Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt11

derspatz writes...I tend to think you are hanging a disproportionate amount of importance on the internut as The Vehicle for alleged "free speech/expression"

Sparrow, the impact of filters on free speech has been overstated, but the importance of uninhibited communication (with low latency and neglible pricing) has not been stressed enough.

I'm happy to take the middle pedal, uh, ground on this one and quite agree with you Sostenuto. Besides, a long held view of mine is that virtually all electronic forms of communication in Oz (and then the whole world) should be publicly owned and free, rather than be the corrupted money grubbing vehicle holding the masses to ransom that they mostly currently are.

Your age is showing. There is a huge cultural gap between your generation and the children of Web 2.0.

Yup, my generation wrote/created/paved the way for much of what we see now (naughty us), and most of the current generation have turned it into the McWeb/McNet; a bloated, obese, over-commercialised and unpleasant place to visit that also betrays its roots.

ie, the Virtual New Garden has instead become The New Babylon.

Perhaps that might clarify another reason why I'm not too bothered as to what happens to it next. Heck, if ILCF forces a return to innovation and advancement and a moving away from commerce and fleecing the masses, then I say "Senator Conroy, do your worst !"

In the meantime, I believe it is right and correct to attempt to "clean the stream" while it still can be done, but we are now drifting into territory which has very little to do with the medium and everything to do with the message, and thus mostly beyond the scope of this discussion thread.

I don't think you have a clue how being really connected feels. I probably can't explain it.

A number of us here started with CB and Ham radio (and some even continue with that. Hi richary) and have been "connected" for a long, long, time, and it is our interests in these things that see us still involved in the evolution of "being connected" to this day. The internut wasn't with us when we began, and who knows what will take its place next.

Whatever it will be, it will be as either interest or necessity demands – just as it generally has always been.

The way my 16yo is "connected" with friends spread far and wide, isn't all that different, and I doubt that any of them either know nor care about the up and coming ILCF for it won't impact on their online world one iota.

And why should it ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt11

It is not fear that drives me, but a knowledge of history, and tools of dictators and the history of australian politics.

I realise you may not understand what the government is implementing here, but your lack of understanding does not reduce the inherent dangers in giving a government a centerilised tool of censorship, which history shows as extremely dangerous.

Aside from the alt.conspiracy kinda angle, I tend to think you are hanging a disproportionate amount of importance on the internut as The Vehicle for alleged "free speech/expression", and how little ILCF (or whatever ends up being the most effective way of getting the necessary job done) is going impact on it in general terms for the majority of users anyway.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt11

Too bad about those pesky VPNs and proxies that make this all a big waste of $125.8m that could be put to much better use elsewhere.

I was using 3 of those from 3 different machines to do 3 different vital nationally spread non-graphically oriented tasks over the last couple of days, and even on probably the some of the best network access that could be bought it was still disappointing on the speed side of things.

VPNs really aren't going to suit most people – not that most people are actually going to have much of a need for them anyway.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt11

What about freindly fire? What unintended things might also go down?

Will the benefit outweigh the collateral damage?

Now we are taking things to a new subjective level, with as many opinions possible as there are people.

Short answer is "it depends", I guess. :)

Will the attempt to create a utopian society and protect people from themselves create a society that no one wants to live in?

Probably wouldn't be the first time, but I do think that we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves in the here and now. The internut isn't either the be and end all or perfect place that various folk want to try and make it, and no amount of ILCF (short of saying "sorry, we can't let you log in") is every going to make it so.

It can only make it a little bit better for somebutnotall and a little bit worse for somebutnotall ... with a degree of cross-over somebutnotall of the time.

No biggie AFAIC.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt11

derspatz writes...What the majority of Oz citizens, particular families want for our society

Anything that threatens the well-being of the majority

Good effort, but noone can absolutely define those things for everyone in one go. Not me, not you, not the guy sitting behind a desk at the ACMA.

Agreed, which is why I suspect we will end up writing yet more software to do it for us. Think of the various Bots and AIs involved in the myriad of computer games out there, along with spiders and web-crawlers building search engine databases for us and then apply a similar idea re: looking after The Web for us.

The job is far too big and complex to leave to mere inflexible simplistic lookup/hash tables and databases.

I don't think anyone is expecting success in one go. Since when is that the way with things IT anyway ?

regarDS