[AusNOG] Google creepier than Conroy?

[David Keegel]

On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 12:21:26AM +0930, Mark Newton wrote:
> 
> On 04/06/2010, at 8:28 PM, Narelle wrote:
> 
> > This is not what I understand the filtering proposal  to comprise.
> 
> I've taken this off-list.  Much of what Narelle has written is simply
> factually wrong, but I'll leave it to her to make corrections if, as and
> when she sees fit.

If Mark and Narelle can come to some kind of agreement on what the
filtering proposal actually is (which I assume is the main topic of 
contention), then I would be very interested to see the result.

Having a list of what you agree is right, or what you agree is wrong,
would be very helpful to me.  I have been trying to get a handle on
what is being proposed by the government.

I think Narelle's understanding was mostly on the money, although I
would probably add two more things, IIUC:
* the filter is intended to stop *inadvertent* exposure to RC material
  (which is probably why Conroy says he has no intention of banning 
  circumvention)
* the black-list is supposed to be kept secret (yeah, right!)

FWIW I oppose the proposal (as I understand it) too.