Australia wants to fine for banned hyperlinks.
Discussion
http://www.smh.com.au/news/home/technology/banned-...
I know the regular "will someone think of the children" line will come out, and everyone will say we need this sort of government level censorship to stop child pornography. However, it will not stop child pornography. I posted a little excerpt from an article the other week about the methods used by pedophiles to spread their abhorrent materials. This censorship will do nothing to curb that.
Do you trust a government to tell you what you can and can't be reading. How long until we have such a system in the UK with the same sort of penalties ?
smh said:
The Australian communications regulator says it will fine people who hyperlink to sites on its blacklist, which has been further expanded to include several pages on the anonymous whistleblower site Wikileaks.
Wikileaks was added to the blacklist for publishing a leaked document containing Denmark's list of banned websites.
...
Online civil liberties campaigners have seized on the move by ACMA as evidence of how casually the regulator adds to its list of blacklisted sites. It also confirmed fears that the scope of the Government's censorship plan could easily be expanded to encompass sites that are not illegal.
"The first rule of censorship is that you cannot talk about censorship," Wikileaks said on its website in response to the ACMA ban.
...
The Government has said it was considering expanding the blacklist to 10,000 sites and beyond.
That's rather scary. The Internet is a powerful tool for freedom of speech and expression of ideas. I don't fancy the prospect of a government imposing fines and penalties on people who want to make certain information available to others based purely on a governments decision on whether you should be viewing it or not.Wikileaks was added to the blacklist for publishing a leaked document containing Denmark's list of banned websites.
...
Online civil liberties campaigners have seized on the move by ACMA as evidence of how casually the regulator adds to its list of blacklisted sites. It also confirmed fears that the scope of the Government's censorship plan could easily be expanded to encompass sites that are not illegal.
"The first rule of censorship is that you cannot talk about censorship," Wikileaks said on its website in response to the ACMA ban.
...
The Government has said it was considering expanding the blacklist to 10,000 sites and beyond.
I know the regular "will someone think of the children" line will come out, and everyone will say we need this sort of government level censorship to stop child pornography. However, it will not stop child pornography. I posted a little excerpt from an article the other week about the methods used by pedophiles to spread their abhorrent materials. This censorship will do nothing to curb that.
Do you trust a government to tell you what you can and can't be reading. How long until we have such a system in the UK with the same sort of penalties ?
him_over_there said:
Do you trust a government to tell you what you can and can't be reading. How long until we have such a system in the UK with the same sort of penalties ?
Uhh, we do already. It's called the Internet Watch Foundation and produces a black list of sites that ISPs have to block, at the moment it's just child porn (but after a couple of mistakes they managed to block all Virgin customers editing Wikipedia, and some site that stores a lot of webpages called the Wayback Machine).
FunkyNige said:
... the Wayback Machine).
Not heard of that before ... look what I found.http://web.archive.org/web/20000706223609/http://w...
A lot's changed.
FunkyNige said:
him_over_there said:
Do you trust a government to tell you what you can and can't be reading. How long until we have such a system in the UK with the same sort of penalties ?
Uhh, we do already. It's called the Internet Watch Foundation and produces a black list of sites that ISPs have to block, at the moment it's just child porn (but after a couple of mistakes they managed to block all Virgin customers editing Wikipedia, and some site that stores a lot of webpages called the Wayback Machine).There is a clear and fundamental difference between this and the system in use in Aus.
Dogsey said:
Not heard of that before ... look what I found.
http://web.archive.org/web/20000706223609/http://w...
A lot's changed.
Ugh! It's like some sort of "TVR Arse-Lickers Website". http://web.archive.org/web/20000706223609/http://w...
A lot's changed.
I bet all the forums were full of people with beards who smelled faintly of urine
deckster said:
FunkyNige said:
him_over_there said:
Do you trust a government to tell you what you can and can't be reading. How long until we have such a system in the UK with the same sort of penalties ?
Uhh, we do already. It's called the Internet Watch Foundation and produces a black list of sites that ISPs have to block, at the moment it's just child porn (but after a couple of mistakes they managed to block all Virgin customers editing Wikipedia, and some site that stores a lot of webpages called the Wayback Machine).There is a clear and fundamental difference between this and the system in use in Aus.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff