people will complain endlessly to their ISPs about it.
If the whole point of this filtering is to block illegal material, they'll fail, if they want to tick most internet using voters off and give ISPs yet another excuse as to what's wrong and why it's not their fault, they will succeed beyond everyone's dreams.
At best the govt would be able to block IPs hosting SSL sites, but I very much doubt they will start trying man in the middle attacks since the browsers will go nuts with pop-up warnings and what not and people will complain endlessly to their ISPs about it.
-
Richary
- 8000 or more caches found
- Posts: 4189
- Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
- Location: Waitara, Sydney
<p>It's happening. The Daily Telegraph ran most of a Letter to the Editor I wrote in yesterday's edition, and the Courier Mail in Brisbane has also run a story.mtrax wrote:I think this issue is only just gathering steam and should blow shortly when this moves into mainstream media eg TV etc..
Sunrise did a segment as well and I think there have been some interviews on the ABC as well. 2GB reported on it but Ray Hadlee (who is a tosser anyway) supported it, in contrast Derryn Hinch on Melbourne radio had a 3 minute segment on it and for the first time I my life I actually agree with him when he came out against it he even sounded sensible for a change.<p>Now if we can get it in the main pages of the newspapers apart from just in their online tech sections then things will start to happen.
-
Guest
I wish I could be that adamantly against it, but I've already figured out ways of making money selling ways for people to protect their privacy against the government and should send the good senator a thank you note for giving me financial opportunities in the current financial crisis.
This whole scheme is one big pork barrel exercise from the begining, there is virtually diddly squat these politicans can do, since they don't have the same weight to throw round the rest of the world that the US likes to think they have.
Reminds me of a couple of those yappy chuauas that won't stop barking, gets on your nerves but you know one good kick would solve the problem.
I forget how long it took that 16yr old to beat the last govt's filtering program, but that was pure class, not only did he defeat it but made it look like it was still working. $80mill down the intar-web tubes, and now another $125+ mill not far behind it.
The sheer stupidity of it all, starting with the ban on porn hosting has been one reason why internet hosting/pricing has remained relatively high, porn drives the world, sony didn't allow porn on betamax and where is it now? The funny thing is they weren't going to allow it on blueray either but have since had a change of heart.
Actually it's largely thanks to porn that we have the internet at all as we know it, most of the cable TV in the US, VHS and then DVD, etc etc etc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE_X4QqTsD0
This whole scheme is one big pork barrel exercise from the begining, there is virtually diddly squat these politicans can do, since they don't have the same weight to throw round the rest of the world that the US likes to think they have.
Reminds me of a couple of those yappy chuauas that won't stop barking, gets on your nerves but you know one good kick would solve the problem.
I forget how long it took that 16yr old to beat the last govt's filtering program, but that was pure class, not only did he defeat it but made it look like it was still working. $80mill down the intar-web tubes, and now another $125+ mill not far behind it.
The sheer stupidity of it all, starting with the ban on porn hosting has been one reason why internet hosting/pricing has remained relatively high, porn drives the world, sony didn't allow porn on betamax and where is it now? The funny thing is they weren't going to allow it on blueray either but have since had a change of heart.
Actually it's largely thanks to porn that we have the internet at all as we know it, most of the cable TV in the US, VHS and then DVD, etc etc etc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE_X4QqTsD0
-
Guest
No they've started singing a new tune lately, you can choose the kid friendly feed or the legal porn, but still blocks child porn no one but those who seek it out see anyway, not to mention it won't stop them from seeking it out or finding it since most of that filth isn't on web sites you accidently come across.CanSolo wrote:Why is compulsory and not an Opt In, rather than Opt Out solution???
Why should customers have to ask for the filter to be removed, and have aspersions cast over their browsing habits, than have customers that want call in and get it activated???
The stupid thing about all this, there is only 27% of house holds with broadband that have children between the ages of 5-15, most people that do have children in that age group, 67%, said they trusted their children and didn't feel they needed filtering, only 3% said it was due to cost.
Figures from the EFF Australia's website.
So we're basically subsidising less than 9% of households that actually want this, or twits that thinks its a good idea and don't even use the internet. Yup great way to blow $125+ mill of tax payers money.
-
Richary
- 8000 or more caches found
- Posts: 4189
- Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
- Location: Waitara, Sydney
Someone posted this on the forums. Just brilliant.
For those of us who are having difficulties explaining this to
non-technical friends/colleagues, try using this analogy which has
worked for me:
Installing an internet filter is like the government posting security
guards outside every newsagent in the country.
If you want a newspaper or magazine, rather than walk into the agency
and pick one from the shelves you have to ask the guard to get it for you.
But before the guard gives you the newspaper he sits downs and slowly
reads through each and every article noting down key words in each one.
As the guard starts doing this you notice 5 people forming a small queue
behind you.
The guard finds on page 17 an article about a missing child in the UK.
He writes down the word "child".
There are now 13 people in the queue behind you.
On page 19 the guard finds a small article about the recent elections in
Italy. The reporter makes some comical and titillating comments of the
state of the Italian electoral system and the fact they have elected
another former porn star.
The guard writes down the word "porn".
There are now over 30 people in the queue behind you.
At this point he guard notices in the hundreds of words he has written
down the word "child" and shortly thereafter the word "porn". He returns
the newspaper back to the shelves and walks back towards you.
There are now over 50 people behind you in the queue.
The guard then informs you that the newspaper no longer exists and
forces you out of the queue, much to your confusion.
As you stand there wondering what just happened, you notice that the
queue is now out onto the main road blocking traffic and that someone
using the side entrance to the newsagent has just bought a copy of the
newspaper you were told does not exist.
For those of us who are having difficulties explaining this to
non-technical friends/colleagues, try using this analogy which has
worked for me:
Installing an internet filter is like the government posting security
guards outside every newsagent in the country.
If you want a newspaper or magazine, rather than walk into the agency
and pick one from the shelves you have to ask the guard to get it for you.
But before the guard gives you the newspaper he sits downs and slowly
reads through each and every article noting down key words in each one.
As the guard starts doing this you notice 5 people forming a small queue
behind you.
The guard finds on page 17 an article about a missing child in the UK.
He writes down the word "child".
There are now 13 people in the queue behind you.
On page 19 the guard finds a small article about the recent elections in
Italy. The reporter makes some comical and titillating comments of the
state of the Italian electoral system and the fact they have elected
another former porn star.
The guard writes down the word "porn".
There are now over 30 people in the queue behind you.
At this point he guard notices in the hundreds of words he has written
down the word "child" and shortly thereafter the word "porn". He returns
the newspaper back to the shelves and walks back towards you.
There are now over 50 people behind you in the queue.
The guard then informs you that the newspaper no longer exists and
forces you out of the queue, much to your confusion.
As you stand there wondering what just happened, you notice that the
queue is now out onto the main road blocking traffic and that someone
using the side entrance to the newsagent has just bought a copy of the
newspaper you were told does not exist.
-
Guest
I heard some time back a good come back to "if you have nothing to hide", being "so I can install a webcam in your bedroom broadcasting to the world then?"
We all have stuff to hide, just the way it's usually framed people only consider the bigger picture and not smaller ones that would be much more invasive.
We all have stuff to hide, just the way it's usually framed people only consider the bigger picture and not smaller ones that would be much more invasive.
here we go again
Just why are the honrable Mr Rudd and co trying to join such a long list of infamous names such as Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Kim; just to name a few benevolent politicians trying to protect us from the evil forces of free thought ? 
Funnily enough, many of the Tin Tin cartoons contained thinly veiled references to the political climate of the thirties. How appropriate that some newspaper cartoonists portray Mr Rudd as this well known cartoon character
Geocaching will obviously be censored. Too much free thought there
Oops too much political content
Funnily enough, many of the Tin Tin cartoons contained thinly veiled references to the political climate of the thirties. How appropriate that some newspaper cartoonists portray Mr Rudd as this well known cartoon character
Geocaching will obviously be censored. Too much free thought there
Oops too much political content
-
setsujoku
- 3500 or more caches found
- Posts: 1422
- Joined: 28 December 04 5:46 pm
- Twitter: BGNWP
- Location: Athelstone, SA
- Contact:
It's good that this is getting plenty of coverage, as the government is definately going about things in the wrong way, with many flaws in their proposals and testing
Check out this press release from a group that i am a member of, which highlights more of the technical and social sides of things.
Check out this press release from a group that i am a member of, which highlights more of the technical and social sides of things.
-
Guest
I find the whole thing so much of a joke, ok they go through with it, tick everyone off till the complaints are going through the roof about how slow the "internet", I love how email=internet or web=internet that's getting side tracked, and they'll have to ultimately undo everything they do anyway.
There was a report funded by the UK government looking into the same sort of issue, that is protecting children from the big bad internet and all that, and the report concluded that attempts to go down this path were only setting kids up for failure later in life and were doing them no favours long term.
The report alikend it to pool fencing, sure we put fences up to reduce the risk of drowning, however we still teach kids to swim otherwise there would be just as many drownings, however they would only be postponed.
There was a report funded by the UK government looking into the same sort of issue, that is protecting children from the big bad internet and all that, and the report concluded that attempts to go down this path were only setting kids up for failure later in life and were doing them no favours long term.
The report alikend it to pool fencing, sure we put fences up to reduce the risk of drowning, however we still teach kids to swim otherwise there would be just as many drownings, however they would only be postponed.