by Sean Wright
Senator Conroy has again fired off another of the ‘no silver bullet’ lines in relation to ISP filtering – a phrase so prevalent that should a pack of werewolves cross over ‘a bridge too far’ and wander down a ‘fork in the road’ our kiddies will be well protected.
Then again maybe he should be shooting at Swallows following the … um ‘Swallowgate’ affair reported by Gemma Jones of the Daily Telegraph. Apparently a female Year 10 student researching the Swallow(feathered variety) through NSW Education Department filters was;
‘…. blocked access to a documentary on swallowing toothpaste but [given] access to a male site talking about inappropriate material.’ [read more]
In the interest of journalistic integrity I did my own research and found the inappropriate material as the number one search result for ‘Swallow’ – I know, taking one for the team.
Hardly surprising is the fact that this scenario is not unheard of in NSW schools nor to anyone who has followed the ISP Filtering debate for more than half an hour.
But then the Government’s ISP filter won’t be subject to this sort of problem will it? Everything went quite well according to the ‘early mail’ on the tax payer funded report, which Senator Conroy has promised us he will let us see after it has been sanitised filtered drafted by bureaucrats.
So as it stands we have the empty Government rhetoric, examples of the technical problems that we fear will dog ISP level filtering and we await a report on a trial whose success is ill defined and delivered to us by bureaucrats that possibly don’t understand government censorship classifications (unlike ITwire).
So while it’s generally situation normal here in Australia, there has been a worrying development overseas. Worrying in the sense that Conroy/Labor might be keen to adopt, or emulate actions taken or proposed by another western democracy.
Slashdot informs us of scope creep occurring in Germany:
tikurion writes
“It’s only been a few weeks since the law dubbed Zugangserschwerungsgesetz (access impediment law) was passed in the German Parliament despite over 140,000 signatures of people opposed to it.The law will go into effect in mid-October 2009.
Now Minister for Family Affairs Ursula von der Leyen implied in an interview that she is planning on extending the reach of the law, claiming ‘…or else the great Internet is in danger of turning into a lawless range of chaos, where you’re allowed to bully, insult, and deceive limitlessly.’ More on golem.de via Google translate (here is the German original).”
Yes, it’s the bullies that should be our number one concern, not as Stilgherrian suggests, the skilled up international crime syndicates stealing our identities, through Malware runs.
Sean usually rants here at his own blog and has been following the ISP Filtering/Censorship debate since mid 2008. Kudos to geordieguy for the werewolf idea.
9 comments
Filtering Wrap Up: Of Swallows and Silver Bullets : Sean the Blogonaut says:
Aug 9, 2009
[...] [read more at Somebody Think of the Children] [...]
Bob Bobington says:
Aug 10, 2009
I am having trouble finding any facts in your emotional rant.
Ok, the NSW Education filter (whats that, a different filter? Yes.) has a false positive. That is news, that is fact. It is largely irrelevant as it is the Education departments filter, and is easily bypassed. Miss year 10 student can go home and research whatever form of swallows she likes.
Ok, so Germany has a filter. That is news, that is fact, that is relevant.
But aside from this, there is no “wrap up”, just ranting without basis (for example “examples of the technical problems that we fear will dog ISP level filtering”, what examples? And is there any proof these examples will “dog ISP level filtering” beyond YOUR (not “we”) fear?).
Poor. I look forward to a real wrap-up.
Sean the Blogonaut says:
Aug 10, 2009
Hey Bob thanks for the input. The post was a bit dare I say, tongue in cheek. I would have thought the werewolf thing at the start gave it away.
Are you saying that those opposed to the filter are not in fear of the issue false positives?
Has Conroy not appealed to filtering schemes in other countries as justification for Australian ISP filter? We still don’t know the details of the trial and whether false positives will be a considerable problem – so yes its a fear. You and I might disagree on how rational that fear is. As for “examples” agree, should read example.
I only hope that my next wrap meets your expectations Bob.
Denis says:
Aug 10, 2009
“We still don’t know the details of the trial and whether false positives will be a considerable problem” Neither does the Communications Minister.
Pharaoh says:
Aug 10, 2009
The DET filter’s a fair example of terrible filter implementation. False negatives are common but false positives are near ubiquitous and circumvention can be impossible (at my old high school it blocks anything unclassified if you’re logged in as a student). It’s also interminably slow. Horrible moralless websites like Gmail are banned to make sure students can only communicate through Minitrue’s authorised channels, as are nasty avenues of expression like technical forums and blogs.
Bob Bain says:
Aug 11, 2009
I journaled about the “no silver bullet” in my LiveJournal entry on 15th. March…
http://bobbain.livejournal.com/301645.html
The expression “There is no silver bullet” has been used so often that I’ve decided to highlight news items involving “silver bullet”.
——————
The issues for which there is no silver bullet change from day to day and month to month.
At the moment “ad funded programming” is seen as “a silver bullet that will cure ITV” BUT there is “no silver bullet for Auckland’s transport needs”
Daniel says:
Aug 22, 2009
As for the students’ encounter with the Dept. Of Education’s filter, assuming the article was more or less accurate (it is The Daily Telegraph reporting after all), it sounds very similar to what users experience when encountering China’s internet filter. Pornographic material flows right on through, while political sites, even including the Communist’s Party own sites are the ones that end up being – intentionally or mistakenly – blocked.
It’s of course a total nightmare and simply practically impossible to accurately catch every site that “ought to be” blocked, which is why it’s simply much easier just blocking entire domains, such as wikipedia, google, youtube and twitter. I wouldn’t be at all surprised that, when Australia gets its filter, and it fails dismally, blocking entire domains will be proposed by Controy as the next best solution. In fact it will be no doubt proposed as the only solution. As they have been doing in China for years.
Amy says:
Nov 30, 2009
We had a fairly decent connection at school. And a good filter in place.
Then “The Filter” came.
When it started I couldn’t google a Shakespeare quote to match it to the play it came from, because it had the word “prick” in it. This is *extremely* common.
Speed slowed to a ridiculous and unproductive crawl.
Macquarie dictionary was also blocked for a long time.
God forbid you’re trying to research anything even tangentially related to sex, fiction, retail, advertising, etc, etc, etc.
Those of us who cared were very annoyed. The majority, both students and teachers were completely and utterly apathetic.
Then this “clean feed” started being talked about. The words “dread” and “horror” seem apt here.
Needless to say, when conversation turned in a related direction and I tried to explain the issue it always came down to:-
“But porn is bad, why wouldn’t you want to block it?”
“Because. It. Is. LEGAL.”
“Its disgusting and horrible, nobody should look at it.”
“Well that’s your opinion, you don’t have to look at it.”
“It should be illegal.”
“Because you don’t like it?”
“It’s immoral.”
“Yes, well. It will also be used to block anything deemed “unsuitable” from a blacklist nobody is allowed to see. There has been talking of censoring discussion on abortion and euthanasia.”
“Well, that’s murder. Why would anyone even consider them in the first place?”
Yes, I do lack tact somewhat.
But the complete lack of even basic empathy and understanding of ethics and… well, anything else, is depressing, and frustrating.
Io blame it on their cultural/religious group and background would be easy, in a smug superior way. (Though, if one more person starts on about how the “Danish cartoonists” should be “punished” or something such, with the disapproval falling on me for trying to explain freedom of speech and suchlike because I’m not being “understanding” of other “cultures”… *deep breaths*)
They’re not morons because of their religion. They’re morons because the majority of people seem to be (which is depressing in itself, as I know can be rather slow), and have the convenient cover of their “beliefs”. The “Family First” party and pretty much all of the right in the US are also good examples of this as well. (‘Spect you can mock Christians.
)
Now that I’ve managed to bring religion into a discussion on an issue barely related to it, I’ll finish by saying that *this*, my friends, is why we’re never going to get anywhere. You can’t reason with idiots. (especially politicians)
Amy says:
Nov 30, 2009
Also, I sick of having to defend having any sort of interest in sex as if I’m some sort of pervert.
The argument shouldn’t have to come down to “it’s legal” it should be. “I happen to *like* looking at porn occasionally, or reading some well written smut. I do like my smut. Is there a problem?”
Of course if you say that they’re even less likely to listen to you (if that’s possible).
/rant