simply put, they can't really do it. All of the proposed solutions are HTTP
based only and have a variety of workarounds associated with them anyway. It
could stop a kid I'm sure, but maybe not a determined one.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Kevin Shackleton
<[email protected]>wrote:

> I'm confused.
>
> I thought the whole idea of DARPANet was that it was bomb-proof - there
> was always another route open.  How exactly are the Thought Police going
> to sit on every possible route into Oz?  How well does the Chinese
> government censorship work, in terms of bandwidth filtered?  I bet it's
> significantly under 100%.
>
> It seems to me, like metropolitan area wireless networks instill a
> little bit of honesty into ISPs, to be up to sites with links to
> international satellite service providers to resist any control from the
> government and pass packets not just because they can but because they
> should.
>
> Kevin.
>
> On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 17:46 +1100, meryl wrote:
> > Heracles is right. The Filtering problem is more about stifling freedoms
> > of speech and censoring the Net than it is about blocking child porn,
> > and it is bound to be extended into other areas so freedom of speech
> > will become a thing of the past for us in Australia. Apart from slowing
> > down our already sluggish Internet speeds, if it is introduced it is
> > likely to be extended down the track to include all manner of sites;
> > possibly even political dissenters... if they get away with this and
> > they'll add more and more sites to the list to the point where we may
> > one day envy the freedoms that the Chinese have!
> >
> > Really the child porn issue is just being used as an emotional ruse to
> > effect censorship controls because the purveyors of such material for
> > the most part would most likely use VPNs and other evasive methods to
> > avoid detection, as such their heinous activities will be totally
> > unaffected by the filter. How about the government catch these crooks
> > and lock them up instead of punishing all of us with this net-nanny
> > filter.
> >
> > By and large the Filter will be way more detrimental to the
> > average honest Internet user and the child pornographers will just sit
> > back and laugh at the stupidity of Australian government.
> >
> > for more info see:
> > http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25773857-953,00.html
> >
> http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/312845/statistics_experts_label_isp_filtering_trials_unscientific?fp=16&fpid=1
> >
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/careful-big-brother-is-editing-you/story-e6frg7go-1225792964441
> > http://www.openforum.com.au/content/firewall-lies
> > http://libertus.net/liberty/
> > http://www.efa.org.au/censorship/mandatory-isp-blocking/
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8AZ21hCkIg
> > and as always there's a "Downfall" video on the subject!
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH35CVig3fQ
> >
> > cheers,
> > Meryl
>
> --
> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
> Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
>
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Reply via email to