The Nanny State to put up Chinese like Internet filters

fatty · 01-02-08, 02:36 PM

Given that the filters are apparently left optional to the consumers, I don't see this to be very nanny-ish at all. Also, blocking pornography is not PC.

XabbaRus · 01-02-08, 02:44 PM

Hmm but I can see what will happen. People who opt out of the filters will immediately be put on a watch list and snooped on to see what they look at. So some guy wants to look at naked ladies sometimes or a couple of girls at it, big deal you think, but it will be watched and recorded and as soon as a sex attack takes place he or she will be called in for questioning.

SUBMAN1 · 01-02-08, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatty

Given that the filters are apparently left optional to the consumers, I don't see this to be very nanny-ish at all. Also, blocking pornography is not PC.

Did I read it wrong? I thought he said it was 'mandatory'.

XabbaRus · 01-02-08, 03:02 PM

He then says consumers who want an unfiltered connection have to opt out. He wants it mandatory for the ISPs to have filters not the consumer.

baggygreen · 01-02-08, 03:58 PM

Its kinda funny, cos this man rubbished completely John Howards attempts at limiting that sorta stuff. Said that it was a waste of time, blah blah.

Im not a pr0n man, never searched for it, but i tell you what, i'll be arguing against this one every step of the way

Stealth Hunter · 01-02-08, 07:20 PM

Makes me think of this video: (it doesn't contain smut... just so you know...)

http://www.idkwtf.com/videos/latest-...cken-porn-worm

01-02-08, 02:44 PM	#2
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Hmm but I can see what will happen. People who opt out of the filters will immediately be put on a watch list and snooped on to see what they look at. So some guy wants to look at naked ladies sometimes or a couple of girls at it, big deal you think, but it will be watched and recorded and as soon as a sex attack takes place he or she will be called in for questioning. __________________

01-02-08, 03:02 PM	#4
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	He then says consumers who want an unfiltered connection have to opt out. He wants it mandatory for the ISPs to have filters not the consumer. __________________

01-02-08, 02:36 PM	#1
fatty The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,448 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Given that the filters are apparently left optional to the consumers, I don't see this to be very nanny-ish at all. Also, blocking pornography is not PC.

01-02-08, 03:58 PM	#5
baggygreen Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Canberra, ACT, Down Under (really On Top) Posts: 1,880 Downloads: 7 Uploads: 0	Its kinda funny, cos this man rubbished completely John Howards attempts at limiting that sorta stuff. Said that it was a waste of time, blah blah. Im not a pr0n man, never searched for it, but i tell you what, i'll be arguing against this one every step of the way

01-02-08, 07:20 PM	#6
Stealth Hunter Silent Hunter Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Y'ha-Nthlei Posts: 4,262 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	Makes me think of this video: (it doesn't contain smut... just so you know...) http://www.idkwtf.com/videos/latest-...cken-porn-worm