tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495023788021462722024-03-14T04:50:44.776+10:00Good PaulMy latest greatest fastest breaking news,celebrity news and gossip,internet news and gossip for the Gold Coast and AustraliaUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-62467367236748141612011-02-04T17:28:00.001+10:002011-02-04T17:53:56.530+10:00Evil Vodaphone pro-dictator company<b>Have you heard what Vodafone just did?</b> After helping the Egyptian Government to shut down the country's internet connection for 5 days, <b>Vodafone then sent millions of their Egyptian customers a pro-dictator text message </b>calling on "every honest citizen to preserve this country as the nation is forever." <br />
<br />
This story is hurting Vodafone's reputation, and they are scrambling to make good. Now, as innocent civilians are being killed in the streets, we must draw a line in the sand and tell Vodafone that its support for the regime must come to an immediate end. <br />
<br />
<b>Our friends at AccessNow.org are collecting petition signatures to urgently deliver to Vodafone's CEO, shareholders, and their vulnerable board</b>. Can you join them in demanding Vodafone put their customers and human rights above profits and the repugnant demands of repressive regimes:<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><a href="https://www.accessnow.org/vodafone-bloody-handsets">https://www.accessnow.org/vodafone-bloody-handsets</a></b><br />
<br />
<li><a href="http://tonyserve.wordpress.com/2011/02/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-streaming-live-in-one-hour-also-action-over-voafones-actions-in-egypt-getup/">Wikileaks Julian Assange streaming live in one hour - also action over Voafone's actions in Egypt - GetUp</a> (tonyserve.wordpress.com)</li>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-33492016424316948162011-02-04T17:26:00.000+10:002011-02-04T17:26:09.548+10:00Wikileaks latest update. LIVE<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-AU</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
</style> <![endif]--> <br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"><span>The Wikileaks saga has transfixed the world, with politicians and punters alike stunned by the intriguing revelations from the leaked US embassy cables. <strong>At 6pm (AEDST) today Julian Assange, Wikileak's founder, will speak via videolink to Australians</strong> at an event in Federation Square, Melbourne. <br />
<br />
The man Sarah Palin said should be hunted as a terrorist and whose activities Julia Gillard pre-emptively judged as "illegal" is at the centre of the debate over freedom of speech. <strong>You can watch him speak on an internet video stream at 6pm <a href="http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/Wikileaks&id=1528?dc=1522,727407,1">here</a></strong>. <br />
<br />
With only 4 days before Assange faces court on extradition charges, <strong>this could be one of the only chances to hear directly from the man at the centre of the Wikileaks controversy.</strong> So bookmark the page, set an alarm, and join us at 6pm tonight (Melbourne time): <br />
<br />
<strong><a href="http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/Wikileaks&id=1528?dc=1522,727407,1">http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/Wikileaks&id=1528</a></strong><br />
<br />
Hope you can join us,<br />
The GetUp Team <br />
<br />
<b><a href="https://www.accessnow.org/vodafone-bloody-handsets"></a></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-8963277329856661672010-08-28T08:22:00.001+10:002010-08-28T08:22:09.721+10:00Paradise Plant Centre Gold Coast<p>Today, everyone who lodged an objection to the Material Change of Use application for this site received correspondence from the GCCC outlining their final decision.  Objectors now have the option of appealing this decision to the Planning Court.   We personally do not plan any further action.</p> <p>In the correspondence are details of the Council's requirements to this developer - 21 units, underground parking, two storeys in the front, three at the back, parking, landscaping and so on.   The developer has said that this is not financially viable.   We plan to wait and see what happens.  The developer can take the decision to the Planning Court but we would hope that, if this happens,  the Council would be prepared to defend their position.  Verbally, the owner has indicated the site will now be sold.</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-71557930802115258872010-08-10T19:40:00.000+10:002010-08-10T19:40:00.456+10:00Australian Labor Party internet filtering policy<p>Labor's internet filtering policy isn't being discussed in the run-up to the election but its impact on Australia is significant. </p> <p>Championed by Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Stephen Conroy, the $30million+ filter is being sold by Labor as an internet block for child pornography, bestiality and extreme pornography with 'wide ranging support from the Australian public' and 'only minimal opposition against'. </p> <p>But after a new, lengthy investigation it transpires that virtually none of this is true. What Australia will get from this internet filter is a framework for censorship that doesn't stop "the worst of the worst" but will absolutely curtail discussion on politically incorrect topics like euthanasia, safe drug taking and graffiti while banning relatively-tame adult content.</p> <div style="margin: 1em; width: 310px; display: block; float: right"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:La_grande_Epidemie_de_PORNOGRAPHIE.jpg"><img style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; display: block; border-top: medium none; border-right: medium none" alt="Australian internet filter;The great epidemic of porn..." src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/La_grande_Epidemie_de_PORNOGRAPHIE.jpg/300px-La_grande_Epidemie_de_PORNOGRAPHIE.jpg" width="300" height="377" /></a> <p style="font-size: 0.8em">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:La_grande_Epidemie_de_PORNOGRAPHIE.jpg">Wikipedia</a></p> </div> <p>Below we examine the filter from the point of view of the people who know most about it, Australia's tech community, which in the past week has united in one last ditch attempt to bring Labor's censorship policy into the open and bring its discussion into the mainstream media in the run up to the election. </p> <p>Support for the filter boils down to a handful of pro-censorship lobbyists claiming to be speaking for all Australians. The opposition is sizeable, informed and has put its detailed case into the open, backed with numerous polls and abundant technical information and show why the filter being touted simply won't protect anyone from child porn to virtually any degree. The following is long, but hopefully simplifies the situation enough for mainstream media and political journalists to at least question Labor (and the other political parties) about and let Australian's know that currently, "Moving Forward" under Labor brings with it censorship the like of which hasn't been seen in the Western world before. </p> <p>This morning, an online poll closed with 98% of 38,000 respondents saying they would not vote for a political party that supported the internet filter. While the ALP is unlikely to be worried by a few tens of thousands of votes, the poll is significant in that it was promoted by an unprecedented alliance of almost every major technology publication and community in the country including the Sydney Morning Herald, News.com.au, PC Authority, Australian Personal Computer, PC User, PC World, Good Gear Guide, ITnews, ITWire, Delimiter, Atomic, Gizmodo, Life Hacker and the large OCAU online community. A version of it <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/filterpoll/poll">can be seen here</a>. The only two major absentees were CBS Media (publisher of CNET and ZDNet) and the large Whirlpool online community, both of which have run similar polls with similar results in the near past. </p> <p>The result underlines the fact that Australia's technology community is unequivocally against Senator Conroy's internet filter. Even if you regard this recent poll as a protest vote, with wide margins for error, it echoes the results of dozens of major previous polls before it including Whirlpool's thorough <a href="http://whirlpool.net.au/survey/2009/">survey in 2009</a> (23,500+ votes, 93% against) and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/polls/technology/technology-news/conroys-filters/20100413-s54f.html?rand1274337544312">SMH's poll</a> in May (69,000, 99% against). Read anyone of the above publications, and there's a history of rebellion against the filter.</p> <p>Opposition also comes from pressure groups such as the Electronic Frontiers Foundation, GetUp! Australia and the Australian Sex Party, organisations like Euthanasia group Exit, plus Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Facebook. </p> <p>Conroy cites support for the filter using a McNair poll commissioned by the ABC's Hungry Beast. The poll found 80% of respondents would be in favour of an internet filter that cut out Refused Classification (RC) content. However, the poll invoked large criticism for not properly explaining what RC content was. McNair summarised RC as being, "Images and information about one or more of the following: child sex abuse; bestiality; sexual violence; gratuitous, exploitative or offensive sexual fetishes; and detailed instructions on or promotion of crime, violence or use of illegal drugs". No mention was made of content being blocked for being politically incorrect. Conroy later told Four Corners that this poll demonstrated how, "the Australian public overwhelmingly believe that Refused Classification is a reasonable classification. They demonstrated that in a reputable poll". No it didn't.</p> <p>But by focusing on the less contentious aspects of RC content, is it any wonder they were in favour of it? If the same respondents knew how much it was costing, that it wouldn't and couldn't work along with what else was being censored, it's likely the result would swing the other way. In May the Safer Internet Group commissioned a poll by GA Research which discovered, as the Sydney Morning Herald put it, "That the more parents found out about the proposed filter, the less they support it". The problem is that almost every pro-filter poll has been presented with a question along the lines of, "Would you like a filter which blocks child porn?". What it also shows is that if a major pollster like McNair can't get a handle on the filter, what hope is there for mainstream media? While we're certain the whole of Australia would love a filter that banished child pornography, this is the last thing that the proposed filter will do. </p> <p>The filter works by having Internet Service Providers, like BigPond, iiNet and Internode, block specific web page addresses on a blacklist. However, it is facile to circumvent in just seconds by using completely legal services like 'proxy servers' and 'Virtual Private Networks' which are regularly used by corporate employees working from home. Getting round the blacklist at the publisher's end is simple too. Recently, tech site, <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/07/why-the-filter-wont-work-a-technical-story/">Gizmodo showed how</a> a blocked page could effectively get off the blacklist by adding a question mark to the end of the web address thereby changing the address enough to make it different. If that subsequent web address was then blocked then any number of meaningless combinations of letters and numbers could be added to the end of the address to avoid blocking too. Internet Industry Association CEO Peter Coroneos <a href="http://www.itnews.com.au/News/173707,net-filter-circumvention-its-completely-legal.aspx">summed the situation up to ITnews</a>, "While we support many of the Government's efforts in the online security sphere, we aren't convinced that it [the filter] will have anything more than symbolic value".</p> <p>The only people who won't be able to readily circumvent the filter are the general public that aren't specifically looking for the blocked content in the first place. What these people will find is that if they ever go looking for detailed information on euthanasia or safe drug taking and in some instances, mild pornography, they won't be able to find it without seeking help on circumventing the filter.</p> <p>In addition to ease of circumvention the filter is diverting attention and resources to the wrong place. The internet is made up of various elements: the World Wide Web's web pages are just one part (the shop window) of the greater internet. There are also vast information stores called newsgroups, plus Virtual Private Networks, chat rooms, internet messaging services and email which act like back rooms and alleyways. This is the natural domain for criminals and the really offensive material. If you're going to commit a crime it's unlikely to be in the shop window. </p> <p>Senator Conroy recently stated that, "No responsible government can sit there and do nothing if there's 355 child abuse websites on the public internet." However, the 'public internet' consists of more than one trillion individual web pages rendering any attempts at blocking all of the 'bad' sites futile. Hypothetically, a team of 100 censorship engineers investigating 1000 pages every day each would take over 27,000 years to investigate what's online today, and in that time countless other pages would have appeared. Any filter couldn't ever be considered remotely complete and any public faith that the filter will in some way protect them is entirely unfounded.</p> <p>Establishing whether the public need protecting in the first place is a tricky matter. Running a poll asking people if they had ever seen any child pornography is unlikely to provide reliable results with few people wanting to say yes to such a question under any circumstances. We can only go on anecdotal evidence here. Personally I've used the internet practically every day since the beginning of the World Wide Web and I've seen just about every disgusting thing there is to see, but I've never once seen child pornography or necrophilia. Discussion with online communities suggests that this experience is universal. Only one person I know has said they'd seen something terrible involving children and that came from following a false music-related link which directed them to one such site. They called the police. At present no one has provided statistics or any evidence saying that accidentally accessing these sites is a problem that actually exists.</p> <p>Another issue is that the internet is global and Australia's broad RC guidelines are at odds to mainstream media coming out of other countries. Decapitated hostages, people dying in accidents and crime scene pictures are not just widely available all over the web, but many come from reputable news sources and even prime time news shows in regions like Eastern Europe, The Middle East and South America. In Amsterdam's Sex Museum there is a restricted section which warns sensitive people that what they are about to see is not for the squeamish. In it there are numerous photographs of women having sex with various animals. The Sex Museum is listed as a major tourist attraction in most guides to Amsterdam and is frequently mentioned by Australian tourism publications as being one the main things to see when in Amsterdam. While few Australians are likely to want to see such content in their mainstream media, anti-censorship bodies and groups caught up in RC classification are adamant that it's up to the individual to decide for themselves and not the government what they see online. The government routinely counters that it's the classification board that decides, but the board does not do what the government says it does and the government is the body that's empowering it.</p> <p>At the sharp end of the argument is the international Euthanasia group, Exit. A recent episode of Four Corners detailed how groups of pensioners were attending nationwide courses which literally taught them how to hack the filter in order to access (at least the key elements of) euthanasia information sites like, peacefulpillhandbook.com which would be blocked by the filter. The full transcript <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2010/s2895350.htm">can be read here</a>. Senator Conroy insists, "Individual pages are targeted. Websites are not. This common argument that the euthanasia websites will be targeted and banned is just false. If there is a detailed instruction in self-harm, yes, that page would be targeted but the website and the discussion around euthanasia would not. So for those who keep trying to make this argument, they're simply misleading Australians." Host Quentin McDermott countered that, "In fact, the entire online version of the Peaceful Pill Handbook and related videos will be blocked if a mandatory filter is introduced." And summed up by saying, "The spectacle of elderly folk finding ways to bypass a filter intended to protect children online begs the question - how on earth did we get to this point?"</p> <p>Much has been made about whether the list should be made public or not. But the question is pointless. It will go public whether by whistle blowing or a simple process of reverse engineering (the latter having been promised by online entities already). Whether anyone should reverse engineer and publish it is irrelevant. That's what happens on the internet and anyone who is adamant that it won't simply doesn't understand the internet. The internet has very many people who value their privacy to extreme degrees and will rebel against any government censorship action just out of principle - whether it's their own government or not. Already, in March 2009, an early version of the blacklist appeared on award-winning whistleblowing website Wikileaks.org which notably released videos of US Army "collateral damage" incidents given to it by anonymous whistleblowers. The videos showed civilians and journalists being killed by the US Army. Wikileaks itself was named on the blacklist. The list was reported on around the world with some Australian journalists investigating the sites on it citing journalistic duty. In this regard the filter was counterproductive in that it acted as a web directory for some of the most heinous websites on the internet. One can't imagine that with the global exposure that the story got, many people, including children, didn't visit the site out of morbid curiosity or whatever reason. Even if Australian kids did find it harder to access child pornography and RC content because of the filter, to the same degree, kids in other countries will find it more easily thanks to an Australian government sponsored directory of websites that wasn't otherwise available before.</p> <p>Although Senator Conroy plays down the impact of the filter, saying that determined people can get around it if they really want to, critics are concerned that Conroy's non-policing of filter circumvention will not be mirrored by future governments who may also broaden the scope of the censorship it affords. He told Four Corners, that he "absolutely guaranteed" that no future Labor government would let this happen and subsequently that "If a majority of the Parliament in the future want to broaden the classification, well then, Australians should stand up and say 'just a minute', and I'll be one of them." We contacted Conroy's office to ask how the Senator guaranteed this would not happen but the question was not answered. The notion that all future Australian governments will be formed by Labor is optimistic of Conroy to say the least. That future governments, intent on censorship (probably under banners of "child protection" and "terrorism"), would listen to people "standing up and saying 'just a minute'" is more optimistic yet, given the contempt Conroy himself has shown to all the people disagreeing with him.</p> <p>While many tens of thousands of Australians are demonstrably against the filter, finding communities that actively support it is somewhat harder. While Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard have both stated they support the Senator and his filter, they haven't addressed any of its points or said why. In the face of all the communities and community leaders against the filter, the same few names keep coming out in support of it, principally Child Wise CEO Bernadette McMenamin, the Australian Christian Lobby's Jim Wallace and Professor Clive Hamilton of Charles Sturt University.</p> <p>At the Media Connect conference of Australian technology journalists in 2008 McMenamin addressed the conference stating that "she did not understand the technical side of the filter" but that "she supported it anyway". After weathering criticism from the attending journalists she stated that only child molesters could protest against the filter - something that mortally offended everyone attending, especially the parents in the room. Her response to the subsequent backlash was, "won't someone please think of the children". When McMenamin published her views in The Australian newspaper in January 2008, they drew similar criticism. Journalist, Blogger and ABC Unleashed contributor, Stilgherrian commented at the time, "The fact that Ms McMenamin is willing to hand the government a comprehensive online censorship mechanism while chasing this chimera of a Magick Filter only shows how naive her understanding of the Internet is, and how her passion has clouded her understanding of the bigger picture."</p> <p>McMenamin is not alone. Senator Conroy recently recommitted himself to the filter by saying, "I'm not into opting in to child porn" in response to Labor Senator Kate Lundy and Greens Senator Scott Ludlam's speeches against it. If they're right, and the only people who protest against the filter are child molesters, then it's a good job Australia is separated from the rest of the world by so much ocean. The implication that the other Senators were opting into child porn was not covered by mainstream media. </p> <p>The Christian Lobby's Jim Wallace told Four Corners that he found it "quite amazing" that anyone would oppose the filter plans. He told Quentin McDermott of his unabashed censorship ideals, "The bigger principle here is to establish the principle that the internet is not a free zone and I think that given the movement of technology and given the expectation of society that what the Government is proposing is therefore a good solution." He also stated, "We've lobbied the Government of course and we've lobbied quite hard. We got the first commitment to this prior to the last election and you know we're happy to see that the Government is delivering on it."</p> <p>Professor Hamilton, a reputed academic, is the calming face of the learned pro-censorship movement. He told Four Corners, "that [his group] commissioned a poll which showed that parents of teenage children are extremely concerned about their children's access to porn on the Internet and when we asked them explicitly whether they would support a mandatory filter on Internet service providers to prevent extreme and violent pornography coming into the home an astonishing 93 per cent said yes they would support that. I mean that's almost unheard of in any survey such a resounding almost unanimous view." He went on to say, "We now we have this strange alliance in support of Internet filtering ... Christian conservatives, along with feminists, social progressives such as myself and a vast number of parents and ordinary punters out there. That's how politics works." </p> <p>And it's these claims which sum up the filter's supporters. The lobbyists are playing politics and claiming ownership of anyone who hasn't overtly come out against the filter - the great unspoken majority: those that don't actually know what the filter will and will not do. While Hamilton may have polls to back up his claims, there are many more from the anti-filter side and those ones come with detailed explanations on why they are the way they are, joined most of the time by thousands of comments from concerned Australians. All the arguments are open and in the public domain and can be easily accessed by a quick Google search. The pro-filter side is conveniently hidden but we're assured it's there. Get used to that if the filter comes to pass.</p> <p>Certainly the anti-filter movement has lost out to the political skills of the lobbyists thus far as testified by the failure to bring the censorship issue into the open. The less debate there is, the more likely the pro-filter movement will succeed in its aims. It's an uphill battle though ... compare the length of this article with the pro-filter's "Shall we ban child porn?" brevity. That doesn't make it right though. As for why the ALP is even bothering to continue with such an unpopular policy when it needs all the support it can get, that almost certainly comes down to politics too: ironically, another policy backflip would almost certainly be leapt on by mainstream media and cost Labor the election. So we're likely stuck with censorship unless things change drastically.</p> <p>Conroy goes to great lengths to point out that this is not a government run filter, but that it will be run by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) which comes under the Attorney General's department. RC is decided by ACMA's Classification Board and uses broad guidelines with regards to what to censor. Sites will only be banned if a complaint is received specifically about them and it falls under RC guidelines - music to the ears of ultra-conservative groups. The board refused to comment on the specific matters we asked about, but then that's how it operates. Everything is dealt with on a case by case basis. Its own history records conflicting classifications, with some media being both banned and classified for the same thing. There are no hard and fast rules.</p> <p>But while the Classification Board won't disclose exactly what will and will not be refused classification, we did talk to people on the bleeding edge of the rulings: sex shop owners and adult publishers. Their opinion was unanimous: the RC rules were impossibly broad and grey which left them with no choice but to err on the side of caution in order to guarantee classification. Sex shop owners felt they were being forced out of business as they weren't allowed to sell books, magazines and DVDs with content that was widely available on the internet. </p> <p>This all flies in the face of Senator Conroy's assertions that "only the worst of the worst will be banned". If you take your definition of mild pornography from what's available online, you'll find what's available in the sex shops - what has been classified acceptable - as positively prudish. We got hold of a document used by an adult publisher which explicitly detailed what should be submitted for classification and what should not on the grounds that similar content has been banned before and will likely be banned again. It details how girls having a play fight, giggling with plastic swords, represented sexual violence and would be classified RC. Also, any images of bondage of any kind with any woman or man being playfully tied up or in any restraints whatsoever would be refused classification. All Sado Masochistic practices, all domination would be refused classification too. We asked the classification board to verify the claims in the document, but it refused. Any Australians that are into these practices should know that although the classification guidelines lead with, "Adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want", your choices are officially, "revolting or abhorrent phenomena ... that offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults". The full guidelines <a href="http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/0/149B1F3EC2A074C6CA257412000164C7/$file/PublicationsGuidelines2005.pdf">can be seen here</a>. </p> <p>Elsewhere, the board has come under fire for refusing classification to pictures of women with small breasts on the grounds they look like children - something that has outraged women's groups for stigmatising women who don't have large breasts. Also videos featuring the natural act of female ejaculation on the (erroneous) grounds that it is in fact an obscene "golden shower" have also been classified RC.</p> <p>Senator Conroy's office laughed off the suggestion that small breasts and female ejaculation would be banned and the classification board also denied doing so either. However, evidence exists to show that both have been classified RC in Australia. According to Australian Sex Party founder Fiona Patten, at an ACMA publications training day being run by Classification Education Officer Antonny Ivancic and four other officers last October, in "one of the slides the reason the RC was given [was because] the woman had under developed breasts and this made her appear under 18. The image was of a woman outside by a pool. There were no pigtails, fluffy toys or anything else in the image that would have you believe that the publisher was trying to portray her as a minor. There was some discussion around the room about this decision. Other images that had been refused classification mentioned the body of the model but also the way that she photographed". As for female ejaculation, films containing it have indeed been banned - Classification Number 237341 is one such example. It all makes a mockery of Conroy's "worst of the worst claims" and he has demonstrated that he doesn't actually know what is being banned by the board he is entrusting so much power to. </p> <p>To make matters more confusing, different States deal with classification in different ways. At present RC material is only illegal in Western Australia. Conversely X18+ material is only available on sale in ACT and Northern Territory. Consequently, depending on where you are, you may get fined or sent to jail for selling material classified legal by the Federal government. With pornography being added to Australian landing cards last September (to no media furore whatsoever), all visitors coming to Australia with pornography on their laptops or phones, must now declare it, have it screened by customs and hope that it isn't deemed RC as they can be fined, refused entry or jailed depending on what they have. Barely any mention has been made of this in the Australian and international media - surprising considering the attention given to the landing cards dealings with drugs and quarantine. The Australian Sex Party's Fiona Patten told us you can "Risk five year jail terms for bringing in more than 25 copies of an RC film under the new Tier One Customs regulations" which a sex shop owner (or tourist) can do if they inadvertently import anything deemed RC. Furthermore, in April this year, New South Wales man Darrell Cohen, a gay 23-year old sex shop owner was sent to prison for, as Patten states, "Selling 45 Federally classified X-rated films and five RC films ... gay mild ... stuff, nothing with animals or anything. First time in the western world that someone has gone to jail for selling a federal government approved film ... It's just unbelievable that in 2010 when you can get all manner of perversity on the internet, and when Conroy has specifically said the filter will not target X-rated material because it's 'legal' that a young man can go to jail for selling same."</p> <p>While the full scope of RC guidelines goes beyond this article, it's clear that it's all but impossible to predict much of what will be filtered and what won't be. Perhaps this really did get through to the Senator lately as he recently announced a one year delay to the filter while the RC system was reorganised. Tony Abbott too was recently quoted by Kotaku as saying the system was "broken". It will still provide the basis of a future Labor filter though. It will still censor politically incorrect sites.</p> <p>The filter did not become law under the current government but earlier this year the Senator reminded us that "We took our filtering proposal to the Australian public and we were elected on it." If this comes as news to you, bear in mind that this is exactly what will happen in one year's time. That it is not being mentioned by a mainstream media, in full election mode, is a disservice to Australia. If Australia wants to vote for censorship then it should be made aware of all the details around it. It should not just accept that the filter will protect the Australian public from things like child porn when it categorically will not. Opposition to it is near total among the communities that actually understand what is happening (Australia's tech community for one) and recognise the devil in the detail. Ultimately, those that know about this filter are against it. Those who don't are having their opinion hijacked by a few pro-censorship lobbyists and politicians. Australia is free to vote for censorship if it wants, but it must go into this election informed and with its eyes open. Australia's media has a moral and professional obligation to ensure that it does so and so far it has failed. It's not too late, but the time has come to ask the pollies, "Do you support censorship?"</p> <p>(story from ABC)</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-53527534042684431372010-08-06T20:53:00.001+10:002010-08-06T20:53:15.636+10:00Filter this, filter that<p>Tony Smith must be a little miffed that shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey took it on himself to announce Coalition policy on the internet filter. In a few short sentences, Mr Hockey killed the proposal. telling the <a title="Triple J" href="http://triplej.net.au/" rel="homepage">Triple J</a> current affairs program Hack that the opposition would oppose the policy, that it was bad policy, and that it would instead revert to the Howard Government policy of giving away filter software to end-users for free. And that we would hear more about the policy soon. </p> <p>As shadow communications spokesman, Tony Smith might have preferred to unveil such a strategically important election policy himself, and been given the chance to put the policy into some kind of context. And God help Mr Smith if the policy was not already generally known among the Coalition front bench and back bench. Because if the shadow Treasurer let slip the plan to oppose the filter before colleagues like Guy Barnett or Cory Bernardi – among others – had been fully briefed, there would have been hell to pay (and it would be Tony Smith paying it.) So the mandatory filtering plan is virtually dead. And in its place is a voluntary filtering mechanism that will cover the vast majority of internet users in Australia.</p> <p>Because regardless of what kind of instant hero Tony Smith might have become today among opponents of the filter – it was an idea that held considerable support on both sides of politics. And among Liberals and Nationals, there were strong voices on both sides of the debate – many in favour of siding with the Government on mandatory filtering, and many opposed. </p> <p>In a statement released this afternoon, Mr Smith confirmed Mr Hockey’s statement and said the Coalition would oppose the filter and would put forward a policy of issuing end-user filters instead. "The Coalition did not implement a mandatory ISP level filter when we were last in Government because it was not workable or effective, and offered parents a false sense of security," Mr Smith said, "A Coalition Government will not introduce a mandatory ISP level filter – we will instead implement practical and effective measures to enhance online safety and security including PC-based filters for families," he said. "Labor's plan is flawed and will not work, and we will have a different and better approach." Any scheme that attempts to balance freedom of speech with the need to protect young people from vile content is fraught with difficulty. </p> <p>It is simply a difficult policy to design. Despite the narrow focus of the government's proposed filter, despite its technical feasibility and despite a series of transparency and accountability measures that were to be put in place, the filter simply unnerved people. And a great many simply said the filter would not work. But the Howard Government end-user filtering policy was a disaster (if you define disaster as a policy that costs millions but is nearly completely ineffective. </p> <p>Under former Communications Minister Helen Coonan, government spend tens of millions of dollars on its end-user filter policy – including $15 million on an advertising/awareness campaign to make sure parents knew the filters were available. At its peak, about 30,000 people had taken up the government's offer of free filter software. 30,000! From an Australian subscriber base of 12 million or more! Further, despite the noisy opposition to the ISP-level filtering proposal, particularly from the technology sector, Mum’s and Dad’s were generally in favour in Government filtering the kind of content that the RC category is applied to. The fact that the opponents of mandatory filtering quietly accepted the volunteer ISP filtering by the nation’s three largest ISPs – which will block child abuse sites – is just strange. </p> <div> <h6 style="font-size: 1em">Related articles</h6> <ul> <li><a href="http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/05/aussie_firewall_opposed/">Aussie opposition will scrap firewall</a> (go.theregister.com) </li> </ul> </div> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-33174183629546689992010-08-05T14:35:00.000+10:002010-08-05T14:35:00.594+10:00Labor backs off filter during election campaign<div style="margin: 1em; width: 310px; display: block; float: right"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StephenConroy.jpg"><img style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; display: block; border-top: medium none; border-right: medium none" alt="Stephen Conroy internet filter Australia" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b8/StephenConroy.jpg/300px-StephenConroy.jpg" width="300" height="199" /></a> <p style="font-size: 0.8em">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StephenConroy.jpg">Wikipedia</a></p> </div> <p>Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan has suggested changes could be made to the Federal Government's proposed internet filter. He has publicly suggested for the first time that the filter could make some changes or "move in different directions" in response to concerns voiced by many who claim it will slow download speeds and lead to unwarranted censorship. "Stephen Conroy... has announced some changes to the filter - he's talking to industry about those now," he said. </p> <p>"We have responded to the legitimate concerns of many of your listeners in this area and Stephen Conroy is going through that process now. "It's possible that we could move in slightly different directions." </p> <p>But Greens Senator Scott Ludlam believes the program has been deferred until after the election due to the unpopularity of the proposal. "There has been a huge outcry over this and I think all they've done is <strong>Labor just backed it off to make sure it didn't play off into the election campaign</strong>," he said.  </p> <p>"The Labor Party policy going into this election is for internet service provider-level mandatory censorship of the internet after the election - that's still their policy." Senator Ludlam says <strong>moving the filter in a "different direction" is not what the public is calling out for</strong>. "I haven't heard a lot of people demanding that Stephen Conroy move in a slightly different direction. <strong>People want the filter scrapped</strong>," he said. "They want to start again with some more intelligent ideas and better ways of dealing with this material, whether it be law enforcement, education, home-based filters or whatever. </p> <p>ISP network engineer and filter critic Mark Newton is also sceptical over what direction Senator Conroy will take the filter. "<strong>The most common responses Senator Conroy has been making to the criticisms of this policy is to assert that his detractors are supporters of child pornography," he said. "He doesn't tend to address the comments of detractors in any great detail. He just sort of brushes them off and the attitude is always, 'I'm right, you're wrong and this is what we're going to do'. "So we haven't really seen a lot of good faith from the minister."</strong> </p> <p>Opposition spokesman Tony Smith says Labor was wrong to cancel John Howard's previous online protection programs. "The Coalition believes Government, regulators, internet providers, teachers and importantly parents should all have a role to play in protecting children online," he said. "While Labor has fumbled around for three years, the only concrete decision Senator Conroy has taken is to cancel the Howard Government's practical program, Protecting Australian Families Online."</p> <div> <h6 style="font-size: 1em">Related articles</h6> <ul> <li><a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/08/conroy-smith-and-ludlam-debating-ict-policy-august-10/">Conroy, Smith And Ludlam Debating ICT Policy August 10</a> (gizmodo.com.au) </li> </ul> </div> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-90931732117822951542010-08-04T19:13:00.000+10:002010-08-04T19:13:21.376+10:00Paradise Plant Centre decisionThe GCCC Town Planning Committee reconfirmed their previous decision to limit this development to 21 units. The supervising town planner said their previous recommendation of 25 units has changed to reflect new information received. Thank you to all the people who did very well researched submissions. Councillor Douglas gave very solid support and we are grateful. Councillor Douglas has suggested that the land resumption from the block for road widening should proceed now and not wait for development to start.<br />
<br />
The developer has said all along that fewer than 25 units are not financially viable and there is a feeling from some members of GCCC that the development will not proceed. We live in hope that the block will be sold. It will have approval for 21 units but, hopefully, a purchaser would realise more return with something of better quality and fewer units. We might finish up with our 10 townhouses yet.<br />
<br />
What we have learned is that we need to be proactive right through a development application because the Town Planner assigned is all in the luck of the draw.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-14549238989122833942010-07-10T11:53:00.001+10:002010-07-10T11:53:49.108+10:00Conroy delays internet filter because of election back lash<p>Controversial policy to filter the internet have been shelved by the Gillard government for at least two years. <br />As the government clears the decks for the coming federal election and dealing with a fierce backlash against the policy, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy yesterday planned a year-long review into subject matter that has been refused classification. He said laws for the filter would not be released until the review was completed. </p> <p>And a spokesman for Senator Conroy said the filter -- that  was a 2007 Labor election promise -- would not be carried out until 12 months following the legislation was approved. While Senator Conroy insisted the government's resolve toward introduce a compulsory internet filter had not changed, the opposition said the postponement was a "humiliating backdown". The deferral comes after a fierce anti-filter campaign from activist organisation Get-Up! and condemnation from internet companies such as Google, and the US government. They have warned that the filter will not be of use, would slow the internet and would set a precarious precedent for web censorship. </p> <p>Greens senator Scott Ludlam said it was clear the government did not have the stomach to discuss the filter in the course of the election campaign. "I think what it is doing is giving the government time plus a bit of a get-out clause to have an evidence-based policy," he said. Senator Ludlam said the filter, which has been strongly supported by church groups, would not eliminate child pornography from the internet, most of which was traded on peer-to-peer networks rather than on live websites. "It will not take a solitary picture off the web, won't point to a single prosecution and it will not lead to any of this information being taken down," he said. </p> <p>Google Australia and New Zealand managing director Karim Temsamani said he was happy the government had taken account of "genuine concerns" regarding refused-classification content. <br />"While our standing on the government's future filter has not changed, we approve of the recommendation to conduct a review of the RC classification," Mr Temsamani said. "Our main concern has always been that the scope of the planned filter is far too broad. It goes way further than child sexual abuse information and would block access to important online information for all Australians." </p> <p>The review was introduced as three of Australia's largest internet service providers -- Telstra, Optus and Primus -- agreed to block a list of child abuse websites compiled by the Australian Communications and Media Authority. Senator Conroy said the government's promise to force ISPs to filter content from the internet had not wavered.</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-23778084233827674262010-07-08T08:32:00.000+10:002010-07-08T08:32:00.320+10:00Paradise Plant Centre<p>You will remember the GCCC Council approved 21 units on this site but that the developer has asked for the approval to be renegotiated up to 25. Today David , John and Judith met with the two GCCC town planners in charge of the redevelopment application. David and John had done enormous research into the Town Plan and into the development application and found dozens of apparent anomalies. They presented the community's case very well.</p> <p>We had a good look at the block today and this is such a small area to have possibly over 100 people. It is most likely to be rental student housing but the proposal has been very carefully presented.</p> <p>The bottom line seems to be that the developer has threatened to take the matter to the Planning and Environment Court if they don't get 25 units and it could cost the GCCC $100,000. We think this is a test case and that the cost to the community should be taken into consideration. When you look at the floor plans of these supposed one- and two-bedroom apartments, these are definitely two- and three-bedroom units - one room in each unit is just called a study. The town planners said this has to be taken on face value. If it is the same size and is the same design as a bedroom, it sounds like a bedroom to us. The town planners took detailed note of all the objections and said they would take them into consideration when reassessing the proposal.</p> <p>(Interestingly, Storey & Castle, the designers of this project also were the designers of the initial QAC proposal for Ridgeway TAFE. They seem to have a gift for junk developments and also seem to be good at "bullying" to get their way as they have continually threatened the past year to take the Paradise Plant Centre redevelopment to Court.)</p> <p>This will go again to the Town Planning Committee for consideration sometime around the middle of July. We will continue to work with the Councillors to minimise the effect of this proposal on our community. Our big concern is that this development will establish a precedent and then become "case law".</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-7166573404779010582010-07-07T18:50:00.000+10:002010-07-07T18:50:00.662+10:00Paradise Plant CentreParadise Plant Centre<br /><br />The Gold Coast City Council voted to approvte 21 units in 2 buildings with 45 parking spaces. They will generally be 2 storeys high with the rear building 3 storeys in the middle. The developer has twenty business days from today to lodge an appeal to the decision to the State Planning and Environment Court which takes us to the 22nd June.<br /><br />Because of the change in State legislation which attempts to greatly increase population in urban areas, the Council felt that, if they stuck with the community-desired 11 units, the Court would overturn this and there was the strong possibility that the developer might get the 28 units they want.<br /><br />While the 21 units is disappointing, it is much better than the original proposal which was for 30 units and four-and-a-half storeys. We still think this is not the site for such a development and that there will be access problems but we do know that the Council is well aware of all these concerns and will watch it carefully. The new roundabout at the Robyn Street/Golden Crescent/Benowa Road slated for 2011 should help with this.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-57167806280820231052010-07-05T18:40:00.000+10:002010-07-05T18:40:00.283+10:00for those concerned about forced population growthIF Queensland charged the real cost of growth it would quickly slow from present levels that were threatening south-east Queensland's lifestyle.<br /><br />Local Government of Queensland executive director Greg Hallam said it was clear from the level of the state's debt that growth was not paying its way.<br /><br />"The minute you apply the appropriate pricing, growth would slow," Mr Hallam said.<br /><br />"There is a big gap between what the government pretends it can provide and what it actually can. It's clear that either new taxes, user charges or demand management, or a combination of these measures is needed if the wonderful south-east Queensland lifestyle isn't to be eroded further.<br /><br />"Unless more money is channelled into roads and public transport, (then)congestion, pollution and productivity will get progressively worse."<br /><br />The impact of New Zealand immigration on population growth in Australia was so great that within five years there would be more Kiwis here than on the South Island.<br /><br />Mr Hallam said the LGAQ had thought there was more the Federal Government could do about slowing immigration, which was dominated by the open door policy with New Zealand and the 457 visa applicants.<br /><br />Mr Hallam has urged residents to make submissions to the association's interim report on the Need for a State Population Policy.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-16905127826976926702010-07-04T16:35:00.000+10:002010-07-04T16:35:00.228+10:00Debts of gratitudeDebts of gratitude<br /><br />The Southport Park/Ridgeway Avenue Community wish to thank Councillor Susie Douglas, Councillor Dawn Crichlow, Dr.Alex Douglas MP, J.P. Langbroek MP, for their support.<br />We also wish to thank the Officers of Gold Coast Planning & Social Health who worked within the constraints of a cumbersome Planning Act. Their diligence and professionalism is to be applauded.<br /><br />Thanks also the reporters of the Gold Coast Bulletin, The Sun Newspaper. NBN TV and Hot Tomato who made it possible for a small cohesive community to get their voice heard.<br />Last but not least officers of GCIT and QAC, with whom we had several amicable meetings. We did agree to disagre. Also the QAC executives who visited us in April to discuss their and our views on the outcome of the project.<br /><br />Alone we can do little, but as a community we have a voice. That voice will have be used more in the future, as we strive to save our communities from developers who will use the new and untested Sustainable Planning Act to stretch the limits of permissible development, supposedly in the name of smaller lot ratios. We think it is not so much about population density increase as about greed. Our values matter.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-78521439869738831022010-07-03T15:27:00.000+10:002010-07-03T15:27:00.610+10:00No Plan B for the Tafe Ridgeway CampusTafe Ridgeway Campus News<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">There is no Plan "B"!!</span>. At the meeting the other night with Aaron Devine, the GCIT CEO, we were told there are no plans for the site and this will be discussed with the Board. At the moment, there is no money for major work but they recognise that, if it is determined that the Campus is still required, a refurbishment is essential. Mr. Devine said they know they should have consulted with the community from the beginning and the angst of the past three years might have been avoided. They will not make this mistake in the future. It is apparent the new CEO of GCIT recognises this community and we are grateful. A point of interest is that GCIT only received the withdrawal confirmation from QAC this week.<br /><br />The community feeling seemed to be that the site should be for education purposes and/or green space. The blackbutt grove is saved for ever and we will negotiate on a proper public access path as required in the Main Roads submission to the development. We have asked if we can "husband" the blackbutt grove meanwhile and this will be considered.<br /><br />The State Parliamentary Secretary has advised us that, if GCIT decide the Campus is surplus to their requirements, the State will determine a future use. We will continue our push for the block to the donated to the City of the Gold Coast the way Kangaroo Point TAFE was donated to the City of Brisbane last year.<br /><br />The GCCC Town Planning will proceed with the assessment of the project which will be voted on in the near future. This should kill off any other similar developer aspirations.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-25267911383913703022010-07-02T17:19:00.002+10:002010-07-02T17:25:58.754+10:00email from TAFE's Ridgeway CampusI received this email from the Acting CEO Gold Coast Institute of TAFE.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0);font-family:arial;" >Proposed redevelopment of Gold Coast Institute of TAFE's Ridgeway Campus </span><br /><br />Dear Resident,<br />As promised at the Gold Coast Institute of TAFE (GCIT) Community Forum on<br />3 February 2010, we would like to keep you updated on the status of the proposed Ridgeway Avenue Campus redevelopment.<br /><br />I wish to advise, it has now been confirmed by Queensland Accommodation Company (QAC) that the development proposed for the site will not be proceeding.<br />According to QAC representative Alan Mayer, negotiations with Gold Coast City Council (GCCC) indicated the project would only proceed based on the recommendation that the capacity of the student accommodation facility be reduced from a maximum of 600 rooms with 1200 students to 300 rooms with 300 students.<br /><br />On this basis, the project was deemed unviable for the developer, and GCIT has since received notice from QAC that they are unable to proceed with the project.<br />I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate GCIT’s consistent view that that project needed to adhere to GCCC’s planning and development requirements.<br />Moving forward GCIT plans to continue working pro-actively with the local community in keeping you all informed of our future plans for the site as an educational facility.<br /><br />We acknowledge the Ridgeway Avenue campus is in need of an upgrade, and hope to engage with our students, residents, industry partners and GCCC in determining the best options for the site.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-85052612286795883602010-05-04T12:31:00.000+10:002010-05-04T12:31:00.977+10:00Aust Conroy, Government delays internet filter until after election<p><strong>Steven Conroy and the Australian government are delaying the internet filter until after the election in hopes that people will stiil vote for them then after they are back in start the filter then. They don’t want bad publicity during an election year.</strong></p> <p>Greens Senator Scott Ludlam said this afternoon the initiative was “consultation, Conroy-style” — the department had gotten industry engagement “half-right”. “But then of course, they just open themselves up to the kind of criticism they’re going to cop now … by trying to hold those consultations in secret,” he said.</p> <p>“They’re finally confronting the logical inconsistencies in what they’re trying to do,” said Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, adding Labor faced a difficult decision — if it became an offence to circumvent the filter, it was likely the legislation would actually trap legitimate as well as criminal activity, whereas if it wasn’t an offence, the Government would face institutionalised circumvention.</p> <p>He said if the Government didn’t make circumvention an offence, the generation of web browsers might have a “click here to circumvent” button built in.</p> <p>Also today, Ludlam called for the Government to re-examine the filtering policy as a whole after Conroy’s office confirmed to the Australian that the filter legislation would not be introduced in the May or June sittings of parliament, meaning it would be likely to be shelved until after the next Federal election.</p> <p>“I am delighted to hear that the Prime Minister has put Senator Stephen Conroy’s unworkable plan on the backburner, but they need to go a step further and just hit delete,” Ludlam said in an earlier statement today.</p> <p><strong>“Merely putting it off because it’s massively unpopular is a cynical pre-election clearing of the decks. The Government needs to clearly indicate that it’s going to scrap the idea completely and work on a new policy in collaboration with all stakeholders.”</strong></p> <p>“Opposition against the internet filter is widespread because it will do precisely nothing to curb the distribution of illegal material online, while establishing the architecture for greater government censorship in the future.</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-71759882429820888392010-05-03T12:12:00.001+10:002010-05-03T12:12:53.199+10:00Australian gov to sign treaty to appease music and video companies.<p>There goes our privacy folks.</p> <p>The Australian Federal Government has introduced policy to endorse an international treaty intended to facilitate the identification, extradition plus conviction of cybercriminals round the world. </p> <p>Minister for Foreign Affairs Stephen Smith yesterday declared Australia would comply to the Council of Europe Conference on Cybercrime. </p> <p>The Convention, which was established in 2004 by pressure from the US music and movie industries, demands actions that permit authorities to pressure internet service suppliers to hand over up information about customers, and capture and report traffic. </p> <p>Parties to the Conference additionally conform to facilitate expatriation of criminals sentenced to a minimum of  12 months imprisonment and gathering of information in one other country. </p> <p>It encompasses unlawful interception plus system interference, forgery, fraud, and "offences related to the infringement of copyright and additional linked rights," (that's the music / movie industry part!) in accordance with an announcement from the Minister. </p> <p>While Australia took "a powerful view" of cybercrime behaviour, a number of legislative amendments are nonetheless essential ahead of it was able to sign the treaty. </p> <p>The representative didn't divulge a timeframe for the introduction of amendments as well as signing of the treaty. </p> <p>"For Australia to sign the treaty Australia be obliged to make legislative changes to our domestic law to fulfill the requirements of the convention," he said. </p> <p>"This has been taking place on an ongoing foundation in consultation with relevant stakeholders, for example, the Commonwealth has updated cybercrime offences within the Prison Code Act 1995 (Cth)." </p> <p>Presently, more than forty nations are get together to the treaty, including the U.S. (thats where the big music and movie industries are), Canada, Japan and South Africa. </p> <p>This is despite preliminary opposition from privacy and civil rights advocacy teams together with the Global Internet Liberty Campaign (GILC), of which Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) was a founding member. </p> <p>EFA opposed a draft treaty that was launched to the general public in 2000. In July 2001, EFA spokesperson Greg Taylor said the treaty was "fundamentally imbalanced" and failed to deal with privacy rights while focussing almost utterly on law enforcement demands. </p> <p>"It contains very detailed and sweeping powers of computer search and seizure and government surveillance of voice, email and information communications, but no correspondingly detailed standards to guard privacy and limit authorities use of such powers," it wrote. </p> <p>"That is although privacy is the most important concern of Web customers worldwide."</p> <p>Senator Conroy would love this. Let Steven Smith cop the flack for as soon as, while authorities indicators away more of our privacy and our rights.  Where will be the protections of our citizens from unwarranted intrusions into our normal law-abiding activities and from unfair treatment by police and our legal system?</p> <p>It might appear the web is being used to show Australia into a nanny-led, police state by the back door. Already the Kevin rudd Government and the Howard/Abbott unChristian onerous-right Libs don't give a stuff about what occurs to our citizens on the hand of overseas countries. </p> <p>Another fantastic failure by Stephen Conroy. How is signing this going to be in any way shape or form in Australia's interest? When was the last time we needed somebody extradited here to face trial for a cybercrime? Never? And what about all those petty criminals around the world now facing 10 year stints in US jails after being passed across to the US for absolute trivial things. What about the huge growing patent industry based in the states which is targeting every open source project under the sun? This Kevin rudd government doesn't know what its doing, has a terrible sense of direction and is made up of ministers that should go and do a beginners course in the fields that they look after. I'm not going to make the same mistake twice next election.Carry on the elections so we can present to these bastard politicians what we think of their behind-closed-door activities!</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-4284991249612424162010-04-01T17:06:00.001+10:002010-04-01T17:06:19.821+10:00Stephen Conroy thinks the internet isn't "special"<p>Internet consultants were shocked today with communications minister Stephen Conroy's thought that the web just isn't "special" and has to be censored like movies, books and papers. </p> <p>In an interview Senator Conroy ignored the flood of criticism aimed at at his policy as misleading info spread via "an organised group within the on-line world". </p> <p>Asked what share of all of the nasty material on the web his filters would block, Senator Conroy dodged the query, responding that his filters had been "a hundred per cent accurate - no underblocking, no overblocking and no impact on speeds". In other words he didn't answer the question. </p> <p>But Mark Newton, from ISP internode, stated: "Censorship is not going to capture a single pedophile, won't trigger one single image to dis-appear from the web, is not going to safeguard a single child." </p> <p>Senator Conroy additionally brushed apart issues from leading teachers and technology corporations that the plan to block a blacklist of "refused classification" (RC) websites for all Australians was an try to shoe-horn an offline classification model into a vastly different online world. </p> <p>"Why is the web special?," he asked, saying the web was "just a communication and distribution platform". </p> <p>"This argument that the internet is some mystical creation that no laws should apply to, that may be a recipe for anarchy and the wild west. I consider in a civil society and in a civil society folks behave the same method in the bodily world as they behave within the virtual world." </p> <p>Newton stated this was a "gross oversimplification", pointing out that Australia Submit and Telstra's phone community had been also distribution platforms however weren't censored. </p> <p>"Why should the internet, a distribution platform for all manner of intangibles, be censored as if it was a film theatre? It is unnecessary, the mannequin doesn't fit," he said. </p> <p>The Greens communications spokesman Scott Ludlam was additionally fast to ridicule Senator Conroy, saying books and movies were distinctly totally different as a result of they're "discreet, bodily packages of content", whereas the internet is dynamic and has "a trillion internet pages already listed and an unknown amount extra added day-after-day". </p> <p>"To characterise sustained opposition by individuals and teams as various as EFA, Google, SAGE, Yahoo, Save the Children, Reporters without Borders, Justice Kirby, Choice Magazine, leading online lecturers and business associations and the United States Department of State as 'an organised group in the online world' is a remarkably naive misreading of how unpopular this proposal is," Senator Ludlam said. </p> <p>College of Sydney associate professor Bjorn Landfeldt mentioned the difference between submitting a e-book for classification and having an organisation classifying and blocking websites with out anyone's knowledge was that, in the guide case, "it's well-known that the e-book was censored and there is usually a debate concerning the correctness of the choice". </p> <p>Landfeldt stated it was true that the filter system would block all websites it was told to block but the trillions of pages on the web means the federal government will not make the web a protected place for youngsters and can only be capable to cease entry to "a small minority" of net pages. </p> <p>Senator Conroy has neglected to handle widespread concerns that the "refused classification" score additionally applies to sexual health discussions, euthanasia material such as the Peaceable Capsule Handbook, historic war footage and instructions in minor crimes comparable to graffiti. </p> <p>Senator Conroy admitted that his filters wouldn't do anything to stop the unfold of child pornography on peer-to-peer file sharing networks, and that they are going to "slow down the internet" if applied to high-quantity websites reminiscent of YouTube, Facebook and Wikipedia. </p> <p>Colin Jacobs, spokesman for the online users' foyer group Digital Frontiers Australia, mentioned this remark ignored proof that the overwhelming majority of kid pornography was traded in others ways comparable to by peer-to-peer. It also ignored the truth that anyone who needed to bypass the filters may achieve this fairly easily. </p> <p>Senator Conroy has been on the assault against Google after the search big issued a withering critique of his policy. Senator Ludlam stated Senator Conroy's assaults on Google have been "a deliberate misdirection of the controversy", whereas Jacobs said they "smack of a personal vendetta". </p> <p>Senator Conroy additionally rejected issues that the government was creating a brand new necessary censorship mechanism that would be vulnerable to abuse by future governments. </p> <p>"For forty four million dollars, we're shopping for ourselves an initiative which will have no measurable affect in any respect," Senator Ludlam said. "In change, we establish the structure for future governments to abuse the free and undefined 'RC' class so as to add a creeping range of fabric to the list. Once this architecture is established, the concept that its scope will not be expanded by future governments is a gamble we don't believe we should take."</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-59334213597530178722010-03-29T12:21:00.001+10:002010-03-29T12:21:11.342+10:00aussie internet filter growing list of complaints<p>THE US has weighed into the row about the Rudd Government's strategy to censor the internet, saying it has raised issues about it with Australian officials. The Obama administration needs to promote an open internet to boost global financial growth and security and is mounting a diplomatic assault on threats to the open net across the world. </p> <p>The US State Division, America's foreign office, has publicly aired concern concerning the internet filtering plan championed by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy. Responding to questions concerning the filter from commentary web site The Punch, US State Division spokesperson Noel Clay said: "The US and Australia are close partners on issues related to cyber issues usually, including national security and economic issues. </p> <p>"We don't talk about the details of specific diplomatic exchanges, but can say that in the context of that ongoing association, we have now raised our concerns on this issue with Australian officials." </p> <p>The Rudd Government has confronted rising criticism about internet filtering in current weeks after it released submissions by organizations including Google, Yahoo plus Microsoft on the approach to improve its policy. Lots of the submissions had been extremely vital of the filtering plan. Considerations included that the scope of content material to be censored was too broad, that the filter can be ineffective or sluggish internet speeds, and that the list of banned materials may very well be leaked to the public. Under the plan, Australian web service providers like Telstra, Optus and iiNet could be pressured to dam access to a secret listing of webpages containing refused classification material. </p> <p>The Obama administration has questioned the Rudd Government’s plan to introduce an internet filter on the grounds that it operates contrary to acknowledged US foreign policy of using an open internet to broaden financial development and global security. The US State Division has advised The Punch its officers have raised worries in regards to the filter with Australian counterparts, as America mounts brand new} diplomatic assault on internet censorship by governments worldwide. Requested about the US stance on the filter plan US State Department spokesman Noel Clay stated: “The US and Australia are close companions on concerns associated to cyber issues generally, including national security and financial issues. </p> <p>“We do not talk about the small print of particular diplomatic exchanges, but can say that in the context of that ongoing relationship, we have raised our issues on this matter with Australian officials.” </p> <p>Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has long confronted opposition to the plan by internet freedom lobby groups, however the circle of critics has now dramatically widened. Google - at the moment involved in excessive-profile standoff with the Chinese government over censorship - and other main tech companies made their objections public last week and the intervention of the US government will improve the pressure on the minister. </p> <p>In a speech in January US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton placed internet freedom on the heart of American foreign policy as part of what she referred to as “twenty first century statecraft”. The US, she stated, could be seeking to resist efforts by governments around the world to curb the free flow of data on the internet and inspired US media organisations to “take a proactive position in challenging overseas governments’ demands for censorship”. </p> <p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; margin-left: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; margin-right: 0px" title="australia internet filter no one wants it" border="0" alt="australia internet filter no one wants it" align="right" src="http://lh3.ggpht.com/_SD4eU30CWiY/S7AOlbVB80I/AAAAAAAABMo/fU5v6wDlncU/australia%20internet%20filter%5B21%5D.jpg?imgmax=800" width="343" height="275" />Clay’s statement added: “The US Government’s position on web freedom points is well-known, expressed most recently in Secretary Clinton’s January 21st address.  We are dedicated to advancing the free circulation of knowledge, which we view as vital to economic prosperity and preserving open societies globally.” </p> <p>On this debate some of Conroy’s biggest allies have been his critics, permitting the minister to place himself in the political mainstream from where he can level to the filter being primarily designed to dam obscene content material, together with little one pornography. </p> <p>But the criticism of the scheme’s design has been mounting, with the US Authorities and companies like Google now numbering amongst those that have publicly declared they have considerations about it. Clearly, no person goes to accuse either of being in favour of the distribution of illegal content. The considerations centre around whether it would work in the first place, but in addition a few authorities building a system is designed to control the distribution of information. Some critics argue the filter will apply to information on euthanasia and safer drug use. But there are also concerns that it is going to stop media organisations reporting sure sorts of stories akin to on crime. </p> <p>Shadow treasurer Joe Hockey a few of these wider concerns in a speech earlier this month when he stated: “What we have in the government’s Internet filtering proposals is a scheme that is more probably to be unworkable in practice. However more perniciously it's a scheme that may create the infrastructure for presidency censorship on a broader scale.” The Coalition’s place is that it stays to be satisfied that a filter will most likely be effective. Now I don’t doubt Conroy when he says it is aimed solely at repugnant content. Nevertheless there have been important considerations raised by specialists concerning the convenience with which it could be bypassed and the accuracy of the filtering. And as soon as the scheme is in place it at all times leaves open the possibility that it could possibly be used to censor some political views. </p> <p>There’s additionally the problem, which Hockey alluded to, that it might be easily circumvented. As soon as the filter goes dwell we can expect instructions for getting round it to be simply accessed by a Google search. (In reality, you may get some fairly good results by looking “The means to bypass the Australian ISP filter” already.) </p> <p>Google’s issues on the filter are primarily that it's more probably to be ineffective and received't protect youngsters Google knows a bit about filtering content, given its experience in China and its voluntary filtering of content material in other countries, corresponding to in Germany the place it filters out Nazi propaganda. In the present day on The Punch, one of the tech giant’s executives Iarla Flynn summarises the corporate’s objections, labelling the ISP filtering plan “a threat to the open web” which “robs Australians of the opportunity to make some important decisions of their lives”. </p> <p>Flynn additionally factors out that other governments, perhaps of a extra sinister bent, could point to the Australian scheme to legitimise their very own plans to manage data movement in and out of their country. </p> <p>The list of complaints with the filter is growing, as is the status of the agencies which have considerations about it. </p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-18072764689625059932010-03-19T19:30:00.001+10:002010-03-19T19:30:20.445+10:00MP ATTACKS SOUTHPORT STUDENT HOSTEL PLANS<p><em><b>A $100 million student hostel planned for Southport has been labelled 'disgusting' and blocking the development would not hurt Korea's growing love affair with the Gold Coast, according to Gaven MP Alex Douglas.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>An angry Dr. Douglas yesterday poured scorn over a suggestion last week by project consultant Alan Mayer of GMP Management that failure to approve the hostel would put at risk billions of offshore dollars flooding into the Coast property market.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>The controversial 600-room project, being undertaken by Korean group QAC, is earmarked for a 3.2ha site near the Southport Centro shopping centre.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>But it already has evoked strong opposition from locals, who have objected to its density and its impact on the community.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>Dr. Douglas yesterday went a step further, describing the proposed hostel as a future "slum".</b></em></p> <p><em><b>He said that similar hostels have dotted the landscape in Korea's capital Seoul for decades.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>They were built for migrating rural workers, but many now were being bulldozed.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>"Koreans hate them," said Dr. Douglas.  "They are fire hazards and dangerous.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>"This has to be the most disgusting building proposed (on the Gold Coast) in the last 25 years."</b></em></p> <p><em><b>Dr. Douglas said the plan to house up to 300 students in each building was too high in density, suggesting between 80 and 100 would be more acceptable.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>He also described s 'totally inflammatory' Mr. Mayer's comments that Koreans would avoid the Coast market if the QAC hostel was denied planning approval.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>Korean developer City Plan Partners lent weight to his argument yesterday by affirming its long-term commitment to the Coast.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>Meanwhile Dr. Douglas questioned the economics of the Southport hostel deal which would see QAC pay a nominal $1 a year rental fee to the state for the next 39 years.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>He said the Korean company would be earning about $300,000 per week from the 1200-bed facility.</b></em></p> <p><em><b>Dr. Douglas said that there were 'too many questions surrounding the development application and the approval process'.</b></em></p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-47293098805806408492009-01-30T15:37:00.001+10:002009-01-30T15:37:00.212+10:00Broadcast TV On Your Mobile, Sydney trialsI don't really know the difference between this and Foxtel already available on Telstras Next G network but a trial is currently being coordinated by the Ai Group’s Australian Digital Suppliers Industry Forum (ADSIF) where mobile phone users in Sydney can access live broadcast television directly to their mobiles.Maybe it is free. <p>The trial is currently being run by the Optus Network and is available for various handsets supplied by Nokia and LG Electronics. The purpose of the trial is to showcase the state-of-the-art broadcast mobile TV capabilities available, raise awareness about the industry, assess the transmission coverage of broadcasts and obtain feedback on mobile TV usage.</p> <p>Australia has one of the highest rates per-capita of mobile phone ownership, so this trial will test the feasibility of introducing this technology to the market, bringing to Australia services similar to those already available in a number of other countries in Europe, Asia and the USA. ADSIF will demonstrate to the Australian Government the advantages of this service, in anticipation of the Government setting a date for the allocation of one of the two planned 7 MHz “datacasting” channels for mobile broadcast TV services.</p> <p>Mobile TV will allow network operators to offer a diverse range of very high quality video services without additional load on their existing 3G capacities. In excess of 20 separate video streams can be provided within a 7 MHz UHF channel.<br /></p><p>There are currently nine video streams available during the trial, these include: the Seven Network, ABC, SBS, Fox Sports News, Sky News Business, CNN International, Cartoon Network, MTV and the MySpace Road Tour.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-85142943175121356862009-01-28T15:17:00.003+10:002009-01-28T15:28:57.892+10:00ASUS new high end Eee TopASUS introduces new <a href="http://goodpaul.blogspot.com"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Eee Top computer</span></a>, I think they have forgotten that the Eee was hit hit because of it's super low price. The original 7inch Eee you can still buy for Aud$250, so $1300 for this is a little extreme no matter how good it is.<br /><br />ASUS, creators of the Eee PC, yesterday announced the newest addition to the Eee Family, the touchscreen-enabled Eee Top. The Eee Top ET1602 is an all-in-one device that boasts the full functionality of a desktop PC, whilst maintaining simplicity with its touchscreen abilities.<br /><br />Equipped with a 15.6 inch LCD and five-wired resistive touch panels, the Eee Top enhances interactivity and the simplicity of performing daily computing tasks by applying direct pressure with just a fingertip.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.asus.com/999/images/products/2290/2290_l.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 450px; height: 450px;" src="http://www.asus.com/999/images/products/2290/2290_l.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a>With a comprehensive suite of touch-optimised applications, the Eee Top enables users to do virtually anything, easily. For enhanced accessibility, the Eee Top displays large icons and tabs, plus it provides easy access to applications such as Eee Manager, Microsoft Works and Star Office. It also offers handwriting recognition software with Soft Stylus, Eee memo sticky notes, YouCam for video chat, Eee Cinema media centre and web surfing that supports drag and drop functions.<br /><br />The Eee Top, which can be used as both a LCD monitor and home entertainment centre, offers a 15.6 inch widescreen LCD screen, Wi-Fi 802.11n connectivity speed for reliable internet access, built-in high fidelity speakers and an integrated 1.3 mega pixel camera and microphone.<br /><br />ASUS claim that the Eee Top is also very simple to set up, “just plug in the power cord and its ready to use.” The Eee Top ET1602 will be available in Australia from February 2009 around Aud$1,299.<br /><br />----------------------------------------------------<br /><br /><span style="font-size:78%;">This is another of my blogs. You may also like the <a href="http://onlinepokemongames.blogspot.com/">pokemon crater</a> blog and the <a href="http://japneseicecream.blogspot.com/"> interesting ice cream</a> blog I write at the moment.</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-45482150205593893582008-12-07T17:15:00.001+10:002008-12-07T17:15:43.758+10:00Attending an 80s Party<p><strong>How You Can Familiarize Yourself with 80s Fashions ???</strong></p> <p>Do you remember the 80s?  Whether you were an adult or a teenager, there is a good chance that you do. While you may have fond memories of raising a family or being a fun loving kid, one thing that many seem to remember is the fashion trends of the 80s.  Popular 80s fashion trends often included large scrunched up socks, rolled up jeans, pony tails off to the side, and bright coloured clothing, often neon.  The fashions of the 80s is one that often brings back smiles and memories for some. That is actually one the reasons why many individuals throw themed 80s parties. </p> <p>If you ever find yourself invited to a themed 80s fashion party, you may end up wondering what you can wear.  Even if you can remember some of the many 80s fashion trends, you may want still want to think about doing a little bit of research before deciding on your 80s fashion wardrobe for your party. When it comes to 80s fashions, there are many individuals who seem to remember the same thing. While this is okay, a little bit of 80s fashion research and you could be more than just an average partygoer; you could be one that stands out or is complimented for your wardrobe choice. </p> <p>If you are interested in familiarizing yourself with 80s fashion trends of the past, you will find that you have a number of different options.  One of those options involves using the internet. What is nice about using the internet is that you can find just about anything that you are looking for online, including information on popular 80s fashion trends.  In addition to traditional websites that may provide you with free information online, you may also be able to find older versions or scans of old 80s fashion magazines <img title="Familiarize Yourself with 80s Fashions " style="display: inline; margin: 10px 10px 0px 0px" alt="Familiarize Yourself with 80s Fashions " src="http://static.flickr.com/3091/3087380222_d6e52e7e0c.jpg" align="left" border="0" />online. The internet is a nice and easy way to familiarize yourself with 80s fashion trends. You can get started by performing a standard internet search. </p> <p>Whether you were a child or an adult during the 80s there is a good chance that you may have photographs of yourself, your family, or your friends.  If you are able to find those photographs, if they do exist, you may want to take a look at them. In addition to getting a nice walk down memory lane, you can also familiarize yourself with some of the popular 80s fashion trends.  When doing so, you may want to think about grabbing a friend, family member, or an old acquaintance, as it is often fun to reminisce. </p> <p>Another fun way that you can go about researching 80s fashion trends is by turning on your television.  On television, even today, you can find a number of shows that aired in the 80s.  What is nice about these shows is that they are set in the time.  Watching 80s television shows will likely not only bring back memories of your childhood or your young adult days, but it may also help you familiarize yourself with 80s fashion trends; trends that you may want to incorporate into your next 80s party outfit.  You may also want to think about heading down to your local video store to rent an 80s movie. </p> <p>Of course, the decision as to what you want to wear or even if you want to do any research for an 80s themed party is yours to make, but you may want to think about doing so. As previously mentioned, researching 80s fashions is likely to be fun, exciting and bring back a lot of memories.</p> Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-89180007253891770702008-04-10T09:08:00.001+10:002008-04-10T09:10:41.926+10:00Microsoft|Yahoo has 3 weeksMicrosoft has told Yahoo that it has three weeks to agree to its US$42 billion takeover bid or face a proxy fight and possibly a lower offer.<br />"If we have not concluded an agreement within the next three weeks, we will be compelled to take our case directly to your shareholders, including the initiation of a proxy contest to elect an alternative slate of directors for the Yahoo board," said Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer in a letter he sent to today Yahoo's board.<br />Ballmer added that if Microsoft was forced to take an offer directly to Yahoo's shareholders, it would most likely reduce its offer...<br /><br />story http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/04/07/microsoft-threatens-yahoo-proxy-fightUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-26215659363065994932008-04-10T08:57:00.002+10:002008-04-10T09:03:30.828+10:00"Monk" tv show actor found deadStanley Kamel, played Monk's psychiatrist on the detective show "Monk," on TV has passed away. He was 65 year old.<br />Stanley Kamel was found dead ,of a heart attack, in his Hollywood Hills home by his agents, publicist Cynthia Snyder ....<br /><br /><span style="font-size:78%;">story by </span><a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_8866631"><span style="font-size:78%;">http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_8866631</span></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949502378802146272.post-13146695349829300892008-04-10T08:49:00.002+10:002008-04-10T08:55:36.870+10:00David Archuleta wins American IdolIt looks like teen singer David Archuleta is going to win American Idol, according to a new poll from new group Reuters.<br /><br />More than forty percent of the people asked chose David Archuleta as their choice of winner, according to Market Researcher E-Poll. ...<br /><br /><span style="font-size:78%;">story - </span><a href="http://www.accesshollywood.com/article/9056/poll-david-archuleta-to-take-idol-crown/"><span style="font-size:78%;">http://www.accesshollywood.com/article/9056/poll-david-archuleta-to-take-idol-crown/</span></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0