Google, Yahoo and Others Fight the Aussie Filter 166
TheFrunj writes "In the wake of an attack on Australian Government websites comes a statement from a joint group of companies banding together to oppose Senator Conroy's infamous Internet Filter. AtomicMPC has posted the statement up on their site: 'We, the Australian Library and Information Association, Google, Inspire Foundation and Yahoo! agree that Australia needs to take effective action to ensure that internet users, and particularly children, have a safe experience online.' Backed by the weight of the Inspire Foundation, Google and Yahoo, this is a good sign for the local and international community that will hopefully spark some positive reaction."
Yeah, the summary is stupid. (Score:4, Informative)
If you take it out of context it would seem that way, but RTFA. Still, this is a very poor summary for that reason.
Actual statement (Score:5, Informative)
Re:As a parent, I would like to make a suggestion. (Score:3, Informative)
How about people actually started parenting their children? I'm sure as hell not going to let the kids go online alone until they are old enough to do so responsibly. Just like I don't let them watch TV programs and movies out of their age group. Or how I actually spend time with them and talk to them about stuff. (Even a three-year-old can have a proper conversation if you actually listen and support with asking questions.)
So when will people get off their collective asses and stop trying to find ways to escape responsibility and offload it to whatever solution happens to be popular at the time?
I man can dream, can't he?
(And no, I can't control what they do at their friends etc. etc. But there are risks with crossing the street too.)
The issue isn't one of parenting (or the lack thereof), but that the democratically-elected Australian Government has made the decision to filter Internet content without the mandate of the people. That is, the Government is going to filter content "for the people's own good - despite what they people may actually want". The "it's for your own good" argument has been used many times before, but in the end, it's all censorship and usually flawed.
Of course, the major flaw here is that the filter (if imposed) will probably catch educational / information content as well as nasty stuff. The Australian Government has conveniently overlooked this point, presumably with the idea that "it's for your own good, you know". It's as equally flawed as the previously elected Australian Government empowering the Australian Broadcasting Ombudsman's office with the ability to shut down offensive websites.... which only worked if the website was actually based in Australia. The first website that was shut down as a result of this law simply moved the content overseas and went on, business as usual. I think they were down for about an hour.
However, to return to the issue at hand: Whilst I certainly agree with a "positive parenting" approach, the censorship of the Internet by the Australian Government is essentially seeking to remove the need for parents to oversee their children's activities on the 'net - regardless of whether the parent wants it or not. This is not democracy in action, it's almost draconian in nature - hence Anonymous' protests.
Re:What about china? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm pretty sure Conroy's head is already so far up his hole that it can't go any further.