Not about access to me, it's about speeds.FatherTed wrote:
V.Smart move by that ISP, i could imagine a lot of people switching over to them to get unrestricted net access.
At the very least, I hope the other ISPs realise that could very well happen and do the same thing.FatherTed wrote:
V.Smart move by that ISP, i could imagine a lot of people switching over to them to get unrestricted net access.
So you're comfortable with getting msn/irc/torrent and email filtered?Spark wrote:
Look, if they can prove that it won' slow internet to a crawl (ironic given I've just been capped), then I have little issue (the list will get leaked whether they like it or not).
Do you really think it's possible?some_random_panda wrote:
So you're comfortable with getting msn/irc/torrent and email filtered?Spark wrote:
Look, if they can prove that it won' slow internet to a crawl (ironic given I've just been capped), then I have little issue (the list will get leaked whether they like it or not).
Easy way to ride out a recession. offer the country its porn backFatherTed wrote:
V.Smart move by that ISP, i could imagine a lot of people switching over to them to get unrestricted net access.
Erm? What the hell d'u think they're gonna do with it? Stopping people stealing software and music is gonna be high their list, I would have thought. IRC, MSN and email are probably pretty safe though.Spark wrote:
Do you really think it's possible?some_random_panda wrote:
So you're comfortable with getting msn/irc/torrent and email filtered?Spark wrote:
Look, if they can prove that it won' slow internet to a crawl (ironic given I've just been capped), then I have little issue (the list will get leaked whether they like it or not).
Although they'd probably sneakily slip in a "We can look at all your chats and emails whenever we want" clauseScorpion0x17 wrote:
Erm? What the hell d'u think they're gonna do with it? Stopping people stealing software and music is gonna be high their list, I would have thought. IRC, MSN and email are probably pretty safe though.Spark wrote:
Do you really think it's possible?some_random_panda wrote:
So you're comfortable with getting msn/irc/torrent and email filtered?
Banning torrents would be equivalent to banning FTP, or banning web browsers. It's just another protocol.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Erm? What the hell d'u think they're gonna do with it? Stopping people stealing software and music is gonna be high their list, I would have thought. IRC, MSN and email are probably pretty safe though.Spark wrote:
Do you really think it's possible?some_random_panda wrote:
So you're comfortable with getting msn/irc/torrent and email filtered?
They don't even have to do that. Just ban mininova.com, demonoid.com etcSpark wrote:
Banning torrents would be equivalent to banning FTP, or banning web browsers. It's just another protocol.
They aren't banning protocols.Spark wrote:
Banning torrents would be equivalent to banning FTP, or banning web browsers. It's just another protocol.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Erm? What the hell d'u think they're gonna do with it? Stopping people stealing software and music is gonna be high their list, I would have thought. IRC, MSN and email are probably pretty safe though.Spark wrote:
Do you really think it's possible?
That would achieve... what?AussieReaper wrote:
They don't even have to do that. Just ban mininova.com, demonoid.com etcSpark wrote:
Banning torrents would be equivalent to banning FTP, or banning web browsers. It's just another protocol.
Exactly my point.Cheez wrote:
They aren't banning protocols.Spark wrote:
Banning torrents would be equivalent to banning FTP, or banning web browsers. It's just another protocol.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Erm? What the hell d'u think they're gonna do with it? Stopping people stealing software and music is gonna be high their list, I would have thought. IRC, MSN and email are probably pretty safe though.
Last edited by Spark (2009-03-24 02:27:07)
True, they are not but Costello wasnt leader of the party either. He seems more moderate then Howard was.AussieReaper wrote:
Work Choices are not socially progressive.BN wrote:
Maybe time for Costello to have a go. Fiscally conservative but socially progressive.
Not at present, but if you read the ACMA 2008 report (June), you'll notice having an interest the filters they're trialling to block/filter torrents. (As well as email, msn, so I'm not just pulling this out of the air).Cheez wrote:
They aren't banning protocols.Spark wrote:
Banning torrents would be equivalent to banning FTP, or banning web browsers. It's just another protocol.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Erm? What the hell d'u think they're gonna do with it? Stopping people stealing software and music is gonna be high their list, I would have thought. IRC, MSN and email are probably pretty safe though.
Meh, work choices isn't gone anyway.BN wrote:
True, they are not but Costello wasnt leader of the party either. He seems more moderate then Howard was.AussieReaper wrote:
Work Choices are not socially progressive.BN wrote:
Maybe time for Costello to have a go. Fiscally conservative but socially progressive.
This isn't about practicality though Dilbert, it's about pandering to the religious right and Fielding.Dilbert_X wrote:
Frankly I don't think the govt really has time to worry about the internet - apart from child porn and terrorism.
And they move so slowly they'll never keep up which what changes so fast daily.
I would have thought it would make more sense monitor it - if its changing quickly to dodge the filter then its harder to do so - then nail anyone involved -> with large rusty nails.
Its unrealistic to have an impermeable 'Firewall Australis'.
They've given up pandering to Fielding. They've all but said that he has a snowball's chance of getting preferences and thus getting re-elected. He's pissed them off over superfluous, minor or just plain stupid things too many times.Flecco wrote:
This isn't about practicality though Dilbert, it's about pandering to the religious right and Fielding.Dilbert_X wrote:
Frankly I don't think the govt really has time to worry about the internet - apart from child porn and terrorism.
And they move so slowly they'll never keep up which what changes so fast daily.
I would have thought it would make more sense monitor it - if its changing quickly to dodge the filter then its harder to do so - then nail anyone involved -> with large rusty nails.
Its unrealistic to have an impermeable 'Firewall Australis'.
Sorry, forgot.This isn't about practicality though Dilbert, it's about pandering to the religious right and Fielding.
Its not hard at all, but as soon as the filter is in place its redundant, it probably needs to be updated by the minute - and that doesn't deal with filesharing unless you ban filesharing of course.Aussiereaper wrote:
Dilbert it isn't hard to get an ISP filter in place. You do not need a guy with a microscope. lol
It doesn't need to be updated by the minute. Blacklisted sites can be implemented incrementally or in a batch. From the early reports of the list it is a lot of blacklisted sites other countries have tried to ban also. Banning file sharing isn't possible, because file sharing in and off itself is not illegal.Dilbert_X wrote:
Its not hard at all, but as soon as the filter is in place its redundant, it probably needs to be updated by the minute - and that doesn't deal with filesharing unless you ban filesharing of course.Aussiereaper wrote:
Dilbert it isn't hard to get an ISP filter in place. You do not need a guy with a microscope. lol
Last edited by AussieReaper (2009-03-24 05:04:51)
Couldn't find it. There's mostly some very sick, sick shit there, but also softcore as well as some wikipedia articles.Cheez wrote:
Difference is yours isn't mandatory.
You know they have lolcats on the list too, right?
