Comments on: Why Internet Filtering Won’t Work, is Wrong and Dangerous

By: ranvijay

ranvijay — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:04:53 +0000

I think it will be better to have some filter.It will stop children to access those areas where they are not to be expected.Some times they can erase those information saved somewhere in the files unwillingly.So its a better idea.

http://www.ezinfocenter.in

By: Internet Censorship and Filters « Chris Loft’s Blogloft

Internet Censorship and Filters « Chris Loft’s Blogloft — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 06:58:57 +0000

...] around Australia are voicing their opposition – Why Internet Filtering Won’t Work, is Wrong and Dangerous by Margaret Simons, is one such example. Margaret begins her blog “It won’t work. There it is. [...

By: Porn lovers unite: Rev Lovejoy attacks | the importance of ideas...

Porn lovers unite: Rev Lovejoy attacks | the importance of ideas... — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 03:43:05 +0000

...] case against a system that will simply not work. And there have been many worthy combatants who have made the strongest case to Conroy against [...

By: ltep

ltep — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 04:00:39 +0000

it is actually a good idea that if implemtnted in the long run would help our kids out. they dont need to be exposed to certain things at certain age.

Well that’s fine. If you have children you can choose to enforce a whitelist on your computer so the kids can only access certain websites if you choose to. There’s no reason why the rest of us, who aren’t children and have no desire to have children should have this filter foisted onto us.

By: dave

dave — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:03:19 +0000

Just a quick update.

With both Telstra and Internode (Australia’s two largest Internet providers) saying they will not take part in this trial. iiNet (Another large ISP) is taking part so that they can prove how much of a waste of time it will be (http://www.iinet.net.au/about/news/internet_filtering.html) and Optus said they would take part but on a much scaled down version (instead of the 10,000 URLS blocked they would block 1300).

Now Senator Conroy is saying the test will be done on “a closed network test and will not involve actual customers”. I really think this is going to be the end of this idea, now we just have to remain vigilant to ensure it doesnt creep back in a changed form.

(offtopic)
Workhard, I would pay more attention to your post if it was not obvious spam. That URL is registered by “NET4″ (http://whois.domaintools.com/bpojobsathome.com) which has registered over 2,000 domains. Real Legitimate.

By: Trevor Cook

Trevor Cook — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 22:12:19 +0000

I wonder if Senator Conroy realises that he has won himself a place in Australian political history as the first case study of political organisation done largely through twitter, facebook and blogs – people will be analysing his impact on the emerging maturity of social media in Australia for years to come. Well done Senator

By: workhard

workhard — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:50:45 +0000

it is actually a good idea that if implemtnted in the long run would help our kids out. they dont need to be exposed to certain things at certain age.

http://www.bpojobsathome.com

By: Tuesday filtering wrap up: Conroy’s blog, AISA, Greens and the trial of doom - Somebody Think Of The Children

Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:10:16 +0000

...] – Crikey: Why Internet Filtering Won’t Work, is Wrong and Dangerous [...

By: Bob Gosford

Bob Gosford — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 07:21:56 +0000

And don’t forget that there is still provision in the NT Intervention legislation (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ntnera2007531/)that requires that anyone with, or responsible for a ‘publicly-funded’ computer (whatever that means – see PART 3–REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLICLY FUNDED COMPUTERS) must install a filter that ‘that has been accredited, in writing, by the Telecommunications Minister’.
Breaches of these provisions are strict liability offences…ie, you are nicked if I say so…
And of course no-one took a blind bit of notice of this crap – but it illustrates the kind of rubbish that Brough & Howard got away with and that Macklin & Rudd maintain…

By: Pat Miller

Pat Miller — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 05:17:36 +0000

I completely agree, It seems that we cannot have a rational debate over this without the zealots shrieking about child pornography. It says more about the shriekers than it does about men in general. What do they think we think when we look at a child? This appalls me.

Here’s a theory about this. I think Conroy is the fall guy for a strategy to get the conservatives holding the balance of power in the Senate to pass government legislation.