Archive for March, 2009
It looks like ACMA really do have no idea about the Internet
Posted by Aaron in Internet censorship on 26 March, 2009
From this, it looks like ACMA haven’t actually looked into circumvention techniques for bypassing ISP-level filtering. They ignore VPNs and HTTP/SOCKS proxies (which are ineffective against PC-level filters) not to mention SSH tunnels or tor (also ineffective against PC-level filters) nor any other kind of tunneling protocol…
So, people with servers in the US, you stand to gain a great deal of money if you were to maybe sell access to a VPN or proxy (web, SOCKS or HTTP) that you have set up on your server…
After all, the Streisand effect will definitely take much greater hold after the sites on the blacklist are actually blocked
Copyright… Theft?
Posted by Aaron in Copyright, Random ramblings on 26 March, 2009
How can you steal copyright? This makes no sense whatsoever. I could walk into a shop and steal a DVD (copyrighted material) but the penalties I would face would have nothing to do with whether or not the content on the DVD was copyrighted. Conversely, downloading copyrighted material from the internet is not theft, because i am simply making a copy of data that exists elsewhere. This is copyright infringement. They are 2 very different things. So when I see a name like AFACT (Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft) I believe that it is simply an attempt to confuse the issue. I’m certainly confused…
Conroy’s finally said something…
Posted by Aaron in Internet censorship on 25 March, 2009
Conroy seems to be changing tack a little :No more accusations about opponents’ supporting CP.
But as my posts on whirlpool have indicated, he is digging himself into a hole. I still have several arguments against the filter:
- The list does contains political content and could be used to limit free speech
- The filter will have an impact on general internet performance
- The government cannot achieve its goals with a filter
Now Conroy has come out and publicy lied about the political content on the list: “It is completely untrue that the leaked blacklist contains political content. This is a list which contains sites that promote incest, rape, child pornography and child abuse.”
Nuh-uh, Conroy. Sites expressing any view on euthenasia or abortion are political in nature and there are sites expressing political views about both on the blacklist. The list absolutely contains political content.
I won’t post links to either the sites I’m talking about or the blacklist, as I don’t want this site to be added too.
However, if you’re curious I’ll give you a hint, if you’re curious, crikey has a recent article about a euthenasia site on the blacklist and wikileaks hosts the leaked ACMA blacklist. That should be enough for an internet-savvy person to verify my information.
And now for something completely different… a non-rant post O_O
Posted by Aaron in PC hardware on 13 March, 2009
My desktop PC’s case is a Thermaltake Xaser VI MX which, while it looks pretty and is nice to work with, does not have the quietest fans. The most recent Atomic magazine has woken me up to the multitude of cheap fan controllers, and because more (preferably LED-lighted) cooling fans would relatively inexpensive (and hassle and power-tool-free) way to add more orsm to my case. This will also inevitably add noise as the vibrations are tranferred to the case (rubber mounts are an option but do not completely eliminate noise and are more money to spend). In addition, I don’t really need my hard disks running below room temperature except on hot days (like the ridiculous 45+ degree days we’ve had this summer) so a fan-controller could be a good addition.
EPIC RAGING RANT TIEM! THIS IS FUCKING RETARDED!!!
Posted by Aaron in at stupidity, at the Australian Government, Internet censorship, Ranting on 13 March, 2009
In quick succession, there are 2 more news articles that further reduce my faith in *any* australian government.
This and this are what I am talking about.
Now, I’m NOT FUCKING SURE HOW HARD THIS IS TO UNDERSTAND CONROY. HOW IS THIS A SCARE CAMPAIGN?
The filter
- Has no judicial oversight or appeal
- The blacklist is maintained by an unaccountable government-controlled body?
- You cannot opt-out of this mandatory filter
THESE ARE FACTS! I DO NOT LIKE THESE FACTS. I AM NOT TRYING TO SCARE ANYBODY, JUST TELL THE TRUTH BEHIND YOUR AND CHAIRMAN RUDD’S LITTLE MORAL CRUSADE AGAINST THE INTERNET.
Sorry Conroy Conjob, I can’t have any faith in you filter while you continue to ignore these 3 very valid facts.
It doesn’t help that while you claim that the xFOADx’s anti-abortion page submission was not about political speech, you can’t argue that ACMA’s takedown request wasn’t. There is NO FUCKING REASON TO TAKE DOWN A LINK, BECAUSE IF YOUR FILTER WORKS, PEOPLE WON’T BE ABLE TO GET TO THE PAGE ANYWAY, RIGHT? OH, RIGHT… YOU KNOW THAT THE FILTER WON’T WORK…
I just realised how stupid some people are…
Posted by Aaron in at stupidity, at the Australian Government, Internet censorship, Ranting on 13 March, 2009
During a energy-drink fueled all-nighter I had a great idea for a blog post. But I forgot what I was going to write. Here is what I remember: The law is does NOT stop people breaking the law. It seems obvious, but some people don’t seem to realise it (I’m looking at you Clive Hamilton, Conjob, Jim Wallace and Michael Atkinson). Just because there’s a law about something does *not* mean that people CAN’T break it. The point of laws is not to prevent people breaking them. That is the point of criminal courts. The laws themselves are not meant to stop people breaking them. If that was the case, we wouldn’t need the courts for criminal trials. So, making a law like this: “Video Games (that would be) rated R18+ cannot be sold in Australia” or “ISPs must prevent their customers accessing illegal/unwanted content” MISS THE ENTIRE POINT OF HAVING LAWS. Yes, laws can be broken, but that is the responsibility of the one who breaks them and there are consequences for it. THAT is the point of laws.