RSS Feeds
Howard to blow $90m on porn filters
Posted by Seamus Byrne at 9:05 AM on August 13, 2007
Tee hee. Blow. Late last week the govt announced their biggest crackdown on net nasties since Alston's heyday - and boy did that first effort work a treat. A $189m package to cut the porn, the child sex predators, and bad language. Yes, bad language - that's going to be managed by a virtual bar of soap, swimming through the tubes washing the mouths of Australians who think it is clever to cuss others out. Game servers everywhere are on notice.
I'm all for cracking down on the predators. Castration by brick or rusty knife is suitable punishment for those animals. So $40m on that front for the fed police is all good.
But $90m for home filtering software?
Plus, forcing ISPs to offer provider-level filtration on request? Have they done any more research on this than just market research how Liberal voters like the idea of such a concept? Newsflash: IT. DOESN'T. WORK!
There is no filter that will ever be a match for some parental involvement, just like TV. Odds are the kids know more about the software and network than the parents do, and they'll have that shit[CENSORED] bypassed quicker than a quick thing.
Needless to say, ISPs aren't too happy about the whole idea either.
Comments
poo
Posted August 13, 2007 9:46 AM
WHAT THE FUCK?!!!@#$%^&*()_
That's my money they're doing that with! I don't pay taxes so they can be torched! It's just so damn frustrating - the blatant ignorance and negligence forced upon our country by little monkey men...
psyc
Posted August 13, 2007 9:55 AM
Is it election year again?
They'd get my vote if they brought our telecommunications infrastructure up to date instead of this useless campaign maker crap.
meinrosebud
Posted August 13, 2007 10:47 AM
Typically, because it is an election year the Government must be seen to attempt to do something about this issue... however as we know it doesn't work.
Brendan
Posted August 13, 2007 12:17 PM
The government has had huge success cracking down on child pornography and this is another step in the right path - especially considering there is no regulation of internet content.
Cam
Posted August 13, 2007 1:39 PM
ISP level filtering??? What are we in China now? This sets a dnagerous precident, not to mention the ease of misuse.
Oh and yay! My tax dollars spent doing something i am opposed to. Whoever goes against this gets my vote (Waiting for the Greens here).
Seamus
Posted August 13, 2007 2:43 PM
@Cam, the ISP-level stuff is set to be at the request of the user, so that isn't too bad. Except that the ISPs have pointed out it won't really work, and will absolutely slow down a person's connectivity.
Cam
Posted August 13, 2007 5:03 PM
@Seamus,
Sorry i read that on the SMH website not this one, basically they said that while it would be optional for people to filter out porn and alike, child porn and voilent websites would be filted out for everyone, not that thats necessarily a bad thing, but yeah just sets a dangerous precident.
Dmitri
Posted August 13, 2007 6:46 PM
Welcome to Communism :-)
poo
Posted August 13, 2007 7:11 PM
@ Brendan
Regulation of internet content? To what end? I like violence and I like porn. I like choice and the ability to think for myself. None of these things are illegal. I also like to swear when any government does something that wastes the finances of its people. How is this in ANY way 'another step in the right path'? I think you are missing the point; which is that our government plans to spend $189 million on something that SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK!
Is this government the same one that fought against the rights of the homosexual community? And now the same government is having 'huge success cracking down on child pornography' you say?
This ought to be good...
McbLt
Posted August 13, 2007 7:32 PM
Simply a publicity stunt. It sounds nice and it's a hot topic, but unless they actually put in a very long term goal, it will be useless. Even if it is functional, without a long term strategy, the software will be worked around - within months if not weeks. As is the nature of 'security' on the net.
It just goes to show just how out of touch the government is to things online... so they know how to use YouTube and MySpace, woop de doo...
rach
Posted August 13, 2007 8:05 PM
I think it also needs to be said that Howard announced this when he was addressing an explicitly conservative Christian lobby group.
I also find it amusing that Rudd's response to Teh Internetz is 'get down' with the yoof on MySpace, Howard's is to clutch his pearls about mythical sex preverts and bad language.
Wee
Posted August 14, 2007 1:10 AM
Bah! That is so shit! I take it, if i do not install the software, i will not encounter these blocked pages? Violence and porn are fun!
komandoe
Posted November 3, 2008 4:47 PM
What the f*ck is with this bull. this is going to be a huge failure and once the general population discovers about this porn filter there will be a massive upoar. this giverment is displaying stupidity beyond belief