[AusNOG] ISP's are the new media. We dont need TV to get the message out.

[Phillip Grasso]

We should not loose sight that this is a shelved policy for the election and
not a dead policy. one could argue this is just their way to kill the policy
without loosing too much face. What seriously concerns me is this can come
back in 2011 or another time in the near future. If we don't act as an
industry and community, we will end up with further stupid policy decisions.


As the election is coming up, this is the ideal time to get the message to
the policy makers that we can and will make a difference to votes.

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Sean K. Finn <sean.finn at ozservers.com.au>wrote:

>
>
>  It’s the same now except we control the new media.
>
>
>
> That's crazy talk.  We don't control the new media any more than Australia
>
> Post controls newspapers and magazines.
>
>
>
> Whoa there big fella, collectively we do.
>
>
>
>  It’s the digital equivalent of collectively controlling 99% of the
> paper-presses in days gone by, and all of the corner street urchins selling
> your papers for you.
>
>
>
> And since Australia Post handles the distribution network, it has access to
> every post box in Australia to add an extra leaflet or two in their normal
> rounds.
>
>
>
> Don’t think it doesn’t already happen, because that’s where I got the crazy
> idea from in the first place.
>
>
>
> The postal service provides an international communication platform
>
> which is used by virtually every individual to for personal purposes and
>
> by virtually every business to enable commerce.  It has its own set of
>
> protocols, economic issues, cross-jurisdictional issues, and so on.  Over
>
> time systems of regulation and understanding have coalesced so that
>
> the postal service can do what it does with a minimum of interference.
>
>
>
> ISPs provide an international communication platform which is used by
>
> virtually every Australian for personal purposes and by virtually every
>
> Australian business to enable commerce.  It has its own set of protocols,
>
> economic issues, cross-jurisdictional issues, and so on. It has NOT matured
>
> into a normal part of our regulatory landscape precisely because there
>
> are so many people trying to portray it as something it ain't --
> particularly
>
> "new media"
>
>
>
> It is definitely an intrinsic part of whatever came after print on paper.
> Would you prefer to hand around CD’s with web pages on them?
>
> Call it whatever you like.
>
>
>
> When the Minister talks about his distrust for "internet companies", he's
>
> referring to companies like facebook and google.  He lacks the knowledge
>
> (and the desire to acquire knowledge) necessary to understand that
>
> ISPs are like the postal service and Facebook is like a newsletter that
>
> just happens to be sent via post.
>
>
>
> I don’t think he lacks the knowledge at all, I think he doesn’t care.
>
>
>
> As long as he continues to lack that understanding, he'll continue to
>
> make stupid decisions and say stupid things.
>
>
>
> Or deliberate actions. Stupidity only gets you so far in life.
>
>
>
> In particular:  One never talks about censoring Australia Post to get
>
> rid of "unwanted" postal content, one instead focuses one's energy
>
> on the publishers and distributors of the content *who just happen to *
>
> *use the postal service as an incidental part of their distribution
> strategy.*
>
>
>
> The government owns Australia Post.
>
>
>
> They use sniffer dogs all the time, Customs services on international
> borders inspecting random bags, hell they can even X-Ray entire containers.
>
>
>
> It’s already being censored, just not inernally.
>
>
>
> Just like you wouldn’t censor peer to peer traffic at every pop, which is
> essentially what Australia post is, but only at the border between National
> and International (Ingress/Egress points, International transit).
>
>
>
> We know he'll never want to acquire that understanding, so we need
>
> to focus our efforts on his parliamentary colleagues and cut him out
>
> of the loop -- If he doesn't want to be part of the picture then he's
> simply
>
> irrelevant and we shouldn't waste our time with him.
>
>
>
> I agree.
>
>
>
> That's why lobbying MPs -- even ALP MPs -- is so important.  Our elected
>
> officials would look like dolts if they couldn't tell the difference
> between
>
> a  magazine and a post office.  For the ISP industry to have any rational
>
> future,* *those same officials must feel equally foolish if they can't
> tell
>
> the difference between the Internet and a website.
>
>
>
> I agree.
>
>
>
> The trouble is as the Communications Minister it’s pretty obvious that it’s
> his job to brief the PM and anyone else who doesn’t have a clue, which means
> he swings it to his agenda.
>
>
>
> Gov’t needs support of a small minority in another party to help get other
> things through, so they can’t let this one get through.
>
>
>
> Perhaps we should concentrate on ousting the independants or minor party
> members that Labour is relying on for their small but deciding vote in
> parliament / senate and shift the balance of power.
>
>
>
> (If the upcoming election doesn’t do that).
>
>
>
> Labour is non-committal on the filter at the momement because to drop that
> policy would be to remove support from non-labour non-liberal fanatics in a
> power broking deal, that they are probably silently waiting to go away, and
> could cost them the next election.
>
>
>
> They can’t about face now because to do so would mean dropping any futher
> support from the other fringe parties who want this.
>
>
>
> Silently I think after the election the shift in power will make it go
> away.
>
>
>
> I bet a can of coke on it.
>
>
>
> S
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100709/8fa0e98e/attachment.html>