[AusNOG] Happy new year / New rules for age-restricted internetand mobile content after the 20th of january 2008

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Bevan Slattery wrote:  
>
>
> Far from it, the problem is not trivial.  But the technical problem 
> (if it's http blacklist) of implementing a http blacklist is not such 
> a stretch.
>
Well, colour me confused - you keep chucking in how easy it is apparently. 
>
> I'm just saying that in the scheme of things there are good outcomes 
> and bad outcomes.  If you think that should the decision for Conroy 
> comes down to Labor implementing an election promise versus Internode 
> buying 25 caches, then mate you're screwed.  And if you think there is 
> an industry/vendor 'expert' who will not back Conroy in saying that a 
> HTTP blacklist is not technically do-able, then you are living in a 
> fantasy land completely abstract of the political position we are all 
> in.  There are filters protecting all of Qld, NSW, VIC, TAS (and I 
> think SA's) public schools.  It's in place right now.  There are up to 
> 2,000,000 students getting filtered Internet access at their school 
> every school day.
>
And let's ask them how badly it sucks at the moment - most schools have 
very very poor internet access as a result.
>
>  
>
> The real problem here is that the filter will achieve very little.  It 
> will result in some latency and performance issues and it will cost 
> money.  However, the reality is It will not provide absolute (or even 
> near absolute) protection for Australia's children and frankly if 
> ACMA/DCITA are providing the list, it will not even provide the barest 
> of minimums.   It will provide ABSOLUTELY NO ADDED BENEFIT BEYOND THE 
> CLIENT SOFTWARE AND PARENTAL SUPERVISION THAT IS IN PLACE TODAY.
>
No kidding I don't think we have any disagreement there.
>
>  
>
> So, I'm not quite sure who you're trying to impress other than Conroy 
> (almost said Coonan).
>
>
> Simply because I have an alternative view of this to yourself?  Oh 
> please  When you grow some stones and actually get active in the 
> industry and take the battle to the Minister, media and public 
> themselves to the point the Minister calls you a 'little shit' to your 
> face then I'm happy for you to step up to my plate and have a swing.
>
Your alternative view seems to be to dismiss the technical side as 
"trivial" despite what you said above.   It might be trivial for the 
small, but as you scale up it actually really messes with our ability to 
built a resilient network.

You are good at throwing stones sure, but sometimes without considering 
who's glass houses you're hurting.  We're your customers - $1M or more 
spent on this crap (because you dismiss it as trivial) means that many 
less exchanges built and less backhaul we buy from you.   Some of us 
have to live with cleaning up after the stone throwers and quite frankly 
would prefer greater accuracy in the throwing or choosing more useful 
targets.

Getting the minister to call you a "little shit" doesn't impress me.   
Getting the minister to change his/her mind on an important topic would.

> I don't have to impress anyone.  Didn't you know - I'm Denny Crane 
> [queue the music]
>
You have mad cow too ? :-)

MMC
>
>  
>
> [b]
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20080104/b9b858bd/attachment.html>