It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ultra_phoenix
Australia :
" The Broadcasting Services Act, which came into force on 1 January 2000, spells out material to be banned from websites, including pornography involving children, bestiality, excessive violence, real sex acts and information about crime, violence and drug use. "
What's wrong with banning pronography ( especially when childrens are involved ), bestiality, excessive violence and real sex acts ?
For the others ( information about crime, violence and drug use ), it depend. If the purpose is to help the peoples who are using drugs, have been victim of a crime or any violence, they don't have to ban it. But if the purpose is to promote crime, violence and drug using.....
Originally posted by William
blah blah blah
A brief scan of some of the content (I can't read it all you know) shows the white paper is not nearly as alarmist as the title would have you believe. It appears to be covering more of how to apply the same type of "moral laws/standards" in offline publishing to online content... and how to place blame in situations where illegal content (such as child pronography) is published from locations where there are no specific laws against it.
The more alarmist material seems aimed at potential monitoring practices, and very little in-use policies.
I ask again, if the Internet were as monitored as you say, why is it that illegal spam is still around, and growing? Why haven't "they" been able to stop illegal file swapping?
Because they can't.
Originally posted by CoLD aNGeRI never said that is possible to monitor the entire NeT, but they are close....
Originally posted by William
Originally posted by CoLD aNGeRI never said that is possible to monitor the entire NeT, but they are close....
"They" are far, far away.
If "they" wanted to create a communications technology that was easy to monitor and track, then the Internet is not it. The packet switching technology behind routing TCP/IP packets from origin to destination is a nightmare to follow.
For example, on this server, the average IP opens 10-15 connections, from 10-15 different ports on your computer, each time you access the site. Each connection requests packets, but the routing of packets will likely not give your connections nice neat sequential chunks, more likely, a spread of packets, across all connections... to make matters worse, each of your connections could have a different route to our server... and to compound matters, returning packets to you could take a different route than was used to connect. Any tracing technology would have to be able know all the active outbound ports on your computer, the number of connections you make to our server, the number of packets my server is sending you, the route of each packet... and so on.
This is why montioring requires the active participation of one end of the scenario... too many variables.
Sure, "someday" there may be the ability to minitor all traffic by a third party... but given the current technology of packet transfer, it would require super computing power beyond our wildest dreams, and near total duplication of exising bandwidth (to reroute duplicate packets for decoding). Too hard and too expensive for the potential gain.
I never said that is possible to monitor the entire NeT, but they are close....
But anyway, what do u think echelon or carnivore or pine gate is?
I think those are like "suckers of info", NSA, CIA, FBI all those agencies MUST have a system to track people via internet with "key words".