[AusNOG] Consultation on s313(3) use

[Mark Smith]

On 30 Apr 2016 01:20, "Paul Wilkins" <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There's days when I think people in our industry have gotten too close to
the ones and zeros, and lost sight of the bigger picture. The State has an
obligation to protect people and property in those realms where it
exercises sovereign jurisdiction. Regulation of the internet has lagged due
to a gap in what the technology can deliver, and the Wild West spirit with
which adventurers have sought to carve out territory in the internet. This
is in no one's best interests, and it's irresponsible to think that as
technology makes enforcement possible, legislation requiring it won't
inevitably follow.
>

Going by the Snowden and other past similar revelations, I think your faith
that governments always act in their citizens' best interests are misplaced.

>
> If we're honest, current technology is capable of routing the IPs of
suspect FQDNs for DPI leaving the bulk of internet traffic untouched (as is
done in the UK's CleanFeed). In such a scenario, the privacy arguments no
longer wash, and the technology arguments that applied 10 years ago have
been outpaced by Moore's Law. Time our industry picked its socks up.
>

The privacy arguments always wash. To allow the government to perform
domain highjacking, they have to be breaching the privacy of what domains
people are visiting.

This would be going beyond the existing metadata laws, and impose even
further similar traffic inspection costs onto ISPs.

The UK cleanfeed system isn't the answer you're making it out to be.

https <https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Cleanfeed>://
<https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Cleanfeed>wiki.openrightsgroup.org
<https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Cleanfeed>/wiki/Cleanfeed
<https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Cleanfeed>

"Technical Considerations for Internet Service Blocking and Filtering"

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7754

>
> The Inquiry mentions that instead of silent blocking, there should
redirection to a blocking page, notification that the page has been
blocked, the reason for the block, and a line of appeal. That all seems
ridiculously sensible.
>

And naive. See my earlier comment about magic.

>
> Kind regards
>
>
> Pa
ul Wilkins
>
>
>
> On 29 April 2016 at 22:23, Mark Newton <newton at atdot.dotat.org> wrote:
>>
>> Successful lobbying uses the politicians' ideology to create reasons to
do what the lobbyist is in favor of.
>>
>> For example, there are plenty of "classic liberal" reasons, which plenty
of Liberal MPs will sympathize with, to do things that are in the best
interests of the Internet industry and Internet users.
>>
>> There are also plenty of "dry Liberal" small-government reasons
supporting exactly the same outcomes.
>>
>> And there are plenty of "big society" reasons which will appeal to ALP
MPs to do precisely the same things.
>>
>> All three sets of arguments can be made at the same time, with each one
persuading a different subset of people about the defensiveness and
rhetorical safety of making the same decisions that favor our aims.
>>
>> This industry has been culturally incapable of providing reasons to
support its aims that are any more complicated or nuanced than, "It is
correct." And even then, there is very little in the way of follow-up: the
industry can't hold an argument for longer than three months, and has been
singularly absent at promoting positions in the face of political
opposition for ten years -- which is, in truth, actually required.
>>
>> Zero MPs are even remotely interested in correctness. So arguments based
on educating them about what the correct answer is will universally fail,
no matter who is in power.
>>
>> Everyone here should know this, because it's all any of you have ever
known, because you've not had the nous to mount a sophisticated argument
about anything, and have consequently always failed in the same way.
>>
>>    - mark
>>
>> --
>> Tiny screen, imaginary keyboard.
>>
>>
>> On 29 Apr 2016, at 19:56, Peter Tiggerdine <ptiggerdine at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This is probably drifting into the off-topic but ideology trumps money
as does religion.
>>>
>>> All the money in the world wouldn't persuade the government to make
good decision because they believe that national security is more important
and civil liberties and right to privacy. So irrespective of the education
and lobbying you're going to struggle to change their belief.
>>>
>>> The government knows that while it can blindside the public though
miss-education, they can do anything. Hence my original point.
>>>
>>> Yes you are right on the mark *pun intended* that the carriers and
associated organisations need to apply more pressure but going up against
ideology is a waste of time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Peter Tiggerdine
>>>
>>> GPG Fingerprint: 2A3F EA19 F6C2 93C1 411D 5AB2 D5A8 E8A8 0E74 6127
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Mark Newton <newton at atdot.dotat.org>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 29, 2016, at 1:47 PM, Peter Tiggerdine <ptiggerdine at gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > education is the key. The problem with the government is that it
doesn't want to be educated because of ideology.
>>>> >
>>>> > Uneducatable (probably made up word, but you get the drift) people
are the true definition of stupid. And lets face it government is where all
these types seem to congregate the most.
>>>>
>>>> Money wins against education hands-down.
>>>>
>>>> The belief that politicians would do the right thing, if only they
knew enough about the subject matter to make well-reasoned decisions, is
absurd, completely unsupported by empirical evidence.
>>>>
>>>> There are very well-organized and well-funded organizations lobbying
in favor of control of the internet. The Internet community fails time and
time again because it has not learned enough lessons from previous defeats
to become well-organized and well-funded enough to make its counter-case
effectively.
>>>>
>>>> The government knows it can marginalize and destroy internet industry
participants with no blowback whatsoever. As long as that remains true,
ISPs and users will continue to be outmaneuvered.
>>>>
>>>>    - mark
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160430/5eff34fb/attachment.html>