Don't want to talk too much.

Here's some stuff from the List:





And some more commission work:

 

Says it all doesn't it. The Australian government in it's infinite wisdom has decided to pursue this "Clean Feed" and actually implement this idea of censoring the internet on the pretense that it is "protecting children". Sure it is. Just like banning the sale and use of knives because someone got stabbed with one. Trying to kill a fly with a nuke. Et cetera.

This topic was discussed on the tv show ‘Insight’ a while ago, and the main argument is that it protects children.

 

Well, power companies don't administer you house's power sockets and amperage to prevent electrocution because you're so lazy/negligent as a parent to mind them and your children yourself; why should it be the same for the internet?

 

If you are unskilled to set up a computer in such a way, DON'T have the internet installed in your house. For some reason, people are able to stop their children from stealing the car and going joy-riding, but when it comes to the internet no one can do anything about it, can they? I suppose any parent that buys a computer, sets it up in their child's room, connects to the internet, and doesn't monitor their child's use of the internet really means that parent's are completely helpless and have absolutely no control in the matter. 

 

For fuck's sake, you can stop your children swallowing paint, playing with knives, playing with fire, but for some reason the internet is just beyond the average parent?! No. It’s not. The onus is on the parents and not the state. I don’t want my internet suitable for 3 year olds and below only, meaning the rest of us are reading the Wiggles instead of BBC news.

 

Also, the proposed 44% reduction in speed will cripple the economy. For a nation that has one of the slowest and least progressive broadband in the world, to decimate what little speeds it has, conflicts with the proposed federal initiative to enhance our broadband, where it is already acknowledged as integral to the nation’s interests economically and socially.

 

It is not the government’s role to censor its people. They can and will enforce the law, but censorship serves no just role. You can enforce the law fine without harming the public doing so.

 

As for the prevention of crimes, it’s fairly evident it won’t do anything aside from make them use more underground methods (even still using the internet), why doesn’t the government spend more time and resources preventing these crimes and inforcing the law than censoring the internet. I don’t know about you, but I’d rather the issue of some child being abused should be addressed first rather than the matter of the internet, because it just happens to coincidentally be a distribution tool. I’d liken the situation to banning a model of car because it is used often for bank robberies. But maybe that’s just silly, as the government cares more for its populace control rather than enforcing law and order.