<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">I'd prefer that the money goes towards Child Protection agencies and various programs to help kids that are actually at risk in their own homes from abuse and neglect. That'd actually do some good, rather than worrying about the very middle class fears of the "big bad unknown internet". <div><br></div><div>You know - protect kids from actual harm. </div><div><br></div><div>MMC<br><div><br><div><div>On 08/07/2010, at 6:57 PM, Phillip Grasso wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">I'd prefer filter millions to go towards development and implementation of an online safety campaign for school children. Have a program that will actually either be implemented in schools / or a serious roadshow. Should cover everything from stranger danger to online bullying and <div>
<br></div><div>1). Help Protect Australian children from the real predators </div><div>2). Educate children on responsible internet usage, and cyber bullying etc.</div><div>3). Create the awareness of other real threats online, e.g. phishing etc. <br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Chris Pollock <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Chris.Pollock@staff.pipenetworks.com">Chris.Pollock@staff.pipenetworks.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">Agreed, which is why it has to be attacked from a logical point of
view. </font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">Argue that:</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span></span><span><font face="Arial" size="2">a) the filter
<strong>cannot and will not</strong> work for what it's claimed to be
needed for, </font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">b) the filter is designed to block access to material that is
<strong>100% legal</strong>,</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">b) the filter <strong>isn't</strong> designed to or going to stop
child porn, and</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">c) the money to be spent on something that doesn't stop or catch
child porn producers and consumers COULD be better spent funding our great
police force who make an ACTUAL difference by catching ACTUAL criminals and
<strong>putting them in JAIL</strong>, rather than turning a blind eye to
it.</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">Keep it factual, logical and on-topic. We cannot let him get
away with Affirming the Consequent[1]. There are a million other
arguments, like its potential for subversion for political agendas (eg blocking
online gambling to increase domestic gambling and thus tax revenue, restricting
access to material that is critical of the government[2]), or how it will slow
the networks down, or incur huge manpower costs for ISPs, or how one even
defines what constitutes an Internet connection, but they can come later - we
need to attack the core logical foundations of the proposal.</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">[1] <a href="http://stephenconroyisanidiot.tumblr.com/post/782995113/affirming-the-consequent" target="_blank">http://stephenconroyisanidiot.tumblr.com/post/782995113/affirming-the-consequent</a></font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">[2] This is already happening without a filter - what will he do
with one? <a href="http://stephen-conroy.com/page.php?4" target="_blank">http://stephen-conroy.com/page.php?4</a> </font></span></div><div class="im">
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span></span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">--<br></span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Chris
Pollock<br></span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Technical & Install
Manager<br>PIPE Networks Limited<br><br></span></font></div><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-weight:bold;font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">PPC-1 is now
live!<br></span></font></b><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">6900 km, 20 Months, 2.56 Tbps, 12.5
kilovolts, $200 Million and 100% Australian Owned.<br></span></font><font face="Arial" color="navy" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;color:navy;font-family:Arial"><a title="http://www.pipeinternational.com/" href="http://www.pipeinternational.com/" target="_blank">http://www.pipeinternational.com</a></span></font></p>
</span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"><br><br>Mobile :
+61 4 1074 7765<br></span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Phone : +61 7 3233
9813<br></span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Fax :
+61 7 3233 9885<br></span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Web :
</span></font><span lang="EN-US"><a title="http://www.pipenetworks.com/
blocked::http://www.pipenetworks.com/
http://www.pipenetworks.com/
blocked::http://www.pipenetworks.com/" href="http://www.pipenetworks.com/" target="_blank"><font title="http://www.pipenetworks.com/
blocked::http://www.pipenetworks.com/" face="Arial" color="black" size="2"><span title="http://www.pipenetworks.com/
blocked::http://www.pipenetworks.com/"><span title="http://www.pipenetworks.com/
blocked::http://www.pipenetworks.com/"><span title="http://www.pipenetworks.com/" style="font-size:10pt;color:windowtext;font-family:Arial">www.pipenetworks.com</span></span></span></font></a></span>
<div> </div><br>
</div><blockquote dir="ltr" style="padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-width: 2px; border-left-style: solid; margin-right: 0px; position: static; z-index: auto; ">
<div lang="en-us" dir="ltr" align="left">
<hr>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Peter
Adkins<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, 8 July 2010 5:53 PM<br><b>To:</b> Mark
Newton<div class="im"><br><b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:ausnog@ausnog.net" target="_blank">ausnog@ausnog.net</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [AusNOG] Press:
ITNews Story - NetAlert could have performedthe internet filter
function<br></div></font><br></div><div><div></div><div class="h5">
<div></div>Unfortunately, it's getting to the point where a rebuttal from a
technical standpoint is simply being dismissed, and any attempts to express
how the policy is a waste of money is being met with:
<div><br></div>
<div>"BUT YOU CAN'T PUT A PRICE ON THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN!"</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I don't think that this situation is one which can be won
through reasoning with Sen. Conroy directly, or even
by-proxy. Unfortunately, it seems that If the filter
isn't implemented it will be picked up by those who either no not
know, or do not care, about the reasons that it was scrapped and be cast as
another "failure" of a Labor government.<br><br></div>
<div>Can this not be chalked up as Senator Conroy blatantly lying to the
general public by enforcing the need for a flawed filter?</div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Mark Newton <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:newton@internode.com.au" target="_blank">newton@internode.com.au</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="padding-left:1ex;margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:#ccc 1px solid">
<div><br>On 08/07/2010, at 4:45 PM, Roland Chan wrote:<br><br>>
Again, the requirement in the DBCDE website is to prevent inadvertant
access.<br><br></div>That means the policy being advanced by DBCDE right now
is a<br>failure to deliver what Conroy has portrayed as an ALP
election<br>promise in 2007.<br><br>The current proposal fails outright to
deliver on that new 2010<br>requirement as well. Google has identified
over a trillion URLs<br>on the 'net, millions of those would meet the RC
definition. At<br>last update, Conroy's proposal will "prevent"
so-called "accidental"<br>access to 355 of them, for the princely sum of
$44.5m.<br><br> - mark<br></blockquote></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>