5 ms·
The Australian government is always threatening to implement draconian filter, censorship, or data-logging plans; luckily, in true government form, they never c
by Wingman4l7 13y ago
The Australian government is always threatening to implement draconian filter, censorship, or data-logging plans; luckily, in true government form, they never carry through on it.
It's a pity that such things are the only exposure the tech crowd has to Australia, instead of more compelling things like the massive and ambitious National Broadband Network fiber-to-the-home infrastructure project.
- nwh 13y agoThreatening? We already have a mandatory filter[0] with no auditing of the ban list, and a government who gives full NSA access to all our data. [0]: Includes child porn and "morally offensive" sites, whatever that means.
- Wingman4l7 13y agoHunh... never heard of anyone bumping up against it. How is it mandatory -- ISPs required to implement it upon pain of fines? Or did they just tell Telstra to do it, since they own all the lines? As far as the data-logging goes, I meant it as done by the native government -- although I agree that's largely a "tomato, tomahto" distinction.
- tomflack 13y agoHe's referring to the AMCA blacklist, which while not a filter in the sense we usually discuss is a kind of internet censorship.
- prawn 13y agoThe existing filter is supposedly for the vilest, illegal things. It has however caught some pretty plain stuff in the past, though is largely forgotten now.
- tomflack 13y agoIf the Liberal/National Coalition manages to achieve a majority in the Senate, I think this will be the time we see a filter become law.
- gilgoomesh 13y ago> fiber-to-the-home Or, as it will be known on Saturday evening: copper to the "good luck with that".
- Wingman4l7 13y agoUgh, don't remind me -- so shortsighted! (Some context: the opposition party -- which apparently is going to win? I don't follow politics too closely -- was suggesting that the NBN project could be done more cheaply if it was fiber-to-the-node instead... thus completely defeating the purpose of the network upgrade.)
- vacri 13y agoThat's the thing that puzzles me. Fast internet benefits businesses more than residents, and it's the 'business party' that's against it. A colleague says that there are Murdoch's hands in the till on this one, given that fast internet threatens his TV offerings.
- jsmeaton 13y agoWE NEED TO CONTROL THE SPENDING!!!!!!!!! That's basically all it comes down to. Not enough people care about what a fast network can do for the country, and they've been brainwashed to think that the economic management of the last few years has been appalling. It's really really strange. People all of a sudden seem to give a shit about how much we are spending and think it's a bad thing, when every economic commenter has said it's been managed brilliantly. It looks like a lot of people are trying to be smart and are failing hugely.
- Wingman4l7 13y agoWell it doesn't help that all those pits have asbestos in them -- but that's not the project's fault. That would have to have been cleaned up eventually anyway. It's the same problem the US has IMO: no one wants to support grand, forward-looking projects that are going to take longer than a term in office. That's why poor NASA has its funding yoyo-ed around a 4-year presidential election cycle, and can't ever follow through on the bigger projects anymore.