<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Australia joining the dark side in censoring the internet?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/12/31/australia-joins-the-dark-side-in-censoring-the-internet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2007/12/31/australia-joins-the-dark-side-in-censoring-the-internet/</link>
	<description>Technology news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:15:02 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: a non e mous</title>
		<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2007/12/31/australia-joins-the-dark-side-in-censoring-the-internet/comment-page-1/#comment-65209</link>
		<dc:creator>a non e mous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:09:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2007/12/31/australia-joins-the-dark-side-in-censoring-the-internet/#comment-65209</guid>
		<description>How amusing it is to read this sort of article by someone who clearly has not done much research.

All of the outlawed categories mentioned are readily accessible on any internet connection in Australia. It is only illegal to host such material on an Australian website. At this stage it is not illegal to view such material hosted on non-Australian websites, except where the content is obviously suspect, such as terrorist activities and child porn, to name but a couple.

As for compulsory Government blocking of unsuitable material, with an opt-out clause - what a load of tosh! 

All that has occurred is that the previous federal government, in a desperate vote-grabbing political stunt, offered a filtering package (ala NetNanny and similar) to parents interested in protecting their kids from net nasties. It was very quickly shot down in flames by a teenage geek who cracked it in a couple of hours, much to the hilarity of the local media.

Nothing has happened since, because a landslide election result swept that government from office, and the new government has more important things on the agenda at this stage.

It is a pity that the author of this article clearly did not bother to look at a few Australian sites where free speech is alive and well, including a current debate on sentences handed down to aboriginal men involved in the rape of a 9 year old girl.

How about doing some better research next time, instead of just blindly repeating what you read in another equally poorly informed forum.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How amusing it is to read this sort of article by someone who clearly has not done much research.</p>
<p>All of the outlawed categories mentioned are readily accessible on any internet connection in Australia. It is only illegal to host such material on an Australian website. At this stage it is not illegal to view such material hosted on non-Australian websites, except where the content is obviously suspect, such as terrorist activities and child porn, to name but a couple.</p>
<p>As for compulsory Government blocking of unsuitable material, with an opt-out clause &#8211; what a load of tosh! </p>
<p>All that has occurred is that the previous federal government, in a desperate vote-grabbing political stunt, offered a filtering package (ala NetNanny and similar) to parents interested in protecting their kids from net nasties. It was very quickly shot down in flames by a teenage geek who cracked it in a couple of hours, much to the hilarity of the local media.</p>
<p>Nothing has happened since, because a landslide election result swept that government from office, and the new government has more important things on the agenda at this stage.</p>
<p>It is a pity that the author of this article clearly did not bother to look at a few Australian sites where free speech is alive and well, including a current debate on sentences handed down to aboriginal men involved in the rape of a 9 year old girl.</p>
<p>How about doing some better research next time, instead of just blindly repeating what you read in another equally poorly informed forum.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
