Comments on: The regulator and the regulated: sorry, but the internet won’t play that game

By: Damon Schultz

Damon Schultz — Sun, 30 May 2010 12:01:33 +0000

This is actually a balanced, well-researched comment piece and deserves far more than the 6 comments it has attracted.

By: paddy

paddy — Thu, 27 May 2010 08:13:17 +0000

I agree with you about the NBN being the govt’s biggest reform Bernard.

As for the “sleeping” parrot that is the netfilter…..
I suspect that the govt will delay the filter until after the election and then, as quietly and painlessly as possible, put it out of its misery.

They’ll probably quote “authoritative Industry sources”, saying that it’s not practicable to make it work on a nation wide mandatory basis. (Doh!)
An optional user-based model will be offered as a substitute and the govt will grin and bear the squeals of the fundie lobby.
Let’s face it. The original reason for trying to fly this lead balloon, was most likely, to try and get Fielding onside for his vote on various unrelated issues in the senate.
That didn’t work and (with any luck) Fielding is unlikely to even be sitting in the next parliament. With the greens holding the balance of power.
The netfilter will be one *very* dead parrot.

By: zut alors

zut alors — Thu, 27 May 2010 08:07:16 +0000

Frankly, I don’t give a stuff how fast or slow the internet speed might be, my objection to Conroy’s filter is a fear of some anonymous bureaucrats deciding what is appropriate for my consumption. We live in a free country, let’s keep it that way.

If a certain group of deplorable weirdos wish to view children in cruel, lascivious, compromising situations they will find a way to savour it regardless of filters. And regardless of the internet, too, if they’re really hellbent on it. Filters won’t cure the problem - or save the innocent.

By: Meski

Meski — Thu, 27 May 2010 07:23:55 +0000

The majority of us who oppose the internet filter aren’t doing so because we want to pirate content, or download illegal porn, and all the other things Conroy has said opposers of his filter are in favour of. It’s because it will slow down the internet, whilst not actually stopping any of these things. It might make it a little harder, but I guarantee the next generation killer apps will be designed to circumvent such filters. So the only ‘benefit’ will be a slower internet. And a reputation for having a government that thinks like China’s government. And Burma’s. And …

By: David

David — Thu, 27 May 2010 05:53:13 +0000

Conroys policy in its current form will never get up, and with the Govt having buckleys of getting control of the Senate it is doomed. Don’t know why it is even being debated, its finished unless Conroy can convince the Coalition, doubt it, or the remainder of the Senators, doubt it. Time to move on and let Conroy rant and rave to his hearts content,

By: shitesherlock

shitesherlock — Thu, 27 May 2010 04:49:38 +0000

Sometimes BK, you even make sense.

By: davidk

davidk — Thu, 27 May 2010 04:12:42 +0000

These companies have little interest in what anyone thinks because they can get away with it. The same applies to Senator Conroy it would seem. The Catholic church tried to stem the flow of Bibles to the people in the middle ages and failed, just as this government will fail in it’s attempt to stem the www.