First, potentially explicit images and video content will now be coming from a separate single domain, explicit.bing.net. This is invisible to the end customer, but allows for filtering of that content by domain which makes it much easier for customers at all levels to block this content regardless of what the SafeSearch settings might be. This makes it much easier for filtering software to block unwanted content if SafeSearch has been turned off.

In addition, we will begin returning source url information in the query string for images and video content so that companies who already use this method of filtering will be able to catch explicit content on Bing along with everything else they are already blocking for their customers.

So no, it won’t affect your ability to get some bada-bing in the privacy of your own home, but your company or school will be able to filter all of it easily. Kudos for Microsoft to think about those who care about these things without affecting those who don’t care. [Bing]

No idea from which back corner of the web this internet meme has come from, but it worked for Watchmen, so it will almost definitely work for the proposed ISP internet filtering scheme that the Rudd government keeps pushing.If you use your imagination and imagine that it is a true representation of the current argument with the Government, then ultimately we can assume that the Allied forces (against filtering) will be victorious over Hitler and his cronies.

Also, I wonder how long it will take before someone mashes up this clip with the R18+ rating for games debate?

[YouTube - Thanks Kaan!]

AU: Um, this article isn’t actually correct. Although Senator Xenophon has announced he will be voting against the filter, and Labor really needs his vote to push it through, that doesn’t mean it’s dead. There are still plenty of ways that the Government could push this through, so put that champagne away and keep fighting for your online freedoms.

If you want more details on why this isn’t over yet, hit the EFA website.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority’s blacklist already contains 1370 sites, only 674 of which actually relate to child porn. The others are legal to view for those 18-and-over, but would have been blocked under the censorship proposal – such as an anti-abortion website that showed photographs of allegedly aborted fetuses (Sure, it’s gross and unnecessary-but pro-lifers have the right to use those disgusting, low-blow tactics if they want).

Plus, there was no evidence that internet-filtering would have been effective in the first place. Though Communications Minister Stephen Conroy had started trials with six ISPs, the three largest internet providers were not involved, rendering any results from the trials more or less useless.

So, in the end, a combined opposition of the Australian Liberal Party, Greens and two Independent senators laid the smack-down on the “unworkable censorship measures,” and now it’s not going through. Hurrah! [Sydney Morning Herald via Boing Boing]

I know, petitions are a bit of a nothing way of demonstration, but considering the massive push GetUp are putting behind their efforts to thwart the Government’s filtering program, it can’t hurt to add your name to the list. And it might actually make a difference.

To sign the petition, point your browser here. Do it now.

[Getup.org]

Even though the number of people dissatisfied with something in polls is usually higher than the actual percentage (dissatisfied people are more likely to complain), it’s really interesting that that many residents think this is an infringement on their rights. I guess getting your mug on record as being a camwithher viewer is more tangible evidence of the internet crackdown than sites being blocked? [Times Online]

Since the launch of Gogo, American has not experienced any reported incidents of customers viewing inappropriate content via the Gogo service. However, we believe this is an appropriate measure to take.

If they have had no incidents–as expected, just as you don’t hear of many people watching porn in their portable DVD players in a plane–, why give up? What happened to their technical arguments? Is the filtering going to limit web access to legitimate services or not? Most probably, American Airlines will avoid answering those questions.

But besides that, are they going to regulate people looking at porn on their own devices too? What about reading Playboy? Are they going to ban Playboy from flights? And are they going to filter Gizmodo because we post NSFW topless girls covered in oil playing Wii Sports once in a while?

Of course, logical questions like these will probably find no answers from American Airlines either. Religious groups like Focus on the Family, on the other side, would probably love to answer them with axes, pitchforks, and torches.

Another sad day in the history of a country that has defended personal freedom and responsibility as a core value since its very beginning. [Sky talk]