WIKILEAKS

[Dragonfan]

Apparently this is where the filtering malarky is at . . .

 

On 11 February 2009 a new filtering trial was announced, initially with the ISPs iPrimus Telecommunications, Tech 2U, Webshield, OMNIconnect, Netforce and Highway 1. Testing with each ISP will take place for at least six weeks once filtering equipment has been obtained and installed, and iPrimus expects the trial to begin in late April or early May with five or ten thousand participants. The trial will be opt-in, with ISPs asking for volunteers, although all WebShield customers already receive a filtered service. None of the top three ISPs, Telstra, Optus and iiNet, have been included in the trial, although iiNet expects to be involved at a later time

[danoz]

iiNet today claimed in an AGE article that it stongly disagreed with the filter ad would not participate in trials.

 

Today the AGE revealed that one of the criteria that could get a site listed is "describes in detail instructions to commit a crime" now we all know that cannibus cultivation is a crime and this site clearly has information directly, and in a detailed fassion relating to cannibus cultivation.

 

Its great that the site is not in the list but the legislation clearly could legally place the site on the list.

[luciddreaming]

WE can't let this go ahead just because ozstoners isn't on the list. It will be eventually. Believe me.

Just like people let some laws go ahead because it may seem to protect people but it's really just paving the way for more draconian laws.

 

BTW there was some protests a while ago and apparently they were really crap and no one really knew anything about it.

[NY2OZ]

I just relocated here from the US and I cannot believe that there isn't more of a public outcry over this internet censorship plan.

 

If the wiki-leaks list is accurate, much of the content they are planing on blocking is not illegal. I'm sure the list will be expanded and if a US based anti-abortion site is on the list, what chance does a site such as ozstoners have if they decide they want it banned?

 

Like the 'patriot act', it goes to show you that with the right title you can get anything past an indifferent, frightened or unengaged electorate.

 

Instead of blacklisting sites that the government feels are 'harmful', slowing web surfing to hell, and infringing on the rights 21 million people, why not just have ISPs track IPs of the people who are accessing the illegal content and prosecute those people under existing laws?

 

The irony of it is that according to the FBI, the vast majority of the of material they are trying to censor is traded P2P and will be unaffected by blacklisting web traffic. As an American, I'm too familiar with the brand of fear mongering / pandering being employed by Senator Stephen Conroy. I think that Senator Conroy might have learned all he knows about the web from US Senator Ted Stevens.

[Dday]

From what i have read that list is not the governments, some other organisation made it