Too Busy For Words - the PaulWay Blog

For the more technically minded, here is a brief synopsis of my criticisms of the "Clean Feed" 'initiative', sent in a letter to Senator Stephen Conroy:

1. 1% false positive rate is way too high to be usable.
2. 75% slower is too low to be usable, and the faster filters have a higher false positive rate.
3. It only blocks standard web traffic, not file sharing, chat or other protocols.
4. If you filter HTTPS, you cripple the financial system of internet shopping, banking, and personal information (e.g. tax returns).
5. If the Government ignores who's requesting filtered content, then those wishing to circumvent it can keep on looking with no punishment. If the Government does record who requests filtered content, then even ASIO will have a hard time searching through the mountain of false positives.
6. We already have filtering solutions for those that want it, at no cost.
7. Mandatory filtering leads to state-run censorship and gives an in for the Big Media Corporations to 'protect their assets' by blocking anything they like.
8. The whole thing is morally indefensible: it doesn't prevent a majority of online abuse such as chat bullying or file trading, and it relies on the tired old 'think of the children' argument which is beneath contempt.
9. People who assume that their children are safe under such as system and therefore do not use other protection mechanisms such as watching their children or providing appropriate support are living in a false sense of security.

Instead, the Government should either put the money toward the National Broadband Network programme, or run their own ISP with the clean feed technology to compete with the regular ISPs.

Regards, Paul.

I urge every Australian to write to Senator Conroy and/or their local Member of Parliament on this issue - it is one we cannot afford to be complacent about!