Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful and beneficial to your readers.

betclic

If the Senator believed his filter was as bullet proof as he does, he should see no concern in publishing the full list so that total transparency on what is filtered is maintained.

This is no different to the banning of films or other media. A quick check of the OFLC database will explain what was banned and why.

Why won't you do this for the internet?

shame there is no parimentary equivilent of crt alt delete

It was only in the last week or 2 that this Senator was preaching for Faith in our elected members, and now he admits that he doesn't even have faith in the system to do right by us.

Doesn't this scare you Conroy, and are you trying to go out of your way to live up to the title Conjob?

Above all else this so called 'Creep' issue should be ringing alarm bells in everyones ears, this is why we as Australians are embarrassed to have voted you fools in. Can't you see that. Let alone the fact that you are trying to add the NBN to that list of embarrasments.

Wake up Conroy, the GST wasn't rolled back because it suits any Government. The same will happen with your Censorship tool. Do not doubt that that is what this filter will become.

Thanks for taking your faith back to church and leaving it, atleast partially, out of politics

Would somebody FOR the net filter, please lay out the reasons why this filter is in trial. Now take that answer and compare it to 6 months ago.

If the government would actually stick to it's directive, and original purpose, then those against the filter might actually have a reason to believe that there is a confident moral direction this whole concept is heading in.

Also remember, that morality, IS the primary objective driving this debate, from both sides. It is just as morally wrong to introduce a filter that can be over-corrupted by personal agenda's then it is to allow the internet to be over-corrupted by personal agenda's.

What you believe and what is known as fact are in two completely separate realms of existence, Mr Conroy - just because you believe such a filter will block 10,000 URLS, with 100% efficacy, zero chance of overblocking and zero impact on the Australian technical economy does not actually make it true.

Time and time again, experts in the relevant fields have told you: this filter will not achieve the results you are telling the Australian public you are looking for (it's possible the results the government wants are different though) - those that truly want to access any blocked material will continue to do so, it will have no impact on the world-wide problem of child sexual abuse/violence and it is going to put further financial pressure on Australian businesses and households that are strained as it is.

Instead of wasting all this time, effort and money on a token effort, why not instead redirect those efforts and funds into supporting the appropriate agencies that can actually make a positive impact - the Federal Police and relations with Interpol et al to actually track down and imprison the abusers, community and government agencies to support and assist the victims.

No - How dare they throw A shoe.

A whole truckful, nay, ship full of shoes needs to be thrown at this scrofulous dick-head.

You ask do we have any proof.

That is the crux of the problem. Since the list is secret how do we know and whom to we beleive? I beleive it is the list and I beleive that Conroy is a liar or grossly misinformed. The so called list can be obtained by a quick 30 second hack to the software the government (formerly provide by the Aust Government). Therefore the so call list the software uses matches the list on wiki ergo: the wiki list is the black list that the black list software uses.

What more proof could you possibly want?

and the longer term approach is the one he himself mentions in the article - voting him out, although that is the slowest and the approach of last resort since he may have already completely destroyed the Digital Economy by the time he comes up for reelection. Hopefully he resigns or is sacked long before then.

Gald to see what Conroy believes is more important than the facts. How can we get rid of this clown?

If the Blacklist starts to include legal content Web sites then this isn't a Clean feed for saving the children it's clearly CENSORSHIP! This will confirm what we all have fear from the start that this is Another great firewall of China ... Get rid of the filter now or you lose the next election simple as that mr Kevin Rudd PM ... I'd be getting rid of "conjob" if I where you ... You have no right

So first there was no chance of scope creep...

And people alarmed about it were "child porn supporters".

Then the list leaked but it was apparently not the list (although we have no way of confirming that)...

Then we are told to have faith in politicians (that's very funny Conroy, you decide to change careers to comedian?)

Now we're told their will be scope creep according to parliament's wishes because they got voted in so anything they want, they get and can claim a mandate (even if the assertion may never have been tested at election).

And last, 'if you don't like it, vote us out'... Yeah, because you've been up front and honest about this entire process... /sarcasm The general public are more interested (currently) in things like Workchoices because they are unaware of what is going on. I challenge any reader to ask 10 random ppl they know about the government's plan to censor the internet and see how many have any clue... The government has obfuscated this policy as effectively as they can manage and then claim a mandate?

Conjob, you're a joke. You're a bully, an egomaniac and your treatment of the public and your critics (particularly Mr. Mark Newton) is disgraceful. There is no reason a single Australian should trust a word you are saying when you've changed your story so many times, all well documented by the print media, for some reason TV news seems to ignore your gross incompetence.

No Net Censorship...

Here's an idea:

Keep the blacklist publicly available. Everyone can see what's on it. That way, there can be accountability for it, and "creep" can be avoided.

The internet filter is suposed to block all these sites, so what harm is there in letting people know that something is blocked if they won't be able to access it?

Why was my comment about Lundy deleted? Presumably for mentioning her marital relationship with CCC lobbyist David Forman...? Internet censorship? Talk about irony!

There are so many ínaccuracies'that Conroy speaks of.

Lets go through them one by one:

1. In race betting affects integrity of sport - I'm glad you are concerned that betting on sport in Australia will make it rigged. Congrats on informing Betfair, an Australian licensed and regulated operator of the legalities.

2. He admits concern of creeping - doesn't this highlight the need to not go ahead with this? Who plays God?

3. “This is just not the case and the trial, in my view, will prove you can block 10,000 URLs without any over-blocking at all,” he said. “I believe the technology is there.” WELL DONE! We now have a Senator that knows more about ISP banning technology than 2 of the top 3 ISPs in Australia.

You are a muppet sir. Thanks to Techworld for writing this article.

Conroy is the "BLACKLIST CREEP".

Australian citizens deserve better that this over- promoted ex TWU thug.

Also the utter crap that comes from Conroy; including claiming "mandates" for apparently deeply unpopular policy , that rubbish about "trusting" politicians (and then lying through his false teeth about "fake" lists), and not to mention what he tried to do to Mark. This is the last person I'd trust my right to free speech to.