Great ideas. So how I see this evolving is
- audience: general consumer
- method: short, entertaining clips, content and merchandise
- goal: communicate the following messages

1) It will degrade our already degraded internerz experience -->
impact on consumers, on startups, on the experience
2) It has the potential for scope creep beyond saving the children -->
impact on privacy, on civil liberties
3) It technologically will be ineffective in addressing the policy
goal --> impact on treasury, agency resources - likely to make some
developer firm rich at the cost of the tax payers for no good reason

I think we need to get behind existing efforts like the nocleanfeed
brand (http://nocleanfeed.com/ - thanks @preds) or create our own -
and just channel our energies across the community and media. Common
brand means common message which means more pronounced political
pressure.

I can't help but think this is a trojan horse policy. Surely, the
minister isn't that stupid to think with 98% public opposition, this
is a smart move. There has to be an ulterior motive such as using it
as a bargaining tool for other policy or appealing to a core
constituency that helps him directly like a campaign donation.



On Oct 27, 10:45 am, Chris Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To get the normal person interested, we've got to show how it will
> effect them - but make it something they want to read. Perhaps a
> satirical website that shows off how bad the internet experience could
> be if the filter came into existence - but with a bit of humour to help
> it get traction:
>
> - Show youtube videos that are jumpy, and impossible to watch.
> - Mock music downloads that say "your download should only take a couple
> of hours".
> - Details of the Governments new "Won't somebody think of the children?"
> fridge magnet.
> - A mock-up of a Government Intranet site that shows all the websites
> someone has visited in the past month.
> - A link to a rival political site, that when clicked says "Blocked for
> your safety" ...
> - A video of someone using P2P to get their illegal downloads without
> being blocked.
>
> (I'm not that funny, but you get the idea. Perhaps if we could get the
> Chaser team to write it :)
>
> If we can show how it will adversely effect the average internet user,
> and still not achieve any of it's goals (apart from the political one of
> being perceived to actually be doing something useful) no-one in their
> right mind could approve of it.
>
> Nick Holmes a Court wrote:
>
> > Just a thought, if the filter passes into use - wouldn't the
> > government make illegal any websites that have information on how to
> > bypass the filter? Also wouldnt the govt also make it illegal to
> > spread information about this and target individuals and corporations
> > who do so?
>
> > This is obviously a flawed way of thinking, but given the flaws in the
> > thinking that has got the government to this point, it really wouldnt
> > be a suprise.
>
> > It would also be a logical extension that the using/creating of any
> > technology that bypasses the filter would also be made illegal. (Not
> > dissimilar to DMCA in the US).
>
> > I know this directly effects my company and many other tech companies.
>
> > While im sure we all strongly agree with Gilmores law - /"The internet
> > interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."/ - and that
> > gives us some confidence. - it seems pretty scary that our government
> > might turn a large percentage of its otherwise law abiding population
> > into criminals.
>
> > The immediate question is how do you make Joe Public care? And, how do
> > you get mainstream media to care?
>
> > Maybe there is something to learn from the anonymous/anti-scientology
> > movement, maybe this is something anonymous could be steered to care
> > about if we targeted their channels. Anonymous delivered in both
> > getting media attention and simplifying the scientology message into
> > something the public is happy to talk about.
>
> > Either way im sure we are all on the same page that this filter must
> > not be passed into use - once this is in, we could speculate that
> > the governement would never give it up.
>
> > /"One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the
> > evils in this world are to be cured by legislation." - Thomas B. Reed /
> > //
> > /"Once fully enslaved, no nation, state, city of this earth ever
> > afterward resumes its liberty."/ - Walt Whitman
>
> > On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Pat Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> >     Elias - love the ideas, definitely got some merit - the initial
> >     idea wasn't mind though, I'm just echoing Mark Pesce:
> >    http://twitter.com/mpesce/status/974762216
>
> >     The one issue I can see with using Iran (and China) as examples
> >     though is that the Government repetitively states it's not like
> >     them. But definitely, the government needs to be embarrassed and
> >     pressured into seeing how stupid their idea is. Get the videos
> >     made, I'll definitely do my bit to promote them.
>
> >     --
> >     Pat
>
> >     On 26/10/2008, at 7:14 PM, Elias Bizannes wrote:
>
> >>     That's a brillaint idea Pat - showing how ineffective the
> >>     controls would be, in a vocal way :)
>
> >>     I've got some contacts in Iran and they could help us broadcast
> >>     how these 'repressed' people get away with things. It would be a
> >>     good way to compare the approach to an authoritarian government,
> >>     whilst at the same time showing how ineffective they are.
>
> >>     We could also  put together short clips having people explain how
> >>     easy it is to circumvent as well as working examples
> >>     of exploitations of the holes.
>
> >>     Whilst we can make this content targeted at the public to create
> >>     awareness, I also (as I am sure others) got some labour hack
> >>     mates, who can ensure that our work is distributed to the right
> >>     people within the party. And certainly, I've got some Liberal
> >>     hack mates who would love to get behind this for the sake of
> >>     creating a wedge issue.
>
> >>     Clearly, English doesn't work in the form of  letters and e-mails
> >>     that we have sent to these short-sighted, opportunistic, moronic
> >>     arse-wipe politicians. Maybe it's time we try another tactic:
> >>     flat out embaressment, with a touch of crowd sourcing and a tad
> >>     of social media distribution. At worst, we have a laugh and let
> >>     the public know our industry is alive and kicking.
>
> >>     Thoughts?
>
> >>     On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Pat Allan
> >>     <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> >>         It took me about six months to get a response to my first
> >>         letter. The
> >>         second letter (as an email, since I wasn't in Aus) got a slightly
> >>         faster response (just under two months).
>
> >>        http://freelancing-gods.com/posts/internet_censorship_in_australia
> >>        http://freelancing-gods.com/posts/correspondance_on_censorship
>
> >>         Sometimes I consider going to harrass Conroy in person (since
> >>         he's a
> >>         Victorian senator), but I wonder if that's just a waste of time
> >>         anyway, given his attitude as reported by the media. And
> >>         whether he'd
> >>         bother responding to an appointment is another matter. Still,
> >>         it might
> >>         result in a somewhat more human response than the bullshit
> >>         spin he's
> >>         responding with to the media.
>
> >>         I'm not sure what we can do as a community - seems several of
> >>         us are
> >>         writing to him, and that's not (visibly) getting us anywhere. ISP
> >>         employees' opinions don't seem to carry much weight either.
> >>         If it gets
> >>         rolled out (although the trial results give me hope it's just not
> >>         feasible enough even for Conroy to go through with it), then
> >>         I guess
> >>         we do what we can to publicise how easy it is to circumvent? I'm
> >>         seeing a lot of pissed off tweets lately about the issue... but
> >>         getting a Government to drop a policy they've been so solidly
> >>         behind
> >>         is far from easy.
>
> >>         Still, suggestions for action welcome :)
>
> >>         --
> >>         Pat
>
> >>         On 26/10/2008, at 6:07 PM, Gary Barber wrote:
>
> >>         > At least you got a response, I have yet to get that for any
> >>         of the
> >>         > three
> >>         > emails I have sent over the previous months and several
> >>         phone calls.
>
> >>         > --
> >>         > Gary Barber
> >>         > Freelance User Interaction Designer/ Information Architect
>
> >>         > Web: radharc.com.au <http://radharc.com.au/>
> >>         > blog: manwithnoblog.com <http://manwithnoblog.com/>
>
> >>         > Elias Bizannes wrote:
> >>         >> This issue really, really, really pisses me off.
>
> >>        
> >> http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/biztech/how-government-tried-to...
>
> >>         >> I've already written to the minister, and got a lame response:
> >>         >>http://liako.biz/2008/07/internet-censorship-in-australia/
>
> >>         >> What's the most effective thing we can do as a community?
> >>         Surely
> >>         >> something is better than ignoring it...
>
> >>     --
> >>     Elias Bizannes
> >>    http://liako.biz<http://liako.biz/>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Silicon Beach Australia" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to