Oh good grief. Here we go again.

[den]

Comments

[bunyip.livejournal.com]

Idiots

[dewhitton.livejournal.com]

They are spending billions to speed up the network, then doing everything they can to slow it down.

Actually, they're spending billions to bring the network up to ADSL, when that has been superseded by ADSL2 and the next generation is almost ready to roll out.

[foxymalone.livejournal.com]

I really hate this attitude that the internet is for kids

[psaakyrn.livejournal.com]

A probably easier way to protect kids is to completely ban the internet from kids (the same way driving and alcohol is banned). Granted a whole slew of other issues would arize, but the costs are probably much lower (other than reduction of taxes from reduced profits of telco and "internet service targetted at children" companies). In my opinion there are far too many idiots on the internet anyway.

[bunyip.livejournal.com]

If that bullshit gets implemented, I'm staying as an ex-pat

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

But if you let kids on the Interwebs then they'll be stalked by paedophiles! So really the Internet isn't for anybody.

[dewhitton.livejournal.com]

Protecting The Children (http://www.efa.org.au/Campaigns/stoprain.html)

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

The best part is when someone brings up evidence that that generally is not the case (a lot of the studies which brought out those "fourteen out of ten kids have been killed and eaten by predators online" type statistics use shoddy stats and broad definitions to say the least), all people have to do to refute their argument is accuse them of being pro-child-molestor or something like that.

It's an issue that's been set up such that it's utterly impossible to discuss it in a rational manner. Absolutely perfect politician fodder, which is why it keeps coming up every few months.