-prove that this filter will work 100% without slowing anything down
Already stated that I'm of the view that it is doomed to mostly fail in the short term. Things "slowing down" are irrelevant to me. Of course they will ... but on the other hand, maybe if more folk give up p2p streaming etc of time wasting garbage due to onerous filtering, status quo re: speed will be maintained. I couldn't give two hoots either way and quite happy to suck it and see, even if "just for the children" while I wait for the necessary Next Best Thing for necessity to produce.
-prove that it won't cost more
Don't care and not interested... it already costs too much and I am already not playing that game. Quite happy with my cheapy 256/64 and way cheapy dialup cheers, and I get everything done with it that I need and want to do. Yes, I'm all right, Jack ...
-prove that even if it doesn't fit the first two points, that it will be worth it ie. give me a guestimate of how many child molesters will choose not to molest because this was put in place...
I reckon it will be worth it because of pragmatic reasons already well repeated, as well as the obvious albeit inaccurate filtering it WILL achieve. The collatoral damage that false positives cause along with potential response time impacts is all mere conjecture at this stage but I'm happy to shrug it off as acceptable losses, even if "just for the children" in the short term.
-prove that this won't scope creep
I hope it does, for it should. The online world has got a long way to go before it can be thought of being in line with the laws of the land for the offline world. I reckon that while we can bring it into line we should, but if it makes you feel any better, I reckon we should also be trying to take global communications beyond the control of any government or special interest group, as well as doing away with the need for telcos and ISPs ... but you've already read that of me numerous times, yes ?
-prove that this isn't a cynical attempt to influence the senate vote of Fielding, a man who gained his office from Labor preferences and has been holding them over a barrel ever since.
I couldn't care less. Politicians do politician things and none of it surprises me nor should be that much of a surprise to anyone else.
The fact of the matter is that the internut in Oz is currently being used in ways contrary to the laws of the land and it is our elected Government's duty to at least rattle their rusty weapons and give lip service to the idea of reducing the disparity regarding dealing with illegal stuff online and dealing with illegal stuff offline. KRudd's "working families" expect it of him to look after their kiddies while they are busy out as wage slaves earning double incomes in order to pay off their negative equity, and all that. Dare I say "think of the children" again ?
-prove that Conroy didn't lie (promised opt out option at the last election)
We are talking about a politician here ? What am I supposed to be here ... surprised, offended, or outraged ? Sorry, but I can't raise enough interest in this one to be any just mentioned.
-prove that Conroy didn't try to bully a taxpaying voter in to silence (Mark Newton)
Same again. BTW, Mark and I used to exchange many a public missive back in the heady daze of FIDOnet and 2400baud modems in the early 1990s, and it is obvious to this day he is able to stand up for himself ... and has probably been exposed to (edit: and participated in) more rigorous debate than all of Conroy's department put together including Conroy. So, once again am I suppose to be surprised, offended, or outraged by this alleged attempt at bullying ?
-prove that Conroy hasn't accused anyone protesting this and Mark Ludlum of being "pro child porn"
I thought he had, so obviously there isn't much point in trying to prove he had not, but I'm happy to be corrected in that regard.
Anyway, you have to admit that there is a clear chain of logic to that kind of fallacious argument, but please spare me the outrage when you well know that near all of us rely upon such methods from time to time.
I suspect if Senator Conroy was arguing in such a way for something you wanted or agreed with, you would choose to barely even notice the method employed just a long as the result you wanted was delivered.
You know [deleted], we aren't THAT different ... :)
regarDS
Posts
