'World Censorship Day'

[the glowing carp]

So sites get shut down if anybody posts anything no-legit, there is no trial, no defence, the host site may not even be aware of the non-legitimate content and it still gets shut down.

Bye bye Internet, as Agent Smith says "How can you talk if you have no mouth", if sites don't have an address, how can they be found?

[monster_gardener]

[Tinker]

Google has been lobbying the hardest against it.

[Tinker]

Google has been lobbying the hardest against it.

[the glowing carp]

The herd of Elephant's in the room is the potential for abuse by nefarious agencies SOPA opens up, all somebody who doesn't like a site needs to do is post something deemed illegal and badda bing dadda boom, bye bye site.

Google would be closed down over night as it inadvertantly provides links to 'illegal' material.

For Google to continue in it's current form it would need to have exemption but then this opens the door for somebody to mimic Google and continue on with so called illegal linkage.

I think they want to turn the net into a mirror image of Television, a portal for propoganda and selling Soup*, which squeezes out any local/non-Soup* content.

The only way around this Net eclipse is via a string of email addresses, as once they remove an IP address the game is over, like trying to find ones way to Smolensk from Adelaide without a map.

[Demon of Undoing]

Either this won't matter, because a go- around will be created, or it will matter. Then, the Internet will be gone and tens of millions of youth with pitiful employment prospects will find themselves bored and painfully aware of what they are being deprived.

There isn't really a third option. " Speak out" is pointless if even Google loses. Contrary to the faith of the left, corporations are not the most powerful things on the planet. Only one level of power exists beyond multinational/ critical companies like G. And it had run amok, even beyond what the suckers that broke it deserve.

More throttle. We'll get something to fly off any minute.

[noddy]

as long as you have an official government internet identity and arent very popular and you make sure you dont break any of the following, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/ ... sa1992214/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; you will be fine.

if you do accidently become popular, you better bone up on all the tax laws and labour laws and so forth aswell, they dont care which book they throw at you.

everyone is a publisher now, you have responsibilities for the greater good, just like andrew bolt... bob brown is watching and he has many definitions of hurtful and is constantly thinking of new ones, ditto fred nile, ditto harvey norman, ditto the twitto.

[noddy]

[lzzrdgrrl]

Has it happened yet???2??......

If it hasn't, or when it comes around next year; I'll commemorate 'World Censorship Day' by putting tape on my nipples, even though I'm walking about fully clothed.........

[Demon of Undoing]

[noddy]

fwiw, australia has had these laws for a while now, we are ahead of the curve in terms of authoritarian fixers protecting us from ourselves.

http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_c ... _Australia

interestingly our internet providers wouldnt do it, so the government then introduced nationalised broadband

http://www.nbn.gov.au/

which all the same people who complained about censorship absolutely love, woo hoo broadband for everyone and no nasty capitalists refusing todo what government wants.

go figure, so easy to take choices and power off these people.... would you like some candy ?

[monster_gardener]

[monster_gardener]

[the glowing carp]

[the glowing carp]

[noddy]

[the glowing carp]

[monster_gardener]

[noddy]

i do agree that the social conservatives in the liberal party are equally untrustworthy as the ones in the labour party, i despise both equally and dont like central government enforcing dubious social engineering from limited perspectives across a diverse multicultural environment.

thats not the issue as far as i can see, the issue is that getting optical fibre somewhat quicker via government takeover rather than somewhat slower waiting for private industry to do so is losing a hell of a lot of choice when it comes to perceptions and choice about what is unnacceptable.. i know i can trust (for instance) iinet cause ive worked for that mob and know they are money hungry businessmen with little interest in restricting our choices because they know it loses them customers to do so.

if you believe in cost/benefit analysis you might ponder the fact that currently private industry doesnt justify optical everywhere so you may question the profitability of the venture in the first place.. yay some redneck like me in the sticks gets faster net im not prepared to pay for.. i only get minimalist net for my home connection cause im highspeed at work and i dont earn enough money to justify the extra expense... i have no interest in paying more than 20 a month and will not benefit from a faster connection..

[monster_gardener]

[the glowing carp]

[noddy]

[noddy]

for clarity.

its not private/public to me, its maximum balances of power and options/choices.

if australian internet was only being provided by telstra and/or news corp id be alot more ambivilent to the nbn.. it would already be a corrupted, limited service with an agenda for social engineering that was in the hands of ONE GROUP.

currently we dont have that, we have multiple suppliers (AAPT,Optus,Telstra,iinet,vodaphone) and they all compete for various niches and a company like iiNet is using its distance from the status quo to compete with non filtered services.. this is proper western liberalism with proper balances of power, anything less is an accident waiting to happen of centralised corruption.

labour or liberal, progressive or conservative, doesnt matter, they are all limited to their own agendas and have very little tolerance for "the rest of us"..

[the glowing carp]

[noddy]