1985 Singles # 39 Billy Idol
1 hour ago
Thursday, 17 December 2009
Greens, EFA critical of ISP filtering plans
The chorus of voices critiquing the Federal Government’s mandatory ISP-level filtering plans has grown larger with the Greens and Electronic Frontiers Australia joining the likes of the Federal Opposition and Google in opposing the filter.
Greens communications spokesperson, senator Scott Ludlam said in a statement that the party was “deeply concerned” about the Federal Government's intention to plough ahead on ISP level filtering
“The pointless nature of this proposal is set out in the report itself, which admits that the filters will be circumvented by people seeking blocked material," Ludlam said.
"The Government has also indicated the open-ended nature of the filter by acknowledging they will be importing blacklists from overseas to supplement the Australian list. As many people have said, this is the thin end of the wedge. The policy is simply misguided.”
Ludlum said unless the Government changed tack on its plans, the Greens would move significant amendments to this legislation if it is introduced to the Senate.
Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) spokesperson Colin Jacobs claimed in a statement that the criteria for success of the Federal Government’s trial of the mandatory ISP-level filter was set far too low. “Given the pilot’s modest goals, it was designed from the beginning to pass,” Jacobs said. “Although it may address some technical issues, what it leaves out is far more important – exactly what will be blocked, who will decide, and why is it being attempted in the first place?”
The EFA noted that, since the last election, the Federal Government’s cyber-safety plan had shifted away from providing tools to shield minors on the web to a black list of almost exclusively Refused Classification content aimed at adults.
“The Government knows this plan will not help Australian kids, nor will it aid in the policing of prohibited material. Given the problems in maintaining a secret blacklist and deciding what goes on it, we’re at a loss to explain the Minister’s enthusiasm for this proposal,” Jacobs said.
“We’ll be interested to see how the Internet service providers respond. We know they are critical of having such intrusive Government interference in their networks,” he added.
The EFA said that although communication minister Stephen Conroy had hailed the pilot a success, many concerns about the proposal remained ignored, with neither draft legislation nor a comprehensive policy document have yet been released to the Australian public, though legislation is expected in 2010.
“Successful technology isn’t necessarily successful policy,” Jacobs said. “We’re yet to hear a sensible explanation of what this policy is for, who it will help, and why it is worth spending so much taxpayers’ money on.”
Google has also expressed its concern over the Federal Government’s plans to introduce a mandatory filtering regime for Internet Service Providers (ISP) in Australia, arguing that the scope of content to be filtered is too wide.
Wednesday, 16 December 2009
Computer says no: Google slams filter
Internet search giant Google has come out in opposition to the Federal Government's push to introduce mandatory ISP filtering.
In a post on Google Australia's official blog, the company said the plan raised concerns about censorship.
"At Google we are concerned by the Government's plans to introduce a mandatory filtering regime for Internet Service Providers (ISP) in Australia, the first of its kind amongst Western democracies," the post said.
"Our primary concern is that the scope of content to be filtered is too wide."
While Google accepted there must be some limits on internet content, it condemned the Government's filtering approach as heavy-handed.
"We have a bias in favour of people's right to free expression," the post said.
"While we recognise that protecting the free exchange of ideas and information cannot be without some limits, we believe that more information generally means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual.
"Some limits, like child pornography, are obvious. No Australian wants that to be available - and we agree. Google, like many other internet companies, has a global, all-product ban against child sexual abuse material and we filter out this content from our search results.
"But moving to a mandatory ISP filtering regime with a scope that goes well beyond such material is heavy-handed and can raise genuine questions about restrictions on access to information."
Citing a recent report into filtering, Google said the use of refused classification (RC) as a screening tool would go far beyond restricting illegal content.
"The recent report by Professors Catharine Lumby, Lelia Green and John Hartley - Untangling The Net: The Scope of Content Caught By Mandatory Internet Filtering - has found that a wide scope of content could be prohibited under the proposed filtering regime," the post said.
'Grey realms'
"Refused classification is a broad category of content that includes not just child sexual abuse material but also socially and politically controversial material - for example, educational content on safer drug use - as well as the grey realms of material instructing in any crime, including politically controversial crimes such as euthanasia.
"This type of content may be unpleasant and unpalatable but we believe that government should not have the right to block information which can inform debate of controversial issues."
But the Federal Government maintains the new filter rules are not intended to curtail freedom of speech.
Google said the Government should instead focus on education and providing effective filtering tools for individuals.
"While the discussion on ISP filtering continues, we should all retain focus on making the Internet safer for people of all ages," the post said.
"Our view is that online safety should focus on user education, user empowerment through technology tools, and cooperation between law enforcement and industry partners. The Government has committed important cyber safety education and engagement programs and yesterday announced additional measures that we welcome."
Google also defended weighing into the controversy, saying discussion on contentious issues was needed for effective democracy.
"Exposing politically controversial topics for public debate is vital for democracy," it said.
"Homosexuality was a crime in Australia until 1976 in ACT, NSW in 1984 and 1997 in Tasmania. Political and social norms change over time and benefit from intense public scrutiny and debate.
"The openness of the internet makes this all the more possible and should be protected.
"The Government has requested comments from interested parties on its proposals for filtering and we encourage everyone to make their views known in this important debate."
@'ABC'
@'ABC'
Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor
Drugs money worth billions of dollars kept the financial system afloat at the height of the global crisis, the United Nations' drugs and crime tsar has told the Observer.
Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, said he has seen evidence that the proceeds of organised crime were "the only liquid investment capital" available to some banks on the brink of collapse last year. He said that a majority of the $352bn (£216bn) of drugs profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.
This will raise questions about crime's influence on the economic system at times of crisis. It will also prompt further examination of the banking sector as world leaders, including Barack Obama and Gordon Brown, call for new International Monetary Fund regulations. Speaking from his office in Vienna, Costa said evidence that illegal money was being absorbed into the financial system was first drawn to his attention by intelligence agencies and prosecutors around 18 months ago. "In many instances, the money from drugs was the only liquid investment capital. In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system's main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor," he said.
Some of the evidence put before his office indicated that gang money was used to save some banks from collapse when lending seized up, he said.
"Inter-bank loans were funded by money that originated from the drugs trade and other illegal activities... There were signs that some banks were rescued that way." Costa declined to identify countries or banks that may have received any drugs money, saying that would be inappropriate because his office is supposed to address the problem, not apportion blame. But he said the money is now a part of the official system and had been effectively laundered.
"That was the moment [last year] when the system was basically paralysed because of the unwillingness of banks to lend money to one another. The progressive liquidisation to the system and the progressive improvement by some banks of their share values [has meant that] the problem [of illegal money] has become much less serious than it was," he said.
The IMF estimated that large US and European banks lost more than $1tn on toxic assets and from bad loans from January 2007 to September 2009 and more than 200 mortgage lenders went bankrupt. Many major institutions either failed, were acquired under duress, or were subject to government takeover.
Gangs are now believed to make most of their profits from the drugs trade and are estimated to be worth £352bn, the UN says. They have traditionally kept proceeds in cash or moved it offshore to hide it from the authorities. It is understood that evidence that drug money has flowed into banks came from officials in Britain, Switzerland, Italy and the US.
British bankers would want to see any evidence that Costa has to back his claims. A British Bankers' Association spokesman said: "We have not been party to any regulatory dialogue that would support a theory of this kind. There was clearly a lack of liquidity in the system and to a large degree this was filled by the intervention of central banks."
Christopher Hitchins: In defence of foxhole atheists
It’s no secret that conservative Christians dominate the U.S. military, but when higher-ups start talking about conversion missions, it’s time to worry. The author meets a group of soldiers who aren’t having it.
One of this year's most overlooked albums
Pop Crimes by Roland S. Howard
Get a recording of the Sydney album launch at Oxford Arts Club on October 22, 2009
Setlist:
Pop Crimes/Dead Radio/Shut Me Down/She Cried/Wayward Man (False Start)/Wayward Man
Avé Maria/Life's What You Make It/The Golden Age of Bloodshed/Sleep Alone
Encores: Exit Everything/Autoluminescent
Nicole Kidman refuses to discuss Scientology
Nicole Kidman iced over when British reporter Andrew Marr brought up "one of the things you haven't talked about before" on his BBC show. That topic was her ex-husband's religion.
"Scientology," said Marr. "A lot of people would say it is a bullying cult."
Kidman stumbled over her response before deciding she wasn't going to give one.
"I just don't . . . This is just so not . . ." she said. Then, "I'm here to publicize 'Nine.' If I was here to do an expose on myself then I'd be like, 'Let's go,' but I have no interest in discussing any of that."
"You don't want to talk about Scientology?" Marr persisted.
"No, I'll talk about 'Nine,'" said Kidman.
The tense exchange was scrapped from the television version of 'The Andrew Marr Show' but released online by the BBC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
