

Aussie Internet censorship plan backlash - nreece
http://www.theage.com.au/news/technology/biztech/net-censorship-plan-backlash/2008/11/11/1226318639085.html

======
gstar
Michael Malone has a bit of a reputation as a ball-breaker, and although I
don't think much of his ISP I am thoroughly impressed that he's spoken out
about this in public.

Could have been a bad move though, as I think the government will do what it
can to exclude iiNet from the trial after Malone's comments. Even if they
don't, iiNet's trial results would not be considered objective.

It's highly unfortunate but I think the Australian government and the
communications minister thinks that it has a clear mandate from the electorate
to introduce this "technology", and it's going to happen whether we like it or
not.

The other problem is, no journalist or lay-person will take the comparison
with Saudi Arabia or China as fact even though it's an accurate assessment
(see the quotes and the attribution of the comment in the article).

~~~
andrewf
I think even if you convinced the Government this filter was a bad idea,
they'd string it out for as long as possible to keep Senators Xenophon and
Fielding on side.

For non-Aussies: The Government, who holds power Australia's House of
Representatives, lacks a majority in the Senate and needs the support of the
two senators above to pass legislation.

------
Dilpil
I don't think ANYONE who is knowledgeable about the actual implementation of
this thinks its a good idea. Possible comedic exception of consulting
companies getting paid to complete the projects.

------
newt0311
Like I said before: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=334294>

"For the 30 seconds that it will take to break this. This measure is not so
much Orwellian as it is idiotic and a waste of time. Its sole purpose is to
put up a PR stunt and that politicians can get away with using $128 million of
taxpayer cash for this is unacceptable."

Nice to see somebody blowing the whistle.

~~~
gstar
Maybe its just more security theatre. And lobbyists (isn't the front-running
vendor a .NZ company?)

~~~
ajkirwin
I dare you to name one piece of security, be it physical or virtual, since
say.. 1990, that hasn't been theatre.

~~~
Retric
Adding reinforced doors to airplane cockpits. It becomes significantly harder
to hijack an airplane so it's not just for show.

Security theater can be useful. EX: Add fake video camera's in plain sight at
a bank and hide the real ones. People act like they are being watched and feel
their money is safer but it's harder to disable the camera's.

The value in security is often to prevent people from trying to attack / break
in, or to make harder / take longer to do so, or to make people feel safer.
While security theater only does 2 out of 3 it's not quite useless.

