Australian Internet Filter Delayed

July 9, 2010 -

Australian Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy (pictured) has said that implementation of a mandatory Internet filter in the country will be delayed for about a year while the government examines exactly what constitutes content that is “refused classification.”

Conroy had intended to introduce official legislation on the matter in early 2010, but, according to ABC, will now delay it until later in the year, biding time as an independent review looks into what exactly should be banned by the filter. Who will be conducting the review is not known, or at least has not been revealed as of yet.

Conroy noted that depictions of child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence, detailed instruction in crime, violence or drug use and material that advocates a terrorist act are banned under the RC rating, adding, “…this material is not available in newsagencies; it is not on library shelves. You cannot watch it on a DVD or at the cinema and it is not shown on television.”

It was reported that, “in the meantime,” three Australian ISPs have agreed to block websites featuring child pornography.

Earlier this week, Australia’s new Prime Minister Julia Gillard endorsed plans for the filter.


Thanks Ryan!


Comments

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

First they need to figure out how they're actually going to implement this, and then they should figure out how to keep it running when angry and bored hackers decide to attack it. For some reason, I can just see a /b/ assault on this thing if Australia can ever work out the logistics and get the bill passed.

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

/b/'s too busy dying of cancer to attack anything.

  ▲
▲ ▲

http://www.randomosity.net/

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

The task is still impossible to complete no matter how hard they try. I said the same thing the last time I replied to this topic. All of Australias "old farts" plans here go out the window when one pimply teenager sets up a personal proxy with a friend in another country. They will all laugh and sip Boost and Amp drinks while high fiving themselves that they worked around this filter in less than 10 minutes. I mean seriously, this is exactly how the whole US works around the stupid sports blackout rules as well.

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

Very true.  But that little fact wont stop them from spending tons of taxpayer money on it.  And it will stop the casual user from getting that stuff.  Chances are though the people who are out looking for things like child porn are not what can be described as the "casual user".

===============

Chris Kimberley

===============

Chris Kimberley

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

Not to mention it'd only be a matter of time until a politician is caught looking at one of the sites they wanted banned.

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

I can see australians censoring stuff like that old Simpsons episode on Australia, instead of just child porn and bullshit.

Seroiusly, governments should be retiring their old members faster. They ruin everything with their ancient views.

------------------------------------------------------------ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

That would a function for the citizens to perform.  If people vote for them, they will stick around.

===============

Chris Kimberley

===============

Chris Kimberley

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

All the old farts need more time to figure out how to censor shit.

Austrailia has no right to call itself a "free" nation.

Re: Australian Internet Filter Delayed

No, they're just debating what to censor for everyone else and what sites they will add to their personal exceptions list.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician