Last month I commented on Senator Conroy’s plans to forge ahead with his ridiculous, costly, ineffective ISP filtering.
Senator Conroy sees opponents of his plan as Child Porn advocates (nice way to club to death any debate).
As I outlined in my series:
What’s the real danger to our children – part 1?
Stranger Danger Online – Cyber stalking with intent to groom
The Filtering does nothing to protect children from child porn. That Conroy is taking the opportunity to get political mileage out of children is sad reflection of his own personal morals.
So with GetUp’s new Project Democracy mentioned in my last post I have decided to "filter" Senator Conroy, by following and reporting on his actions.
If we have enough people "filtering" and reporting on his actions letting him know he is being watched, he might get the message – no?
Want to filter…. I mean follow Senator Conroy click here
Now while we are on the subject why hasn’t GetUp launched a campaign against the ISP filtering plan. Not enough interest? Not a priority right now? One would think it fits within their scope.
I see ISP filtering as a direct threat to grass roots democracy.
Perhaps Jason, if he is reading might be able to enlighten us.
Related posts:
- ISP Filtering Update 2009… not going to be any easier for Senator Conjob It seems that everyone is back from their christmas break...
- My Brother’s Keeper. Senator Conroy seems to be committed to the plan...
- Senator Conroy is watching you Click through to my zazzle page where I have some...


Following Conroy, also Fielding
Sean, check the contacts page
http://www.getup.org.au/about/contact/
you can suggest a new campaign topic!
Sounds like you have the same problem we do here in the U.S.
All Scoundrels hide behind at least one of the 3 -
Flag
God
Children
OZ,
Yes I must be blind, but then I was going back and forward between the project democracy site and getup – that’s my excuse anyway
John,
I think it’s because we mimic your political trends at least in media releases.
Content filtering is as useful as a chocolate teapot.
Ironport devices the world over do their best to filter spam and phishing emails. Most ISP’s and businesses employ at least one Ironport server. The reports I see from these guys are comprehensive and indicate that they throw away something like 98% of all email received, yet spam and phishing attempts arrive in my inbox every day.
For every filter there’s a hack, of that you can be sure…
Well I see a lot of claims here about the uselessness of ISP based filtering and the ineffectiveness of spam filtering (RE: Ironports), yet I have worked in the ISP industry since 1995 and see significant improvements in content and email security since then.
Anyone claiming a system must be perfect before they accept it as useful are fantasizing with one hand in their pants…
As for ISP based filtering, what do you expect? Be adults for once. I have worked with numerous ISPs and ALL have looked for the first hole in which to stick their heads anytime any level of true co-operation was sought and real solutions targeted. It was ALWAYS someone else who should do it.
When you bulldust just once too often about th etchnology being too weak, then you are exposed to action from the pollies when thetechnology is one day good enough.
And the technology is good enough today. Handled really badly by ACMA, this is without a doubt true, but still some are good enough.
As for comparisons to China and Korea etc, get a grip children. Are you for real?? You end up becoming the real enemies of democracy when you make claims like that…
BSNL in India has over 4 million active users on ISP based filtering and no shrieks of China, Korea or other tyrranies about that one??? Must be a tad hard kiddos, but get your facts right, OK?
Mikeg:
One claim does not make “a lot of claims”. Perhaps I need to quantify.
Ironports are the best we have for email and although they’re very good (98% of all email is NOT to be sniffed at. Imagine your inbox if they only filtered 10%), they cannot possibly filter ALL the spam. Get to my last sentence and you’ll see the point I was trying to illustrate.
Now, as a 20 year verteran in IT and internet business in general (started in 1987), including the ISP aspect of the industry, I’d be extremely amazed if we hadn’t seen significant improvement in the last 10 years or so. Technology has come a very long way in that time after all. It doesn’t change the fact however, that for every filter ever designed there’s been an equally successful hack to get around it. Just because China banned iTunes doesn’t mean people there can’t see it and use it if they want to take the risk.
As for bsnl, you are correct. They do offer a proxy service for content filtering but do not require their customers to connect through the proxy if they don’t want to. Get your facts straight Mike, ok??
Mike,
You focus in on one aspect of the issue- that being the technology. I would still have serious objections to the ISP filtering if it were as good as the claims.
I am an not an IT expert but the industry itself rejects the idea, citing cost as well as ineffectiveness. So I will go with Bertrand Russell when he says that if the majority of expets agree then they are are probably right.
I will let your insults slide. As to Korea and China where are those claims being made be me here in this post – no. So kindly stop with the strawman.
It would be a long bow to draw equating ISP filtering in Australia with that in China or Korea, but it al starts somewhere.
The last decade has seen the erosion of civil liberties both here and in the United States.
You head in the sand approach, “she’ll be right jack” is quite frankly alarming. Your attempt to curtail debate by labelling those who might be a little too premature in their claims regarding a totlitarian regime suggests to me you have a rather closed mind on the matter.
Frankly I could give a rats if India has 4 million on IS filtering it has very little to do with the points I am trying to make.
Excuse the typo’s and poor wording, multi tasking and can’t be stuffed editing.