[LINK] Internet Censorship

[Rick Welykochy]

David Goldstein wrote:

> Jumping the gun here aren't you Danny? We don't even know what the version of "censorship" will be. Could it be 100 sites such as Singapore? More? Less? Something altogether different? None of us on this list have a clue what the government is proposing in this regards.

> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Danny Yee <danny at anatomy.usyd.edu.au>
> 
> My guess is that fewer than 5% of Australian households will want a
> censored Internet connection, and that after actual experience with
> that maybe 1% or 2% will still want to be censored.
> 
> Remember the NetAlert success with PC-based censorware?  There's a
> nice summary of that here:
>   http://dansdata.blogsome.com/2008/02/22/wanna-buy-a-porn-blocker-only-3000/

I like Daniel Rutter's take on this. We, the taxpayer, have funded some
30,000 PCs with censorware at an average cost of about $3000/unit.

That is like we taxpayers providing $3000 to 30,000 car users to pay for
seatbelts. Of course that is absurd: the owner of the car should do that.
Why shouldn't the owner of the PC do the same? i.e. pay for their own
censorware?

Politics. Who needs it?


cheers
rickw


-- 
________________________________________________________________
Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services || Internet Driving Instructor

The purpose of censorware is not to Protect The Children, but to
get some people elected and keep other people employed.
      -- Daniel Rutter