[clug] [OT] Broadband clangers

[steve jenkin]

<--iNT13--> wrote on 14/08/10 1:14 PM:
>  On Fri Aug 13 19:11:27 MDT 2010 steve jenkin sjenkin at
> 
>>
>> 	Given that there is deep passion in the community over this
>> 	issue, just *how* do we (The Voters):
>> 	- define the question,
>> 	- debate the issue and
>> 	- decide the issue?
>>
>>

> Your questions raise further questions...
> 
>     * What is the government able to do?
>     * What is the actual issue?
>     * What should the government do?


 <snip>


> The issue (apparently) is that undesirable material can be accessed on
> the internet.

I think this can be very easily characterised as:

 - Do we have *any* Censorship on published/public materials?

 - Do we apply Censorship to new technologies, like "the Internet"?
   [Really, "The Web" and file transfers. Not e-mail, not IM, ....]

Particularly, at-this-point-in-time, what are our (generally) Shared
Values that we'd like enshrined in Legislation and enforced by "Law
Enforcement Offices"?

Are there particular *exceptions* we'd like:
 - uses (art/research/academic)
 - people (artists, censors, reviewers)
 - technologies (Paper but not Digital)
 - places (within our Borders, but not on the high-seas)
 - Law Enforcement, Military/National Security, ...
 - more/other?


There's a reciprocal question this categorisation raises:

 - What parts of "the Internet" are to be thought of as 'Public',
   hence "published materials", and should be subject to Censorship?

 - What parts of "the Internet" are strictly private and *never*
   to be censored? (person-person email and other communications)
   [A consequential question are the Interception provisions of the
    Telecommunications Act:
    - Who can legitimately listen in on private communications?
    - What are the rules they operate under?
    - The check-and-balances controlling them?
    - Penalties for those who illegally intercept or publish private
      material?
    - The line between private and criminal prosecution/actions?

 - What parts of "the Internet" are sometime private, sometime public?
   Hence, what are the rules that apply in distinguishing private from
   public 'stuff' and what is legal, illegal or "grey"/undecided?


<snip>

> A solution we can all live with for 50 years?
> How about constant vigilance?

Yes, that's necessary, but not 'sufficient' for a good solution.
We have to have reasonable legislation to back it up.

[Hitler's *entire* reign was just one year longer than John Howard's.
[Some of his techniques were to push-the-boundaries of existing laws and
to pass laws that seemed innocuous, but could be bent to his ends.]
[Notice how the Nazi Party didn't see the need for elections after a
point...]

I don't know your age or whether you expect to be around in 2060. I
certainly expect to be a dim memory at best :-)
This conversation/whatever for me is about the world Baby-Boomers, like
me, would like to leave for future generations

I lived through one revolution in Australian Censorship (under Menzies,
it was extreme and draconian).
These long overdue reforms were part of the changes by the Whitlam Govt...

Collectively, we stand at a cross-roads:
 - Do nothing and suffer silliness, or much worse, for decades, or
 - agitate, maybe fight, now and get something we feel OK about.

> We can't make the world a better place but we do have to work
> to stop it becoming worse.

Very good insight.

> Personally I think most people do the right thing most of the time - and
> peers are very influential. If "we" do nothing the "rest" will just
> follow the second law of Thermodynamics ;-p


Exactly. Crucial point mostly lost in the noise.

We're not even talking 00.1% (1-in-1000) cases here, more like 1-in-10^6
or 10^9.

> 
> Cheers

Thanks for a great, reasoned response.
-- 
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