Comment News Stories, and a possible solution ? (Score 1) 272
There has been some stories in the news about the censorship legislation, mostly in the paper news though, hardly a peep on TV.
Some of the newspapers , like the Australian, and the Age, have covered it pretty well. The other major paper in Melbourne (where I live) , is a thing called the "Herald Sun".
Here is a few stories that they have been printing about "the internet"
In the Herald sun , page 18 , 8 June 1999
"As Evil as porn"
The jewish group B'nai B'rith Anti Defamation commision wants the KKK banned from the net. There is a photo of a Nazi site "Stormfront" , and some guy holding what apparently is a gun, but what looks like a PVC tube (used in plumbing) , with a muffler stuck on the end of it.
"Genuine civil liberties orginizations have also expressed concerns about freedom of speech, but democracy is based on the tenet that induviduals are allowed to live harmonious lives without fear of persecution. Laws ranging from defamation to sexual discrimination provide that there is no absolutes of free speech.
Most Australian would not let a vehemant extremist into their homes, yet via the net, potentially all homes with internet access may play host to such visitors"
on 16 June 1999 , page 18 , the editorial piece says this :
"the insidious nature of the internet as a tool for pedophiles has again been highlighted by the arrest of an Australian man in the united states"
"Internet service providers have an obligation to eliminate or at least reduce the incidence of child pornography and the covert use of the internet by pedophiles"
(some australian person went to the USA to meet some kid he befriended over "the net". He was nabbed by the cops. Good on them.)
basically any story about someone using the internet for a "bad" purpose is hammered in this paper.
All the government has to do is appeal to the majority of people in Australia (who don't have an ISP) that the net is full of paedophiles, bomb recipies and porn , and then they can do whatever they damn well want.
To be honest, I feel totally and utterly sold out. Not just by the Liberal party, but by the whole party system in this country. Back room deals, bribes, the notion that a party member has their first loyalty to the party, not to the country, you name it.
And I've been thinking of a way to change it. (I'm sure lots of others have thought of this, but bear with me). Political Parties, I think, were set up because it was impossible to have all of the citizens in a country run the whole show at once. It just wasn't possible. Now with the net, it IS possible. we don't need to delegate our vote to someone else, who goes to canberra (or washington :-) ), and expresses our opinion. (but probably just gets told to shut up during party meetings and votes along the party line anyway)
So what I'm thinking of is this :
1) set up some kind of slashdot-like web site, where people can freely express any opinions they like on the budget, defense, taxes, social security, etc.
2) after debating for a few weeks, have a vote on particular bits of law. (voting to be done by citizens of that country only. Need to figure out some way to enforce this)
3) The majority opinion gets tabled in Parliment by someone, who the citizens have to vote in to represent them. That person agrees to represent the majority opinion, not their own. (of course, without enough people to actually vote for that person to get in to parliment, this whole step can't be done.)
Yes, I know, you still have to delegate someone to go to the government. But that's only because of the way the present system works. If by some chance the rest of the country sees that the "open source" way is better, and we manage to get a majority , then the whole government can become completely virtual. (and step 3 won't be necessary)
Once that happens, no more "secrets". No more "commercial in confidence" contracts , where citizens are not allowed to know how much taxes are being paid to a company to do some out-sourced activity like power generation , ambulences, or whatever. True power to the people.
OK, that's enough. I think you get the idea.
whaddya reckon?
Some of the newspapers , like the Australian, and the Age, have covered it pretty well. The other major paper in Melbourne (where I live) , is a thing called the "Herald Sun".
Here is a few stories that they have been printing about "the internet"
In the Herald sun , page 18 , 8 June 1999
"As Evil as porn"
The jewish group B'nai B'rith Anti Defamation commision wants the KKK banned from the net. There is a photo of a Nazi site "Stormfront" , and some guy holding what apparently is a gun, but what looks like a PVC tube (used in plumbing) , with a muffler stuck on the end of it.
"Genuine civil liberties orginizations have also expressed concerns about freedom of speech, but democracy is based on the tenet that induviduals are allowed to live harmonious lives without fear of persecution. Laws ranging from defamation to sexual discrimination provide that there is no absolutes of free speech.
Most Australian would not let a vehemant extremist into their homes, yet via the net, potentially all homes with internet access may play host to such visitors"
on 16 June 1999 , page 18 , the editorial piece says this :
"the insidious nature of the internet as a tool for pedophiles has again been highlighted by the arrest of an Australian man in the united states"
"Internet service providers have an obligation to eliminate or at least reduce the incidence of child pornography and the covert use of the internet by pedophiles"
(some australian person went to the USA to meet some kid he befriended over "the net". He was nabbed by the cops. Good on them.)
basically any story about someone using the internet for a "bad" purpose is hammered in this paper.
All the government has to do is appeal to the majority of people in Australia (who don't have an ISP) that the net is full of paedophiles, bomb recipies and porn , and then they can do whatever they damn well want.
To be honest, I feel totally and utterly sold out. Not just by the Liberal party, but by the whole party system in this country. Back room deals, bribes, the notion that a party member has their first loyalty to the party, not to the country, you name it.
And I've been thinking of a way to change it. (I'm sure lots of others have thought of this, but bear with me). Political Parties, I think, were set up because it was impossible to have all of the citizens in a country run the whole show at once. It just wasn't possible. Now with the net, it IS possible. we don't need to delegate our vote to someone else, who goes to canberra (or washington
So what I'm thinking of is this :
1) set up some kind of slashdot-like web site, where people can freely express any opinions they like on the budget, defense, taxes, social security, etc.
2) after debating for a few weeks, have a vote on particular bits of law. (voting to be done by citizens of that country only. Need to figure out some way to enforce this)
3) The majority opinion gets tabled in Parliment by someone, who the citizens have to vote in to represent them. That person agrees to represent the majority opinion, not their own. (of course, without enough people to actually vote for that person to get in to parliment, this whole step can't be done.)
Yes, I know, you still have to delegate someone to go to the government. But that's only because of the way the present system works. If by some chance the rest of the country sees that the "open source" way is better, and we manage to get a majority , then the whole government can become completely virtual. (and step 3 won't be necessary)
Once that happens, no more "secrets". No more "commercial in confidence" contracts , where citizens are not allowed to know how much taxes are being paid to a company to do some out-sourced activity like power generation , ambulences, or whatever. True power to the people.
OK, that's enough. I think you get the idea.
whaddya reckon?
