The Case for Censoring The Internet

[benji]

http://www.news.com.au/technology/jessi ... 5894369199

Professor Matt Warren, the head of Deakin University's School of Information Systems, said as long as parents who don't understand the internet kept giving their children access to it, there needed to be ways to control its use.

"You simply can't have free access to the internet," he said.

"It has to be controlled, censored and people have to be held accountable for their actions on it.

"We punish people who drink, we punish people who speed and we have to implement laws to that effect when it comes to the internet."

Prof Warren said that parents might think allowing children to access the internet in their bedroom was a way of helping them do their schoolwork, but the reality was, a lot of parents simply didn't understand the medium.

"The child isn't ethically aware of what they're doing," he said.

"It's also an education issue with that person and the parents aren't necessarily the ones that should be giving that training, because they don't understand it either.

"Parents will be concerned about their child going out all hours, but they don't care about them staying on the internet all hours."

Prof Warren said educating children about the dangers of the internet should be part of the national curriculum and that cybersafety should be an election issue.

Both major parties have shelved their plans for filtering the internet until after the election, which Prof Warren said was an oversight.

"Governments still don't understand the huge impact of the information age on our society," he said.

"Five hundred million people using Facebook has huge implications.

"Cybersafety and cyberbullying ties into censorship and control, so it should be an election issue. But does it win votes?

"It will just need a government to make a hard decision to say this has to stop."

A pilot study into teaching ethical behaviour on the net has been under way in 150 schools nationwide since last year.

Recommendations on how it fits into the national curriculum will be put forward after the election.

One proposal would see schools given the right to respond to student's activities on the net outside school hours.

I see no downsides to giving someone power to censor the internet.

[Andrew]

Professor Matt Warren, the head of Deakin University's School of Information Systems, said as long as parents who don't understand the internet kept giving their children access to it, there needed to be ways to control its use.

Or, you know, those parents could be educated about the Internet and how to monitor their children's activities and punish them accordingly.

[J@3]

I read encyclopedia dramatica would be on the list of banned websites if we get this censor. Thus I will leave the country if it goes through.

[Lamrock]

If we don't censor the internet, then the corporations win.

[Laxation]

Professor Matt Warren, the head of Deakin University's School of Information Systems, said as long as parents who don't understand the internet kept giving their children access to it, there needed to be ways to control its use.

Or, you know, those parents could be educated about the Internet and how to monitor their children's activities and punish them accordingly.

I like the cut of your jib

I read encyclopedia dramatica would be on the list of banned websites if we get this censor. Thus I will leave the country if it goes through.

I have bookmarked this site in advance
http://www.internetfreedom.org/Products-and-Services

I'm sure regulation of the internet has its advantages, however, they don't outweigh the negatives. That is, complete bullshit of censoring. The government gets to choose what is out. They have suggested censoring porn where girls have A cup boobs.I have nothing against child porn censoring, in fact that is great. But if they extend it to anything else, its fucking retarded.
It proposes to ban any site that has the censored content, and any site that LINKS to the extended content. ITS FUCKING RETARDED

And of course they will extend it.
Once they get the laws in, why wouldnt they extend it to censor websites advertising the other political party? It is complete bullshit, and the #1 reason why Steven Conroy should just go jump. Fucking douchebag retard, get your head out of your ass and start appreciating porn like the rest of us warm blooded men.

I go to Deakin so I will keep an eye out for this so called "Matt Warren" and picket against his stupidity.

And Lamrock, are you joking? Because I totally agree - we can't have those corporations acting all corporation-ee

[Laxation]

And you know what else, FUCK THE OPINION OF THIS GUY

he is a fucking lecturer at Deakin, what sort of fucking uni is that?*
They sacrifice learning of ALL students by shortening the length of teaching time in order to put in another semester to make money off international students.

fuck deakin, fuck this cunt, and fuck internet censoring.

God dammit i hate all 3 of those things so god dam much


*yes i realise i go to deakin, i started before they put trimesters in.

[J@3]

You owe it to yourself and everyone else to strike this guy in the nuts if you ever see him. What a cunt.

[Laxation]

I totally would if it werent for all these god dam rules everywhere...


SEE another reason more rules arent needed!

[Laxation]

AND WHAT THE FUCK

I just read the bit that andrew quoted properley

Professor Matt Warren, the head of Deakin University's School of Information Systems, said as long as parents who don't understand the internet kept giving their children access to it, there needed to be ways to inform parents about the internet

Fixed.

So fucking retarded.

it was unrealistic to expect parents to monitor their children around the clock and that the onus was on schools to give kids the tools to protect themselves.

Wtf seriously? Schools are there to fucking teach children, not to monitor their internet activity at home.

[J@3]

Wtf parents are informed about the internet. They know about the cyber police and everything.

[koberulz]

I have nothing against child porn censoring

Thing is, though, most child pornography is distributed through p2p and private networks, not websites, and preventing people from accessing it is going to do nothing to prevent it being produced, thus having zero effect on child abuse. Once it's been made, it hardly matters if nobody in this country can see it, the crime has already been committed.

Less time and money on restricting my freedom, more time and money on stopping the actual problem.

[Andrew]

it was unrealistic to expect parents to monitor their children around the clock and that the onus was on schools to give kids the tools to protect themselves.

Isn't that kind of what being a parent of someone under eighteen is basically about? Of course you can't watch them every single second, but you should be able to keep track of what they're doing, stay a step ahead of them and punish them when it's in order.

Occasionally a customer will ask me for some advice about keeping track of what their kids are looking up and whether they should bother investing in NetNanny or similar software. I generally advise them against it because programs like that can just make things difficult, aren't infallible as they'll sometimes block safe sites while letting adult content through and kids with any kind of computer savvy can get around them. I show them how to look up the history, a solution they find effective and easy to handle. A lot of these people are by their own admission not very knowledgeable when it comes to computers but with a few quick notes jotted down for them, they can handle the situation.

Of course, focusing on adult content is probably the wrong way to go here because it invites the obvious rebuttal of "Oh, so you're just against is so you can get your filth online." To which one could reply that if everyone involved is over eighteen then it's perfectly legal and within our rights, but the bigger issue as Laxation said is that the government would be deciding what's objectionable. Porn is just the starting point because they can play the morality card and they can point at anyone who objects and declare "Pervert!" or maybe even "Pedophile!", but what next? Websites of political movements they want to quash? Websites that simply exercise freedom of speech and criticise the government? Websites that simply have profanity on them? The possibilities are endless and it's just a bit too Orwellian for my liking.

[koberulz]

"You simply can't have free access to the internet," he said.

"It has to be controlled, censored and people have to be held accountable for their actions on it.

"We punish people who drink, we punish people who speed and we have to implement laws to that effect when it comes to the internet."

Since when were we punishing people who drink, or not punishing people who accessed illegal material online?

[Paul23]

Good post Benji, there are plenty reasons to make sure the internet does not become overrun with lies and hate speech along with this violence you noted. I have heard that some countries block the entire internet and simply provide an internal internet that does not have these problems, that sounds like a sensible policy and one that would be easier than tracking down and prosecuting all the people violating the internet.

And to make sure people could not just ruin that internet we should require everyone to post with their full name, this account could be tied to the same central government account that would have all your money, health care records, education/work history, etc. That would make it really easy to get things done without hassle and also hold people accountable for their remarks on the internet. It would get rid of a lot of paperwork too, as when someone posted some hate speech you wouldn't need to arrest them and fines, a moderator could simply flag the post and the system would automatically deduct the fine from their account. This would do a lot of solve our budget problems and spur the economy by getting rid of red tape.

I know a bunch of corporate whore teabaggers would raise a stink over this, but if a country like Australia could implement a sensible policy of managing the internet it would be easy to convince the serious people in this country that it is not the end of the world because that policy and the resulting success could be pointed to. So it is good to see them leading the way on an issue that the rest of us need to tackle as well.

[shadowgrin]

How sure are you that such policy won't be abused by those in power?

[koberulz]

Good post Benji, there are plenty reasons to make sure the internet does not become overrun with lies and hate speech along with this violence you noted. I have heard that some countries block the entire internet and simply provide an internal internet that does not have these problems, that sounds like a sensible policy and one that would be easier than tracking down and prosecuting all the people violating the internet.

And to make sure people could not just ruin that internet we should require everyone to post with their full name, this account could be tied to the same central government account that would have all your money, health care records, education/work history, etc. That would make it really easy to get things done without hassle and also hold people accountable for their remarks on the internet. It would get rid of a lot of paperwork too, as when someone posted some hate speech you wouldn't need to arrest them and fines, a moderator could simply flag the post and the system would automatically deduct the fine from their account. This would do a lot of solve our budget problems and spur the economy by getting rid of red tape.

I know a bunch of corporate whore teabaggers would raise a stink over this, but if a country like Australia could implement a sensible policy of managing the internet it would be easy to convince the serious people in this country that it is not the end of the world because that policy and the resulting success could be pointed to. So it is good to see them leading the way on an issue that the rest of us need to tackle as well.

Have you ever read the fucking constitution?

[shadowgrin]

Is that when a person is having a hard time releasing his crap because it doesn't want to get out?

[Paul23]

Shadowgrin, ever heard of voting?

Koberules, an outdated and worthless document written by slave owners is not a death pact.

[shadowgrin]

I have heard of it, so do every crooked person that would lie, cheat, and steal to present a flawless image to the voting public and enable them to be seated in power.

[el badman]

Shadowgrin, ever heard of voting?

So that's what magically prevents politicians from abusing their power, voting?
You're hopeless

[Paul23]

What do you expect when you install people who hate government and want to gut it to loot the American people's lives and money to give to corporations? Maybe if you guys stopped helping them steal elections and defending their hateful ideology we would not be in this mess and your education might have taught you better about the real world.

[shadowgrin]

But the people voted for them. The same people that you're relying on to establish a government that would stand against them evil corporations. If the people can get it wrong, what now?

[benji]

Clearly we should dissolve the people and elect another.

[el badman]

and your education might have taught you better about the real world.

You keep bringing that up, yet you post like a brat fresh out of high school. You're not fooling anyone. Except if you actually are a by-product of benji's twisted mind (it's just eerie at times), in which case you're fooling everyone...

[benji]

You all aren't by-products of my twisted mind?