Gillard is thinking of children. Not hers (obviously), but the countless others of interest to pedophiles. She is backing law changes to get the government involved in censoring the internet, and forcing requiring ISPs to filter government banned sites.
Senator Conroy has defended the plan:
"The internet is an incredible piece of technology and in our lifetime it's unlikely we'll see anything like it again," he said. But for all its technical brilliance, the internet is a distribution and communications platform.
Err, it's actually a positive that it is a distribution and communications platform. That's one of the reasons why it is brilliant.
"Having no regulation to combat illegal activity actually weakens all that is good about the internet."
I think there are a lot of options to combat illegal activity. The government building filter lists of what is acceptable or unacceptable may not be one of those. "Out of sight, out of mind" doesn't actually mean "out of action".
The current projections are a spend of over $100 million to set this up, and I get the feeling this money will be seed money for a much bigger bill, and the filtering technology will be easily circumvented (by pedophiles) and quite possibly, easily abused (by the government), especially if they resort to rules based determinations.
With this bill, Gillard takes a step to the left. But, the progressives will cry - for the best possible reasons: Think of the children!
Senator Conroy has defended the plan:
"The internet is an incredible piece of technology and in our lifetime it's unlikely we'll see anything like it again," he said. But for all its technical brilliance, the internet is a distribution and communications platform.
Err, it's actually a positive that it is a distribution and communications platform. That's one of the reasons why it is brilliant.
"Having no regulation to combat illegal activity actually weakens all that is good about the internet."
I think there are a lot of options to combat illegal activity. The government building filter lists of what is acceptable or unacceptable may not be one of those. "Out of sight, out of mind" doesn't actually mean "out of action".
The current projections are a spend of over $100 million to set this up, and I get the feeling this money will be seed money for a much bigger bill, and the filtering technology will be easily circumvented (by pedophiles) and quite possibly, easily abused (by the government), especially if they resort to rules based determinations.
With this bill, Gillard takes a step to the left. But, the progressives will cry - for the best possible reasons: Think of the children!
There is already a filter of sorts in NZ, as I found out the other day. I like to email my wife during the day and we often use google images to puncuate our converstaions. I wanted to tease her with a pic of a child running off down a beach with a bare bum (private joke). I could see the google thumbnail version of the pic I found (from someone's blog) but as soon as I clicked for the full sized image to copy n paste, it appeared with a big black censor's band over it.
ReplyDeleteSo I must be a pedophile, according to my ISP. Or perhaps my sense of humour is pedophilic? And I never knew. Well you learn something everyday I guess.
What bollocks.