On errors and angry demographics

Conroy's internet filtering report is out. For the opt in filtering; around 3.4% errors are being reported.

So, if every aussie visits only 1 web page, there will be more people blocked than there are homosexuals in Australia (2-3%).

I don't know about you, but if Conroy were to come out and interfere with Australia's homosexual population; there would be one hell of a noise. No one would touch it; just because of the sheer numbers involved; let alone the political suicide it would be.

Now, every Australian visits one webpage per day for a year, that's a hell of a lot more people; and they are a lot more angry.

Smooth move, Conroy.

Anger, Lies and McMenamin

I am now firmly entrenched in my view that Bernadette McMenamin is a fool who deserves no respect from our side of the #nocleanfeed debate.


Listen:

"Yes, there's been an awful lot of vitriol, there's been an awful lot of misinformation, and certainly I think there's been an awful lot of hysteria, and most of that hysteria is not coming from the child protection advocates, but it's coming from all these anonymous bloggers and people that write to you and just call you every name under the sun, and it's not helpful," she said.

Who are the anonymous bloggers of which you speak? Mark Newton? Kieran Salsone? Who are the people who write to you? Me? GeordieGuy? Because you sure as hell haven't responded to me, and I'm pretty polite no matter how pissed at you I am.

What about Clive Hamilton, misusing statistics to push his flimsy arguments? Or Conroy, doing exactly the same thing; while being incredibly disingenuous about the purpose of the filter?

On the misinformation front, the pro filter side is outpacing us by miles. We're quick to self regulate any extreme voices or misinformed people on our side, we assemble factual talking points and research everything.

Calling us a hysterical loud minority is an absolute case of the pot calling the kettle black. To hold any other position means you are either a liar or proactively misinformed. So far, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and stick with my assessment of a fool who is putting their hands over her ears; crying "I can't hear you".

"I think it's really incredibly arrogant to call people and those who support internet filtering stupid and the scheme stupid, and it's a very simplistic approach to something that is in discussion by a lot of different people," she said, later adding that critics seemed to be focused on the business, not human, impact.

You want to protect children. The methods under discussion will not work. You want to spend oodles of my dollars on it; which would be taken away from police who can catch the people who cause the abuse.

How is that anything but stupid?


I am so angry with this rubbish, it's beyond reason.

#nocleanfeed, strategy, and direction shifts

There's a growing buzz amongst the #nocleanfeed communities - the issue is being framed as a censorship and freedom of speech issue more and more.

This is being driven largely by the DLC.

I don't like that; it's not what motivates me; its not how I get people on side. We don't have freedom of speech here in Australia except around political issues. When has that ever stopped us from saying what we want, though? As a society, we're more than happy to say what we want. If someone says nasty things about us, we don't get our panties in a twist about it; we call them a wanker and ignore them.

What does motivate me is how dishonest the government has been through this process.

1) They call it a "clean feed"; but it won't actually work. A more descriptive name: thing that will annoy the shit out of you every 3 days on the internet.
2) It won't work like they want, but the government won't listen to their own trials, industry and the public. That makes them stupid.
3) Its a people issue. Not a technology issue. It is pretty obvious that is the case.
Think of it like gun control - guns don't kill people; people kill people. Answer: don't let stupid people have guns, or arrest stupid people who do stupid things with stupid guns.
4) Conroy is a wanker. He acts like a child and won't answer questions in Question Time. He makes a mockery of our political process
5) Conroy (his office at least) threatened Mark Newton's job. That's unaustralian, stupid, and the act of a first class fuckwit.
6) This childish fuckwit is spending our tax money on his 1984 reenactment wet dream. Why?
7) If it is a problem; how come I don't hear more about it happening to my friends, family and workmates - my child was preyed upon by an internet sicko? The truth is, it doesn't happen.
8) IF THIS IS SUCH A PROBLEM AFTER ALL; WHY NOT SPEND THE MONEY SOMEWHERE USEFUL, LIKE THE POLICE?

Angry: Don't make a mockery of our medium, Stephen

Image by CloCkWeRX via Flickr

Conroy finally starts 'engaging' the public.

He does it by parroting the same rubbish he's been doing all along, while actively ignoring our questions.

This is a total mockery.

An example: Why aren't PC level filters sufficient?

The previous Government's Protecting Australian Families Online strategy focused on providing families with PC-level filtering software. However, despite an $84.8 million government program and $15.5 million in advertising, only about two per cent of households with dependent children are using a filter. Unfortunately, many parents do not have the technical skills or knowledge to install and manage PC-level filters. ISP-level filtering could provide important protection for those families with limited technical expertise.

We understand that ISP filtering is not a 'silver bullet' for this purpose. However, in conjunction with the Government's numerous other initiatives in this area, we believe it can make an important contribution to protecting children online.

Stephen Conroy

So,
1. You think we are too stupid to go out and learn how to protect our children if we need to
2. No one wanted it before, which means we're too stupid to learn how to get it
3. Look at how much money was spent, and still no one cared! The answer? Spend more money, and force it on people.

RRRRRRRRR.

These are the same rubbish answers you've given in question time, this is the same junk. You wasted hours and hours of our lives, as we hated you then, and then to pacify us, you parrot it back at us?

Get out, Stephen Conroy, get out of this country: you have no place within our civil and confident society.

A response from Ms Ellis

I got a response regarding my letter to Kate Ellis, my local member, regarding #nocleanfeed.

It's at least polite, and she did write a letter to Conroy on my behalf.

Her words:

Dear Senator Stephen,
I write on behalf of a constituent, Mr Daniel O'Connor, regarding ISP filtration.

Mr O'Connor is concerned that ISP filtration system will inhibit his job. Mr O'Connor is currently employed as a software engineer, and he points out that his work could not continue without a free and open responsive internet. Mr O'Connor also enquires as to whether the option of giving funder and encouragement to ISP's such as http://www.webshield.net.au has been considered.

I would appreciate it if you could please investigate this matter and advise me of your findings so I can respond to Mr O'Connor's enquiry.

She also included a number of pages detailing the other bits of the proposed plan - I'm aware of these, and largely unconcerned by them - they are in fact reasonably on target.

She mentions her support for the other parts of the package, minimizing the importance of the filter, and so on and so forth.

When I'm next to a scanner again, I'll post a PDF of it all.

My take: from the tone and wording of the letter, it seems like she's taking the party line but politely ignoring the filter aspects. She's certainly not a foaming at the mouth filter fan; but won't speak out against it.

It's at least better than the fridge magnet I got sent.

NoCleanFeed slogans

If you've been living under a rock, you might not know about the upcoming #nocleanfeed protests planned for December 13th.

Basically; the Labor government wants to provide a mandatory filter of Australia's internet to prevent child porn and other 'unwanted' content.

I'm against it because it is a technically unworkable solution to a problem I don't have. You can learn more at the GetUp petition, or NoCleanFeed.com.

The protests

Adelaide
12 Noon @ Parliament House

Brisbane
11am @ Brisbane Square

Melbourne
12 Noon @ State Library

Sydney
11am @ Town Hall

Hobart
11am @ Parliament Lawns

Perth
12 Noon @ Stirling Gardens

The slogans

I'm in need of more signs.

Here's some starter ideas.

"For an anti-porn filter...
... this is gonna fuck us!"

"GET /public-support?
HTTP 403: Forbidden"

"Accidentally the whole internetz?
This protest is what that means!"

"What's wrong Conroy?
Afraid to answer our questions in the Senate?"

"Clive Hamilton - LOLWUT?"

"Clive Hamilton will damage our children,
by controlling their future"

"Clive Hamilton is a philosopher;
His ideas are not designed to be practical!"

"Won't somebody think of the children!"

"Net Filters are like windows,
they don't stop criminals with purpose"

"Sen. Conroy, slow down!
You are dodging our questions too fast!"

"My Labor Government Penpal just wont write back"

"Hey, can I opt-out from Sen Conroy's rhetoric?
Oh, not that either then..."

"Conroy says:
NetAlert: wasted taxpayer's money!
CleanFeed: a winner!
HUH?"

"The only positive part of CleanFeed
will be the false positives!"

"If it doesn't work in trials,
just ignore the results! WIN!"

Possible posters

Letter to Kate Ellis

Dear Ms Ellis,
I am concerned about the ALP's policy to implement a Clean Feed internet filter. As I understand it, you are somewhat aware of this issue; and have met with Mark Newton; who discussed various technical details with you.

This is evidently an emotional issue from both sides – Sen. Conroy taking the save the children line, and many others, including myself, saying fine, but don't break my internet to do it.

My concerns stem from the fact I make my living as a software engineer, and my work literally could not exist without a free and open, responsive internet.
An internet filter as has been described would damage me; not to mention the Australian economy – it is no coincidence that breakthroughs in mass communication are tied to massive economic growth.

Also, by pursuing this technical solution so aggressively, Sen. Conroy has disregarded legitimate technical concerns; and demonstrated he is out of touch with the very field he is meant to be the Minister for.
I can only imagine that many employees of the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy are embarrassed beyond belief; by the factual errors, by the rhetoric.
Let's not even touch on the fact they are meant to be providing both a Clean Feed (which will slow the Internet) and ubiquitous, fast broadband to all Australians.

So; my questions:

Is your position still one of support for the Clean Feed?
Have you researched more into the technical issues after your discussion with Mr Newton?
Would the ALP be open to different proposals; such as increased funding for policing and enforcement against child pornographers?
Or funding / encouraging the creation of ISPs like http://www.webshield.net.au/ ?


See also: protest pictures, nocleanfeed.

No Clean Feed Protests - Adelaide

I'm just up the street from the Adelaide No Clean Feed protest. It's pretty decent, and it's kind of mind numbing to be able to reach out and interact with the Melbourne protesters via SMS and internet.

We've got about 30-40; Melbourne has 50; and we've yet to hear in from Sydney.

There's shots of me even; how neat is that.

As soon as I can get home, I'll dump photos onto flickr.

Tune into the twitter #nocleanfeed stream.