[LINK] Net filtering may not be mandatory

Jan Whitaker jwhit at melbpc.org.au
Wed May 27 09:57:06 AEST 2009

At 09:35 AM 27/05/2009, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
>Late today a spokesman for Senator Conroy said that the department was
>not allowed to reveal how many subscribers had participated in the trial
>due to terms of its agreement with the participating ISPs. He referred
>to previous statements affirming that the outcome of the trial would not
>be affected by the number of participants.
>"The trial is examining different filtering technologies in a live
>internet environment. In particular, Enex Testlab will assess the
>performance of the filter on internet speeds. A scalability assessment
>will also be undertaken to assess the impact of the filtering solution
>on internet access speeds with higher levels of traffic and customers,"
>the spokesman said.

If that is true, the research is BOGUS! A first semester stats 
student could destroy their report on methodological grounds just 
from the withholding of the n. N=number of subjects. The metrics 
won't stand any surface scrutiny as a result. They should have saved 
their money.

I hope someone from the department or the companies involved in the 
study is reading here and will inform those at the top how stupid 
they will appear to any half-way educated member of the public.

Why am I not surprised by this? It has been daft from the beginning!!



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

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

_ __________________ _

More information about the Link mailing list