I guarantee ATS will be banned by Australian Government.

I notice, in regards to this discussion, every once in a while someone throws out Big Bad China as the ultimate example of Internet censorship.

Okay, can't argue with that.

But in this case, just so you know, we get ATS in China.

Hmmm? China tosses Facebook but keeps ATS.

Good work!

Originally posted by Retrovertigo

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
Man, we gotta project some positivity about this. It wont happen, if and only if it does, how do we bring it down, or subvert it. These are the things we should be talking about, don't bring it down to "its hopeless" cause its not.

Spread the petition.

Indeed...If it does happen, we need to ensure instructions on how to find/use a proxy & how to find/use a VPN provider is put out there as widely as possible on as many mainstream websites, blogs & newspaper comment sections as possible...

I have raised this query on ATS Issue thread in my post, on whether it's against ATS T&C to discuss how to evade internet filters and break them or other info related to it...so far no reply. If its allowed members can pool information and discuss how to evade filters, if not well...search google.

Originally posted by December_Rain

Originally posted by Retrovertigo

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
Man, we gotta project some positivity about this. It wont happen, if and only if it does, how do we bring it down, or subvert it. These are the things we should be talking about, don't bring it down to "its hopeless" cause its not.

Spread the petition.

Indeed...If it does happen, we need to ensure instructions on how to find/use a proxy & how to find/use a VPN provider is put out there as widely as possible on as many mainstream websites, blogs & newspaper comment sections as possible...

I have raised this query on ATS Issue thread in my post, on whether it's against ATS T&C to discuss how to evade internet filters and break them or other info related to it...so far no reply. If its allowed members can pool information and discuss how to evade filters, if not well...search google.

I wasn't talking about posting info on proxies & VPN's on ATS, DR....

I was talking about posting the info to websites, blogs & newspaper sites visited by "your average Aussie internet user" should Conjob manage to convince the Senate to let this thing happen...

Edit to add - However if we get the thumbs up that posting this stuff on ATS is ok, then absolutely, we should & will post this info here

[edit on 15-3-2010 by Retrovertigo]

reply to post by ventian

My first post, ever, on this site - although I read alot

Soo...Aussies, what can ya say about aussies;
Welllll,
We drink beer at the pub in plastic glasses - because we cannot be trusted to drink out of glass ones for fear of using a glass to shred someones face with it - aka - a 'glassing'

Nor can we be trusted to control our drinking habits at the pub, so for 10 minutes every hour the bar shuts down - no alchohol

Nor can we be trusted to actually be drunk on premisis - which is not allowed. Hence the bouncers who hold sway over the bar scene (not that they are a bad bunch

We are a nation who refuses to accept personal responsibility for our actions and, through complacency, have been happy for the government to so for us. A culture of apathy has led us to this point and we only have ourselves to blame.

Perhaps its because as a 'white Australians' we never had to fight for our freedoms - they were handed us, while the 'abos' were pushed off cliffs and reduced to economic and cultural slaves in their own country.

Will apathy win the day again?

Who knows?

Originally posted by univac500
I notice, in regards to this discussion, every once in a while someone throws out Big Bad China as the ultimate example of Internet censorship.

Okay, can't argue with that.

But in this case, just so you know, we get ATS in China.

Hmmm? China tosses Facebook but keeps ATS.

Good work!

Thanks for letting us know.

Interesting...

reply to post by Norbit

Speak for yourself.

The pubs I go to in Victoria use glass and serve alcohol the whole time they are open, with no 10 minute breaks.

And the Australians I know are too responsible to even want to get pissed when they're out.

Originally posted by Kailassa
The pubs I go to in Victoria use glass and serve alcohol the whole time they are open, with no 10 minute breaks.

Yes this is 100% correct.

Don't know where that other guy comes from, but I have never seen plastic glasses in a pub, ever.

Originally posted by countercounterculture
Hey Silver Shadow!
I'm glad you dropped by because a lot of the material I found was when I was writing a response to you in another thread!

Your concerns are absolutely valid! And I completely agree, ATS is NOT about encouraging crime, or promoting child porn

The point I've been trying to make, (which I think the case was made better by subsequent posts rather than the OP), is that the filtering criteria is very broad.

I don't always agree with the standard OFLC system, but the mandatory filter will not be the same as other medias, and we already have our problems with other medias (Banning video games), but the decision is based on the lowest denominator being some paranoid parent who thinks ATS is unsuitable, inciting crime, and conspiracy theories, and submitting it to complaints[/url].

Perhaps if you don't have a problem with the filter then what do you think of the legislation? Its not just me highlighting the problem here, perhaps you might hear

I agree, the legislation probably needs to be written very broadly to prevent devious and mischievous people from exploiting any loopholes.

That legislation would be absolutely terrifying if you imagined the absolute worst case censorship scenario.

But I have a lot of faith in the judgment and common sense of the people that will be running the system.

I doubt very much if they will take seriously any fanatical nutters that want to ban absolutely everything.
It is unlikely that we will get Sharia law type censorship here, just because a few dozen hysterical people are offended by seeing fully exposed female faces on the internet, hehehehe.

My guess is that after a bit of initial turmoil and confusion, they will fine tune the system to get rid of only the vilest and most offensive of sites, and create the maximum possible number of happy voters.

That would be a win/win situation for both the politicians and the rest of the broader general public.

Originally posted by Silver Shadow
"But I have a lot of faith in the judgment and common sense of the people that will be running the system."

"My guess is that after a bit of initial turmoil and confusion, they will fine tune the system to get rid of only the vilest and most offensive of sites, and create the maximum possible number of happy voters."

"That would be a win/win situation for both the politicians and the rest of the broader general public."

Soooooo.....

You have a lot of faith in the judgment and common sense of the people that will be running the system, eh ? Really that gullible, are we ? OK, I have a surefire, no way it can lose thing in the 5th at Sandown tomorrow...

Send me a grand via internet banking and I guarantee I will turn it into five grand for you...

Surely if you trust TPTB you can trust me, right ?

Regardless of what sites are blocked by this filter, I pay my ISP to provide me with a broadband connection that provides downloads within a particular "speed" limit range....The governments' proposed internet filter WILL slow individuals internet connections...I do not want the government slowing down my internet connection in any way, shape or form or by any measure, no matter how small...

"They" will not "fine tune" the system to get rid of the vilest and most offensive of sites...This is utter pie in the sky garbage...

"They" will block sites that provide information regarding safe drug use, euthanasia and various non-violent pornographic sites which depict fetishes indulged in by a more than tiny proportion of the population every day of the week, to name a few...

All it takes is for a small number of complaints by the "moral minority" who think like Stephen Conjob and the christian zealots he represents and a site goes on the list...No ifs, no buts...And once a site goes on the list, good luck having it removed...

It may well be a win/win for a few politicians and the moral minority who wish to shove their morality down the throats of the rest of us, but once the majority of the Australian public are educated as to what this filter REALLY entails and what it will do, I sincerely doubt a majority of Australian internet users will agree with you...

AGAIN, you show your ignorance of the realities surrounding this issue

Just out of interest, how many times do you propose doing that on here ?

[edit on 16-3-2010 by Retrovertigo]

Nice post, S + F.

Here where i live, we (the citzens in general) are facing the same problems of gov. trying to control the internet with the same lame excuses.

Censorship is comming back into fashion guys, hang on in your chairs!

reply to post by Retrovertigo


Do you remember the reasons why John Howard was voted out by an overwhelming majority ?

1/ He refused to apologize to the aborigines

2/ He once made a mistake about some illegal immigrants falling overboard

3/ He wanted to build several nuclear power plants in Australia.

4/ He completely stopped the incoming flow of illegal immigrants by holding them in prison camps outside Australia.

Four such terrible evil unforgivable crimes against the Australian people.
But it was all enough to see him crucified at the ballot box.

How long do you think the Rudd government would last if they started banning popular internet sites ?

Politicians may be devious shifty slime, but they are not THAT stupid.





[edit on 16/3/2010 by Silver Shadow]

reply to post by Silver Shadow


Did you even read my post properly ? Didn't think so...

Where did I mention banning popular sites ? I mentioned my internet connection being slower for having this filter in place, and I also mentioned a few topics where sites about said topics would be filtered...

All to stop approximately 335 kiddie porn sites (according to the figures that Conjob quoted during Question Time yesterday) that often come and go on the web within 24 hrs...

Kiddie porn is already illegal to view and possess...There is no need to filter everyone's web content in order to stop people viewing it...

The resources that have been and will be used on this filter should be given to the Federal Police in order to boost their ability to apprehend people who view and possess this material...

Edit to add - Your understanding and knowledge of Australian politics is as poor as your understanding of the internet filtering issue...The Howard govt was by and large voted out of office due to Work Choices, not the issues you listed...

[edit on 16-3-2010 by Retrovertigo]

Some people, when they put their faith in the good sense of the sitting government, forget that government could be kicked out next election.

And if a government does not succeed in fulfilling the agenda of TPTB, they will quickly be replaced by one which will.

This is not an isolated experiment in censorship we are dealing with. It is one more step in the plan to mould our world into a new EDEN, to be inhabited by few, and enjoyed by even fewer.

Originally posted by Silver Shadow

But I have a lot of faith in the judgment and common sense of the people that will be running the system.

You have faith that this filter will be hunky dory and give it your public support here, without investigating the slow-down issues, and without investigating the leaked list of sites to be banned . . .


Are you happy about your internet being slowed down?
Are you happy about Wikileaks being put on the banned list for publishing the banned list?
Are you happy that the banned list is to be kept secret, so we will never know what has been banned?
Are you happy about this power to censor being given to all future governments?

If you can happily accept all these things, then I guess the only thing you are unhappy with is that Australia is still a democracy.

If anyone interested how to bypass the filter visit this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by December_Rain


Bypassing the filter isn't that difficult, what I hate is the fact that it will be illegal!

Now the pervs and child molesters or whoever are already perpetrating crime, so why would they have a problem bypassing?
The filter does little to tackle the problem.
And honest users have to become criminals if only to check whether controversial issues are censored.

In fact by posting up methods to bypass the Aus filter, you are in effect inciting crime.

And that post, by definition makes this thread applicable to be filtered!
See clause C in the National Classification Code

(c) promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence

reply to post by countercounterculture


Showing how to bypass the filter wont become a crime until/if the filter is put in place tho

let me put it this way.
If I were browsing the net, and something I wasn't looking for that was absolutely horrible, say for instance, child pornography, popped up on a web page, I would be disgusted and outraged and I would notify the police!

If the same thing occurred, but lets say it was in a newspaper classifieds, I would do the exact same thing!

In both cases, I would expect the police to have reasonable investigative powers to find and apprehend the suspect publishing. But in both cases I would not condone the government to filter what is and isn't published before publication. I would not want a government agent in my house when I write a letter to the editor, I would not like a government agent bleeping talk back radio before it goes to air.

I expect the law to deal with these crimes through the courts, so then if by chance something is against the law, but shouldn't be, the legislation can be openly challenged, not hidden, unknown, in government secrecy, behind the filter.

With ANY degree of freedom, inevitably someone takes advantage of it and commits crime. We ARE free to commit crime, but once we do we face the courts and justice system. The filter inhibits our freedom!

Now there is a second point, and that is the availability to children, I would have NO problem with a VOLUNTARY filter so that my kid does not find the inappropriate material i described! Now I'm mature enough to deal with it, call police, contact my local parliament member, put pressure on foreign regimes which allow child abuse... BUT my kid isn't. And i would be more than glad to voluntarily apply a filter that might protect him.

The real problem is that when a parent exposes their children to inappropriate material, social services deals with the parents. Parents must take responsibility for what they expose their children to!

So if you give you kid full access to the internet you might as well be handing them cigarettes or taking them to a sex shop.

Classification is a guide to parents, the parents ARE free to show their children violence and sex, but I guarantee they face at the very least social services and the courts. BUT, they are ALLOWED to commit it, and ALLOWED to contest it!

Think about the reality of it, its a system which prevents you from committing a crime. Why don't we ban all cars because they have been used as weapons? we did it with guns, so why not? And they are not appropriate for children, we must protect the children!! /sarcasm off now.

This is about freedom. Not safety.

reply to post by Retrovertigo


yep agreed.

But would it stay legal if the filter goes up?
Because it was posted before the legislation?
Or does it just automatically become illegal??

The whole scheme is gray area.