[LINK] Internet filtering plan may extend to peer-to-peer traffic, says Stephen Conroy

[Jan Whitaker]

At 09:40 AM 23/12/2008, Michael Skeggs mike at bystander.net wrote:
>accidentally search for child p-rn
>and unwittingly seek to download it and unknowingly view it.
>It is this kind of accident that happens every day that we need the
>gov to act against.

Far be it from me to defend any of this filtering insanity, but I 
think there may be a 'protection of children' aspect that is getting 
confused here. I don't think anyone would argue with the horrible 
abuse aspects of the subjects of the p--n. In a way, the stopping of 
child images like this is a focus on the delivery and access points 
in the chain. Doesn't mean the abuse has stopped. Just like the 
attempts to reduce illegal prostitution by arresting the customers, 
at least in the US. Australia has a different cultural filter when it 
comes to adult sex workers.

Frankly, whoever came up with the 'protect the children from 
ACCESSING' justification was dumb. But I don't know where that all 
began or if it was the journalists who confused the two.

>Surely, there should be some sort of law or regulation that
>criminalises child p-rn so that the government would not have to
>implement such difficult technology? Oh.

Yeah, oh. See points above.

Jan



Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
jwhit at janwhitaker.com
business: http://www.janwhitaker.com
personal: http://www.janwhitaker.com/personal/
blog: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/

Our truest response to the irrationality of the world is to paint or 
sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
~Madeline L'Engle, writer

Writing Lesson #54:
Learn to love revision. Think of it as polishing the silver for 
guests. - JW, May, 2007
_ __________________ _


-- 

Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.0/1861 - Release Date: 22/12/2008 11:23 AM