Internet Filter.

Talk about everything but gaming in here!

Moderators: pilonv1, Juzbuffa

Post Reply
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

It's not about the children. It's another power grab to control the masses. If we can't see what was blocked then how will we ever actually know that the government isn't filtering out the critics, right?

Logically you can't say we have no intention of blocking legit content and then make the filter mandatory so people can't check that what you are saying (about never intending to block legit critic websites) isn't true.

Do you understand?

But it's not about debating, they just need you to think they are listening to you and doing something to buy time. They have no intention of listening because there is an agenda to see it through no matter what is said.

Unless they allow people to actually opt out of this filter with no questions asked, you as a mass of people who have the info blocked would never be able to put yourself in a position to be a judge, right?
Because how would you know they are not blocking legit things unless they first allow you to view the internet without mandatory blockage applied to it? We would just have to take their word for it that nothing legit is blocked.

Australia = china. The dicussion should be focues on why they could even think of filtering with no freedom to opt out, in the first place. And what the real reason is for why they want to. That is the more interesting thing to talk about.

Main things people have brought up:
-pirates

-silence critics

-mind control (you will rely only on what you can see on tv and any alternative views on issues wil be blocked - the internet is too free and it scares them - "let's dumb the masses down to make them more obedient using mainstream media distractions")

-an attempt at blanket banning of any online porn by religious conservatives

-covering up info on any things they don't want you to know about (just any unpopular site representing a minority view of the day)

-planning on using australia as a test bed for unpopular changes that will be brought about globally at some point. (like the climate change thing being pushed in movies and stuff - all the industrialised nations are attacked) First they need to see how we react and then record all this down for future attempts to push it onto other countries as well. We are getting acclimatised to it and they hope we get used to it. ie boil the frog, raise the temperature slowly over time and it doesn't know it is being cooked alive. This is why nobody believes the claim it won't be abused at some later point (even if it's not done right now) to blacklist people with unpopular views and shut down their freedom to speak.

The last one is the major one. Because once people let them get their foot in the door, the salesman will see it as a weakness of the buyer in their ability to resist and then it will encourage them to push even harder and harder for more and more. But unlike someone selling you something you don't need or really want, this push for more power contains evil intent. If people stop seeing evil for what it really is, then they have no hope doing any good. Any attempts to do good will just result in more damage than good. We are living in a new evil age where the blind lead the blind. It's your money, and it's just being used to take your own individual freedom away because people let it happen.

If people can't opt out from the filter, then it's a form of unjust oppression.
Last edited by GameHED on 24 Dec 2008 09:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Twiztid Elf
Team Wowboy
Posts: 7459
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 05:59 pm
XBL ID: Koco Savage
PSN ID: giantenemycrabb

Post by Twiztid Elf »

Heh. For those of you who even doubt that we're the guinea pigs for the rest of the world, here's a link for ya.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Secti" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... router.pdf
RIGHTEOUS FURY
Image
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

There reasons they need to get feedback from people and "debate with them", is really so they can try to counter any claims you make that what they are doing is in any way wrong, stupid, not in the interest of the public, a waste of tax payer's money etc... and prepare their lines ahead of time to look like they had already thought about the problems raised.

They need to look like they have addressed every concern before they go on to tv or the mainstream media to try to catch critics offguard with a response that sounds intelligent.

So don't bother trying to debate with people who can't think logically on why the problem they think exists must be put up for debate in the first place. It just plays into their hands that there IS a problem to begin with that needs their preplanned-in-advance solution to be implemented. ie The solution being the goal all along to take away something from the public that they ordinarily would not give up without some problem invented for an excuse to bring in the changes that the solution asks for. In this case: make australia more like china where people can't express themselves.

The sad thing is that previous generations had to fight and die in wars for the freedoms they bought with blood thinking they were doing good instead of serving some other purpose in a multi-step plan to seperate humans into manageable groups to form opposite beliefs and used to kill each other off in those wars. And then one day their children would be taken over by a global government by the manipulators who profited and planned all the wars to make themselves controllers over everything by exploiting people's weaknesses. It's a disgrace that the government is trying to take away those things and betray it's own people.
User avatar
Pariah
Street Fighter HD Remix Champ
Street Fighter HD Remix Champ
Posts: 7695
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 04:40 pm

Post by Pariah »

fuck this shit..i dont give a fuck about torrents but what we need is stupid fucking filtering putting more strain on the australian network and slowing shit down...
It's yet another case of Puritans deciding that their morality needs to be imposed on everyone. Puritans though are usually the worst offenders and more than likely to be rockspiders than anyone else.
nailed it...motherfuckers cant control their sick minds so they need filters..its better to fucking catch em and send them to jail where big buba makes them their bitch[/quote]
[img]http://i30.tinypic.com/5as8eq.gif[/img]
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

We need to convince them there is no debate. Just leave the internet as it is.

Besides isn't the the pc-level filtering actually more effective than the isp level filtering? But would they ever admit that it's a shit idea or just pat themselves on the back by silencing the critics and pretending they are doing good?

It takes more courage to admit you're wrong. Scrap the shit plan, save money, and inform those who are interested in the added protection of a filter to download them to pc. Why anger the nation, when you can come out as a hero for admitting your own plan is crap and that you were wrong to try to slow the internet down and cause grief for the whole nation who just wants to get things done fast?

What will happen is people will come down harder on you for wasting all the money on a flawed system than admitting you were wrong and giving the people what they want: opt out ability, or just admitting you can't filter everything and there is never ever going to be 100% effectiveness. And for those that get close to it, the speed reduction is too much of a sacrifice for the majority of people who have to pay for the internet out of their own pocket. You're just going to anger and frustrate everyone by not looking at the reason it's bad to have such a filter in the first place. If you can't see why it's bad right form the start, any advice given will fall on deaf ears.

If they don't have an opt-out ability put in the plan, they are no better than countries like china which don't allow people to think for themselves. In a free society people have control over their own lives provided you harm no one. I don't want the filter but I won't stop you from wanting it either. It's when the government forces those who don't need it, to take it, that I have an issue with. In general I just don't trust the government because it looks like they've been planning to sneak in newer stuff gradually and slowly over long period of time when they think nobody is watching them. Boiling the frog by slowly increasing the temperature gradually. We are the frog. They are the power-mad oppressors betraying you of human rights who use your money to create more problems than they solve. (assuming they had an intention of solving anything vs serving some other nefarious goal)
User avatar
Pariah
Street Fighter HD Remix Champ
Street Fighter HD Remix Champ
Posts: 7695
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 04:40 pm

Post by Pariah »

they should invest the money into more police that track fucking cunts that download kiddie porn..anyway i doubt a filter will stop the sick fucks from getting what they want
[img]http://i30.tinypic.com/5as8eq.gif[/img]
User avatar
unfnknblvbl
googlebomber
googlebomber
Posts: 9783
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:17 pm
XBL ID: unfunk
Steam ID: unfnknblvbl
Location: Just behind GameHED

Post by unfnknblvbl »

correction: They should invest the money into tracking the sick cunts that produce kiddie porn.
The sky calls to us; if we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars
User avatar
Pariah
Street Fighter HD Remix Champ
Street Fighter HD Remix Champ
Posts: 7695
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 04:40 pm

Post by Pariah »

indeed money could be better spent on both departments..
[img]http://i30.tinypic.com/5as8eq.gif[/img]
User avatar
Lepo5
Kyber Felted
Kyber Felted
Posts: 2841
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 12:46 pm

Post by Lepo5 »

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't part of KEVIN07 election promises better broadband for Australia ?

Did he ever use the word 'faster' or was it contained to the much greyer word 'better' ?

I suppose the political argument will be that it's better now because there's less offensive content.
Candy Arse wrote:
Lepo the Legend gave me his pair for free.
Vzzzbx
Bob Brown’s Rainbow Cumrag
Posts: 5484
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 06:38 pm
XBL ID: Fairlie Arrow
PSN ID: vzbxvzbx
Steam ID: vzbxvzbx

Post by Vzzzbx »

I'll read the rest later but this
GameHED wrote:By tricking you into thinking there is a debate and that they have any valid reason to need this stupid thing is an attempt to make them out like the good guy trying to help you all. :D
is 100% otm, because despite inviting discussion the official response to every comment is 'we're doing it anyway.'

I'm ending a lot of posts with 'but seriously, cunts' at the moment but seriously, cunts.
User avatar
unfnknblvbl
googlebomber
googlebomber
Posts: 9783
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:17 pm
XBL ID: unfunk
Steam ID: unfnknblvbl
Location: Just behind GameHED

Post by unfnknblvbl »

wait, you read one of GameHED's posts?

I'd really like to add him to an ignore list, if possible :lol:
The sky calls to us; if we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

I'm all for it. I think it's a good idea (make one for GR), but a part of me likes the idea people have to read old messages as punishment for not clicking on thread of each page to see what has been said before.

poster A: "here are the latest images for halo 4 which are exclusive"

Poster b: "here are the latest images for halo 4 which are exclusive"

Poster c: "hey we already have 10 different posts from 5 different people about halo 4 you idiots. Stop posting the same shit over and over again. Didn't you see the original one started by that other guy who had those images last week? Stop spamming!"

Poster A and B: "whoops, we didn't even know those guys even posted anymore. We must have had our ignore filter on because we don't like read/scroll through the crap posts in the threads we click. Strange that there are other people on the internet too. Who told them about it?"

Poster D: "fuck this shit I'm going to put these spammers on ignore list for filling up my screen with old stuff!"

Cycle repeats as poster D starts posting the same things as the list of ignored guys he adds because he can't see what they are posting. :D
User avatar
unfnknblvbl
googlebomber
googlebomber
Posts: 9783
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:17 pm
XBL ID: unfunk
Steam ID: unfnknblvbl
Location: Just behind GameHED

Post by unfnknblvbl »

I don't think anybody would be posting the same shit as you, so we'd be safe there.
The sky calls to us; if we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars
User avatar
Misly
Blackened is the end
Posts: 1069
Joined: 03 Sep 2006 05:49 pm
XBL ID: Misly
Location: Sydney

Post by Misly »

I think GameHed SHOULD write a book!
Last edited by Misly on 03 Jan 2009 06:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

I don't think anybody would be posting the same shit as you, so we'd be safe there.
Er..it's not just me or you who would use the filter. duh Ever thought of people who might want to ignore troll posters and clones? (ie rocco agressive-pimping type threads) There might be legit stuff mixed in you know. Some good legit posts can come from trolls too. There are drawbacks to it.
User avatar
Cletus
Hates Everyone Equally
Hates Everyone Equally
Posts: 15563
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 12:56 am
Location: Aboard the HMAS Todd Margaret
Contact:

Post by Cletus »

I'd never use a filter here.
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

This article sums up why it's so dangerous to apply the filter as it could end up blocking things that could be considered a form of hate speech but is really political speech.

http://www.inquisitr.com/12909/great-fi" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... ore-scary/

Lot of issues there.

Like I mentioned, both sides of politics will benefit from this in some way and be able to control what you can see by adding stuff later to try to shape your opinions and how you think. If it were about protecting children, then they wouldn't assume the whole country are children by default and not have a way for a consenting adult viewer of the internet to take the child safe mode off. Just like how duke nukem 3d was released here with the adult content taken out in australia, there will be no option for the adult to view the net as it normally is. This is the backwards australian game ratings thing (and the bannings system) ..applied to the internet.

I just think the idea of censoring the internet is such a sinister concept that goes beyond trying to nanny people: It's a form of denying a person's human rights. And that is its true intention as I have been telling all along. How could people even think to control what can't be controlled? Unless they benefit from it in some big way? Remember it's all secret right? So you won't know if they are blocking something legit and if they are lying about what they are blocking right? Just as I mentioned before in my post:
Secret Blacklist/ Due Process

The Minister points out that the blacklist to be maintained by ACMA will remain a secret, and cites legislation supporting this. His reasoning, as it seems to be for everything, is that it’s all about kiddie porn
Publishing the title or internet address of child abuse material would constitute distribution of illegal material and is therefore protected from release. To do otherwise would allow a person to view and download the material in jurisdictions where ISP-level filtering was not implemented.
That may well be the case, but the Minister fails to address concerns about due process should a site be added to the list. If there is no access to the list, there is no way to appeal a site being blocked incorrectly. Imagine a commenter leaving a lurid comment or pic on this blog, or a forum, and the site being added to the list based on this one instance. No transparency can only equal unfair and arbitrary justice that remains the hallmark of totalitarian Government.
The implementation of this scheme can and will take Australia into an elite club of totalitarian societies that value state control over free speech. The Rudd Government seems hell bent on implementing a scheme with no recourse, that may kill legitimate businesses, and slow internet speeds so that Australia can truly take its place as an online backwater in the digital age.

Today I am ashamed to be Australian, ashamed that my Government should seek to implement draconian 19th century style censorship laws over the marvel of the modern age: The Internet. Free Speech may not be totally dead in Australia yet, but it’s about to be placed on life support. Conroy can say all he wants that this isn’t about free speech, but speech censored by Government isn’t free, no matter which way you want to spin it.
Remember how I mentioned that the plan to censor everything will be eventually worldwide? (huge worldwide big brother spying thing monitoring everything you say and controlling what you see)
http://www.news.com.au/technology/story" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 08,00.html

Rating the internet lol. A new dark age in human history. Told you that computers and robots have taken control of what you can see and do. The very technology you built for good uses will just be used against you for evil purposes as I predicted. (your own tax money is being used to build your own prison - this could be considered the thought prison which would be like the digital equivalent of the physical fema camp one. Websites are targeted for termination like the humans in terminator movies and no questions can be asked about why) Where is neo to save us? Face it we are living on prison planet people. No escape.
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

Here's my response to a comment which was posted on an article about the issue: (you see already they have agents trying to respond to our responses to train them to argue their points more strongly, which is why I say "don't debate and just accept that they know why they are bringing in the filter and that it is not for the stated purposes they claim its for". All they want is for more people to debate it to convince people there is something that needs fixing, when there isn't anything to fix. The goal is they hope others will watch a debate and get tired of hearing it, then just buckle under pressure and let them have their way in exchange for shutting up about it - this is the technique used for everything that goes against the public interest but which benefits a few elite in power. Keeping making up BS and plausible-sounding excuses so journalists can't question them more and more)
Peter of Wheelers Hill Posted at 7:31pm December 28, 2008

There are 3 arguments mixed together running through these posts. 1.the ethics of censoring, 2. technical problems affecting the efficacy of censoring 2. and 3. who gets to decide what is banned and how this could be used to manipulate the public. Lets start with number

1. Australia has a long history of classification and censorship of material that is not in the public good. As a civilised society we have decided that there are media pieces that have little or no benefit to everyone and pose considerable risk to a minority and so these are restricted either by age classification or totally. To argue that the internet should be an exception is baseless, especially with its almost ubiquitous availability, and is inconsistent with censorship aims of all other media types. Nor is it realistic to state that parent alone should monitor at home. For instance none of us would endorse the production, transmission and viewing of child porn on the television, claiming that the only censorship should be parents monitoring the television at home (24/7!!!).

2. Technical problems will always be an issue, simply because it is difficult and costly and may not be 100% effective doesn't mean that it shouldn't be attempted if we are committed to the aims of censorship. If we are serious about restricting debasing, illegal and damaging material entering the country every effort must be made to do this, and to improve the effectiveness of measures over time.

3. Currently many things are restricted in their availability or access in Australia, be it weapons, knowledge used to produce bombs and poisons, or visual material that is exploitative that sustains (or creates) a culture of exploitation of others. The decision on what is restricted is made on the available evidence, via many mechanisms state and federal lawmaking processes. To claim that restricting access to some parts of the internet is simply a backdoor for the government to dupe the public is farcical. We are lucky to have access to many separate independent media sources in Australia and the likelihood of a media controlled 'big brother' state is infinitesimally small. So is the likelihood that our highly educated society is so easy to manipulate. It is also stupid to believe that an accountability process to ensure that legitimate sites are not included in the banned list can not be part of the ongoing implementation process. It is kind of obvious that some people posting simply want to bypass all the checks and balances we have developed as a civilised society. Basically they want to have total access to any material, any time, anywhere. They don't want not be told what, when and where they access material that in other circumstances is unavailable. Really its called lawlessness- wanting to operate outside the law or not have society restrict some of our personal freedoms. Wake up Australia, we need internet censorship for the long term good of our nation. We need to protect those vulnerable to the influence of such material by restricting its availability- even though some 'hard core' nuts will bypass such measures. Why would anyone want this sort of filth piped into our country anyway?
Notice how they list what the arguments against it are? Trying to counter anything you say with their own excuses?

My response to no.1. : parents ARE responsible for their children 24/7. The government isn't. When you don't feed the child, protect it from pedophiles, teach it, clothe it, the blame goes to you the parent. This is exactly what is wrong with the thinking of today's generation. The government is not the babysitter. You take responsibility for what they do and if they are not mature enough to be trusted (some mature faster than others - we all know some kids behave more than others) then you must take extra precautions to put the computer in a place where you can monitor its use. Just as nobody can be 100% certain if your house isn't going to get robbed if you don't lock your doors when you are not there. True a robber can break into your house, but you don't live a life where you are paranoid and stay home and hire bodyguards and other expensive overkill stuff that would make your living miserable? This is what the filter will do: be paranoid that every site is offensive by default and only if its 100% certain that it's not, then it will let you see it. It's not going to be nice to a site that mentions "breasts" but which isn't a porn site.

So having this 87% slow internet speed is unnecessary to the majority of people using the internet. It's not worth it. Just as it wouldn't be worth it hiring security guard 24/7 to ensure your place isn't going to get robbed when you can rely on locking doors and having other things like alarms or a dog to bark. The filter is your responsibility to put on your own damn pc. Not force me to use one and suffer slow speed just because you are too lazy to install the software! Bottom line: when a child is too young to take care of itself you make a commitment to stay home until it is old enough to think and/or can be watched over by a trusted guardian/sitter and take responsibility of it, or you just don't have children at all!

Irresponsible parents can't keep making excuses. You lead by example and teach kids that way. When they see you look to others for help they will end up like you expecting the government to give them everything and then all the tax money gets wasted on services nobody wants. What happens is they no longer want to take responsibility for anything they commit to and become reliant on others to solve their problems.

2. Doesn't apply to me since I believe in non-intervention in this matter. Censored content leads to confusion in many things and I would rather hear what is being said by the thing that might be offensive vs not hearing what is said altogether. Take many games where the religious stuff is taken out because it might offend some people. We should be free to hear what is said and/or the message of the author of the material first, over having to protect ourselves from it. Because if you can't hear the message, how can you argue against what is said to the authors and perhaps convince them to your thinking, or debate it openly for others to talk about? Having things in the open allows for people to apply their own critical thinking to things like books or movies or anything. It's soo important to first be able to hear what is said even if it might offend some people, so that people can first understand it.

Censorship just hurts those who are trying to figure out what the writers or creators are saying and confuses people. It's morally wrong, it's against a person's human right to speak, and if censorship wasn't there, then there is still nothing stopping the offended person who gets easily offended from just not listening/buying/reading what is said and walking away or avoiding it. (self censorship) In the case of TV if I see an offensive song or lyric I just turn it off. I don't want to take away that artists right to sing or create his own unique material just because I don't believe in his views.

3. Who decides what is wrong or right to hide from view? Everyone has their own view on what is suitable or not suitable. I have no interest in the genuinely dangerous sites but I still don't want the filter because of the chance the computers will block legitmate. Why should I take the risk that millions of sites are blocked because the technology isn't smart enough to understand the genuine stuff that should be blocked (child porn) and the innocent stuff? (a patch for duke nukem 3d to see the adult content like the americans) Laws are made by man. If man is corrupt enough he will make laws that are there simply to get an advantage over another group he hates. You can't truly censor hate. In this world people will convince others it's ok to bomb innocent civilians on the basis of defending their own country from attackers. Killing people with weapons of mass destruction to bring peace. (ie WWII - nobody likes the idea of something that powerful but it was built so there is nothing to say) There are many laws nobody would support that are just put there by imperfect men just to conquer over others and control them. This is the reality of the world and why laws are different in each country because of differing views. (the fluoride thing for example - this stuff is banned in some countries) I don't want australian laws to be like china's.

What people should remember is that men had to fight for their freedom in the past and it's disgusting that later generations are fighting for beliefs that go against what previous generations had to die to protect. If you want all those bad sites like "how to make bombs" or "how to poison" etc filtered out then fine, no arguments from me, but to assume that everyone's original intention is to go to those sites on how to make bombs and how to poison and how to do other illegal stuff, is just showing your own paranoia about the people around you.

All we want is for you to just put a filter on your own pc rather than waste so much money on something that will slow down speed, make legit sites harder to get to just because politicians don't like the critics, and block legit content because the computer filter isn't really good enough. By trying to make excuses for why you want australians to be like china and not be allowed to think, you are just making yourself look like you are hiding something from public scrutiny. Sort of like a thief who wants to avoid being seen in the act of committing a crime and is paranoid someone has already spotted him, and desperate to take any measure to avoid being caught so he sees anyone as a danger to himself, attacking people to hide his criminal actions. Even if they were not there to suspect that they were just involved in a crime - it doesn't matter to you why, just assume you've been seen and attack everything. Trying to convince us that there is no legit reasons (only criminal illegal ones) for questioning why you are even thinking of putting a countrywide filter or how its going to be abused.

If people are going to fight for their freedom and you are against fighting for those freedoms in support of laws that take those freedoms away, then you are part of the sinister plot to remove human rights form people. Just as china has laws to stop people from thinking. But at the same time china has rampant piracy and break laws. No man is good enough to say that their law is perfect for others to follow globally because each person in each nation has different beliefs. Each nation should protects its beliefs and mine is that censorship is a form of manipulation and control and is wrong, so that is why I won't want the filter, not because I want to know how to poison your cat.

...

Now what will happen is they will read the arguments on the internet about this, and try to strengthen their own argument even more for why they are justified in bringing in a filter. So the whole point of debating the topic is to make them look like the are protecting you and that there is no evil intention behind it. By constantly debating it, it legitimises the debate itself rather than letting people see that there is nothing to debate in the first place and that things are just fine as they are. (ie no problem to solve)

The more you debate it, the more they can constantly think up some new excuses and debate more strongly when they prepare their responses to your criticisms in public. After it's done they can bring these same arguments to other countries where they intend to change people's opinions. When all criticism has been argued and they still managed to push for the change: they then have more total responses to the critics' arguments at the ready to more-easily persuade people to accept what they wouldn't normally want to accept because they know instinctively that it's evil from the beginning. In other words: they had no intention of not pushing for the change from the start, they just needed to hear your arguments first to create prepared plausible-sounding excuses to counter them in public to look more confident. It's all about outward appearance. "We are protecting kiddies", makes it seem innocent.

If the government really wanted to protect people all they would need to do is listen to people like this:
I am definately in favor of ISP filtering. My prefered position, however, is an OPT IN arrangement. I would even be willing to pay a subscription service to have adult content filtered. Perhaps when the government realises mandatory filtering is something of a pipe-dream they will make a concession and pay the subscription fee for people like myself! People who do not want any access, either intentional or accidental, to any adult material via my internet connection. I believe that is responsible parenting and want to protect my kids from all porn. It has been documented as unhealthy for normal sexual development. I challenge anyone to prove otherwise, I owe it to my kids and their friends to do shield them.

Posted by: Cameron O'shea of Brisbane 4:15pm December 24, 2008
Comment 47 of 64
People who want it, get to have. Not force everyone by default to take something and anger those who don't want it. (just like the fluoride in water thing - all those who don't want the toxic waste won't have to drink it - but they won't listen to any argument, only use arguments to see if they can find a way to respond to ones they can with prepared comments as a way persuade people they have some idea of what they are doing when they don't intend to listen. Sure they'll say: we welcome advice and feedback as we like to listen to critical comments, but then have absolutely no intention of doing anything that the critics say that could make both sides happy. So the whole point of them saying that, is just as a way to argue better their points - not to actually follow through with changes from hearing the valid criticms. "Let me hear what you have to say, but I won't do anything because I am just using you to create some way to argue against your points and gather some plausible excuse or gather false info to counter your claim and need preparation time." It always happens that way: they would not create a problem that doesn't exist if they didn't have every intention of going through with the plan for some other nefarious reason.

But people say: "oh there is no conspiracy or anything, the government is just too dumb to think that way." No they are not. That is exactly what they want you to think. By pretending they are dumb and don't know what they are doing, you underestimate them and are more sleepy and less guarded with them on the issue. They know what they are doing but must have the outer appearance it's for some good cause rather than a bad one. If it's really just about kiddies then the government would do the "opt-in" arrangment like the above comment proposes. It's not about kiddies. Never was.
User avatar
unfnknblvbl
googlebomber
googlebomber
Posts: 9783
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:17 pm
XBL ID: unfunk
Steam ID: unfnknblvbl
Location: Just behind GameHED

Post by unfnknblvbl »

Image
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
I can has refund?
The sky calls to us; if we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars
User avatar
Pat
The Fury
Posts: 8060
Joined: 16 Jan 2008 08:43 pm

Post by Pat »

I watched Enemy of The State last night. What did you think of it, gamehed?
Vzzzbx
Bob Brown’s Rainbow Cumrag
Posts: 5484
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 06:38 pm
XBL ID: Fairlie Arrow
PSN ID: vzbxvzbx
Steam ID: vzbxvzbx

Post by Vzzzbx »

Such cunts.

What is it with Aus governments pissing on their key support bases? Howard comprehensively pissed all over his battlers, now Rudd's pissing on the socially progressive that got him over the line.
Vzzzbx
Bob Brown’s Rainbow Cumrag
Posts: 5484
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 06:38 pm
XBL ID: Fairlie Arrow
PSN ID: vzbxvzbx
Steam ID: vzbxvzbx

Post by Vzzzbx »

And now Mark Taylor is commentating the cricket again. This country is fucked.
User avatar
GameHED
10000 words or your money back!
10000 words or your money back!
Posts: 13228
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 01:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AU

Post by GameHED »

I watched Enemy of The State last night. What did you think of it, gamehed?
Movies contain all the secret messages. It's the intent of the controllers. They must put it into movies to test audience reactions and condition them first, and see what they say about it while recording their reactions before actually going through with it to see if it is a popular idea or not. A good example might be the movie Minority Report where you have psychics predicting a crime before it happens using some technology to prevent a crime - the ability to know shit before it happens is the theme of that movie and similarly that's where I can see them trying to push the legitimacy of taking away a person's privacy to stop a murder or something. They can fall back on the idea that if we don't have it, we can't catch people. "We can do good with it, all you have to do is give up your rights. Stop being a pain and just accept it. If you try to resist the control, we can use that as reason to assume you are a criminal with something to hide."

Anyway, after a long time of exposure people get acclimatised to it, and just accept the idea of being watched and the plan goes ahead to bring in even more controls over populations of people until they are unaware they are being tricked. (just do it over a loooong period of time instead of instantly so it's not noticable)

It's inevitable that all this illegal spying technology is misused. I'm not against the technology itself just it's misuse. Also the secrecy of it all and the sneakiness makes me suspect it will just be used for the interests of those who know about it, for purposes other than what they officially say it will be used for. We all obey if people in a uniform or who have a badge of authority say they are trustrworthy, because we have ways to publicly scrutinise them, but what if the watchers themselves are corrupt and have more power to cover themselves than normal? Who watches the watchers?

What I don't get is: why don't they go and actually arrest the child porn makers who created the blacklisted sites instead of forcing the population to have to give up their freedom and privacy? Why should legit people have to suffer when you can use that information to stop the thing at the source?
The extreme right wing just wants more power to control things. They are control freaks. It's nothing more than that. We should have had our R rating for games by now for example. But we are going backwards and having the internet censored. tsk tsk What a fucking joke..

While we have less freedom to see things through all this censorship, the controllers have more growing powers and freedom to see what we do by increasing their spying abilities on us with our taxes. Technology and spy robots and advances in AI to predict human patterns and behavior, is going to be the next step: if they can get the AI to be as sophisticated as HAL who can monitor everything you do and interpret it intelligently, then that will be the end. Maybe the giant computer will crash regularly and all your money held in the implanted chip in your forehead will be deleted, or the online virtual goods you bought lost, causing massive chaos as records are gone or stolen. There will be leaks and losses of sensitive data. We are just guinea pigs for their experiments. With great power will come great abusability. The next generation are already being acclimatised. (ie children being fingerprinted FFS)

All the effort to ruin innocent peoples' lives could be used to help catch the real bad guys who are out there. What that movie is about is that our own leaders have to be watched just as much as they watch us, or we'll be bullied into doing all these things we don't want. (in this case accepting the giving up of basic human rights and other freedoms others fought for so that later generations didn't have to)
Last edited by GameHED on 05 Jan 2009 10:40 am, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
lestat
Pixel Count Lestat
Pixel Count Lestat
Posts: 12710
Joined: 03 Jul 2006 11:15 pm
XBL ID: grlestat
PSN ID: grlestat
Steam ID: grlestat
Friend Code: SW-5550-6241-2054
EpicGS ID: grlestat
Battle.net ID: grlestat#1153
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Post by lestat »

Vzzzbx wrote:And now Mark Taylor is commentating the cricket again. This country is fucked.
:rollin:
Talez
Choc #2
Choc #2
Posts: 8277
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 11:28 pm
Location: Froggy's basement faking being in the United States
Contact:

Post by Talez »

Vzzzbx wrote:now Rudd's pissing on the socially progressive that got him over the line.
Ha. You really think he gives a shit about us to start with? The socially progressive/economically sensible don't have a real option to vote for anymore and as much as I find K-Rudd that kind of dopey likable I know he knows that he can piss all over us and go for the WSPTOTC lobby at the same time. Have your cake and eat it too so to speak.

Labor is shifting more and more right every day while the Greens are socially progressive but completely fucking daft on the economic spectrum.

So what's your choices? Hold your nose and vote to lose your Internet connection or hold your nose and vote to lose your job?

At least back in the day we could vote Democrats. But that isn't even an option anymore thanks to Meg Lees selling us up the fucking river.
Post Reply