[LINK] Conroy vs Google

[Rick Welykochy]

Jan Whitaker wrote:

>> Senator Conroy has conceded that greater transparency is needed in
>> terms of how content ends up on the blacklist, but last night he
>> again refused to make the blacklist itself public, saying it would
>> provide people instant access to the banned material.
>
> This one was actually made ridiculous by a caller who pointed out
> that if the filters really worked 100% as Conroy claims, they could
> easily publish the list because the items would be blocked. So what's
> the harm? '-)

This thought crossed my mind until a fellow from EFF spoke
and mentioned he agrees with the secrecy. I thought further ...
if the list is public it would allow the following:

(*) those in Australia who know how to bypass the filters (of
     which there will be many) could use/abuse the list;

(*) outside of Australia, the list would be used by those interested
     in breaking the law for a number of reasons.

I am not happy at all with the filtering proposal, for reasons
obvious to those who support a free and open democracy. If the
filter legislation is rammed through parliament, there must be a
mechanism to find out if a given site is block when it becomes
apparent there has been a mistake or some sort of unwarranted
interference. Without that safeguard, we have truly lost a basic
democratic freedom.

But! One can always find out if a site is blocked by comparing
access through the filter and access via a proxy through another
country. Hmmmmm .... good idea for a web-based Australian Filter
Check Service :)

e.g.

    Enter suspect URL here: [    ]

    result: yup, that site is blocked in Australia or nope, fine.

    Probably a few lines of script.

cheers
rickw



-- 
_________________________________
Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services

Hofstadter's Law. "It always takes longer than you expect, even when
you take into account Hofstadter's law."