I mean, who’d miss out on free donuts?
Thursday April 02nd 2009, 5:36 pm

See you on Sunday!

mgk commenter Nate thinks porn is bad, mkay:

You cannot deny that there is horrible, damaging and illegal content on the net. And while you’re right – looking at this stuff isn’t going to kill you. But despite the fact there is no hard evidence or studies – I still think that all of the RC, illegal Etc. stuff they were talking about – right down to most pornography in general – IS very damaging to to people (whether they think so or not), and even more so to teenagers. I work with Youth and know that kids do get addicted to pornography and it escalates and can ruin lives. I don’t think there needs to be a university study to realise that.

And I agree that the system is imperfect, can be hacked broken through, bypassed Etc. BUT saying it ‘doesn’t work’ I think is incorrect. It would still save millions from the destructive influence of porn, let alone the illegal content classified about it.

So yes, despite the filter not being perfect and not working 100%, I would still implement it.

It’s terrible how looking at porn is just seen as the norm these days. Forget for a second the characteristics of males Etc. few people seem to grasp just how destructive it can be to a person – In relationships, families, businesses Etc.

There is so much more to this than ‘Oh it will never work so i’ll shoot him down’.

Can you not see that IF it could work, it could do some good?

Comment by Nate 04.02.09 @ 12:41 pm

No shit, some people actually believe nonsense like this.

Lemme tell you how it is, Nate- if you don’t like porn, don’t look at any, but don’t ever mistake your belief that ‘porn is bad mkay’ for any sort of a mandate to dictate to others what they can view on their computers. There’s absolutely no psychological evidence that viewing porn harms anyone. This is a moralist objection with a basis in religion- in other words, a furphy, a canard, a lie, intended to force religious morality on everyone regardless of their personal beliefs.

The Conjob filter has been exposed. It’s not about stopping child porn. It’s about government control and imposition of religious (namely christian) morality on all Australian internet users, whether they are xians or not.

I will not have it.

If the government does eventually mandate filtering with a secret, unappealable blacklist, I’ll be looking into how to provide VPN services at cost to anyone who can’t set up their own to circumvent the filter.

-weez


3 Comments so far
Leave a comment

From the SBS comment board:

David from Perth

2009-04-01 17:30:35

Netalert did what they want but was scrapped

The previous Government’s free Netalert home filter fulfilled everything Conroy and filter supporters seek, yet Labor scrapped it. The question nobody asked is why only 2% of users took up Netalert? If the answer came back that 98% users never wanted a filter at all, it destroys Labor’s entire argument that parents demand a mandatory ISP filter to protect their children.

Comment by weez 04.02.09 @ 11:06 pm

Newmatilda: Conroy Comes Out Swinging By Colin Jacobs

Comment by weez 04.02.09 @ 11:59 pm




Leave a comment

(required)

(required)