[clug] OT: Protesting the proposed clean feed?

[steve jenkin]

Alex Satrapa wrote on 24/10/08 11:21 AM:
> On 24/10/2008, at 11:13 , jm wrote:
> 
>> Just reading this and, as has been mentioned in a number of places,
>> the  live trial. This made me think, as someone who works for a local
>> ISP, a Canberran ISP should volunteer as a test bed.
> 
> My vote would be for the Australian Government to prove that this system
> is workable by having Telstra implement it for their retail customers.
> <snip>
> 
> Alex

I think this is the germ of a *very* good idea:

	Separate networks for separate uses/users.

There is no technology fix (provably so?)[1] for this problem ("kiddie
safe Internet"), so make the problem a commercial decision for the
consumers.

I'm not sure you'd have to change the Interception Act or Privacy Act if
all subscribers to BigPond-F (and Optus-F) had to sign a contract
explicitly allowing M-i-t-M + logging & filtering by the ISP.

Rational subscriber families would buy *two* xDSL services - one for
family use and another for "Adult use only". If they are air-gapped:
perfect isolation or 'security'.

Then subscribers vote with their feet/wallets and the Govt. initiative
will stand or fall on its merits.

ISP-F services would come at a premium - and you'd hope they'd also do
active scanning for virii, spam, malware (like GovDeps do internally
now).  The Great Aussie Bush-Firewall  :-)  [A bit lame, sorry. cf "Great
Firewall of China"]

A side effect is that LEA's need only lightly scan the logs from
filtered ISP's and concentrate elsewhere looking for Bad People.

None of the Govt. Depts. I've worked in who've run 'content-keeper'
asked my consent. I believe it's covered in the AUP, or might have been
a warning on the network login page...

Comments and flames anyone?
[No, this is not tongue in cheek.]

cheers
steve


AUP- Acceptable Use Policy
LEA - Law Enforcement Agency
ISP-F - Filtered services from an ISP

[1] Love the use of footnotes (by Nathan): been highly amused  :-)

Seriously, would there be a PhD in this proving that *no* technology fix
can be applied postori to The Wild Wild Web to make it "Kiddie Safe"?

And if the Govt. wants 'Kiddie Safe', I expect there are significant
groups (e.g. Muslims, Jews, other sects), that would want a similar
filtered 'Hal'Al' (?sp) Internet - and I would strongly support them in
that request/right. [But 'user pays']

In the Physical world they can avoid insults to their values/beliefs,
why not have the same rights/facility in cyberspace??


-- 
Steve Jenkin, Info Tech, Systems and Design Specialist.
0412 786 915 (+61 412 786 915)
PO Box 48, Kippax ACT 2615, AUSTRALIA

sjenkin at canb.auug.org.au http://members.tip.net.au/~sjenkin