Anonymous' attack on Kevin Rudd

[Epictank of Wintown]

See, what I think the point Anonymous is trying to get across is that, unified, they are capable of great and/or terrible things. This is really just a warning to the Australian government. They did similar things at first to the Church of Scientology before really launching off in that epic campaign I'm sure everyone remembers.

The internet is a powerful thing. Anonymous know that and they use it to their greatest advantage. Kevin Rudd and the people that Anonymous are going after had better be ready if they try to fight back against Anonymous. It's hard enough to fight a war against a million enemies you can see. It's impossible to fight a war against a million enemies that you can't.

 

[TheEvilCheese]

I support what Anonymous are doing in this case, but it's kinda counterproductive. "Hands off our legal (and illegal) porn" just makes them sound like a paedophile ring. Which is exactly how they can be painted by the conservative media now. And of course, anyone investigating them finds out what their roots are, and can you imagine the average hardcore christian reaction to 4chan? I'm liberal, anti-censorship, atheist and well educated, and I still find it pretty foul.
It would be a nice if there was an organised protest group which had some respectability and still made headlines, but I guess I might as well wish for a jetpack while I'm at it.

Im prettty much of the same opinion on this- I don't live in australia but knew about the anon attack due to a friend who has spent far too much time on 4chan recently. But sireously, whatever happened to freedom of information?
Oh right, a Conservative Christian Political leader.

 

[IckleMissMayhem]

(Cut)

I don't support Anonymous' attack on The PM's website though. Their heart is in the right place but threats from the Internet probably only strengthen Conroy's and Rudd's resolve. Besides, a quick search of Anonymous probably comes up with what many people will consider a good reason to censor the Internet.

This post represents my views.

To reiterate; Although Anon's heart was in the right place and I can endorse their spirit, this may well give the anti-internet freedom groups more ammunition for their .50 cal machine gun of hate and misinformation.

Ninja'd up the wazoo.
Yes, it might just attract attention to the cause, but I doubt it'll be 100% the right kind of attention. Better to educate people about the problems of the over-nannying of Atkinson et al rather than proving them right by attacking them personally...

 

[Daffy F]

I live in the U.K... but whenever I hear of Michael Atkinson I feel sorry for you guys... And I say a quick prayer that a bus would swiftly run him down. Amen.

 

[sirdanrhodes]

Well, although I think they are usually evil. when Anonymous do tricks like these to ultimately help the internet, I applaud.

 

[SamuelT]

I would absolutely know nothing of this action.

*hides evidence.*

 

[fletch_talon]

But sireously, whatever happened to freedom of information?

I don't know just how informative looking at naked children is but child pornography is what happened.

Now I'm not claiming for an instant that this internet filter idea is perfect. But the way everyone reacts is as though even thinking of censoring the internet is blasphemy.
The idea is a noble one, regardless of how much you ***** and whine about it. Reducing access to content that is already regarded as illegal can only be a good thing. The issue is the execution. Mainly the fact that it can potentially slow down internet speeds, which have never been great to begin with.

Stop acting as if the slightest hint of restrictions on what we see/do/say is another step towards a worldwide dystopia. I for one would be quite content to live in a world where child pornography can't be accessed online, and people are arrested for harassing others based on their skin colour, sex or sexual orientation etc.

 

[CHangedUsername]

But sireously, whatever happened to freedom of information?

I don't know just how informative looking at naked children is but child pornography is what happened.

Now I'm not claiming for an instant that this internet filter idea is perfect. But the way everyone reacts is as though even thinking of censoring the internet is blasphemy.
The idea is a noble one, regardless of how much you ***** and whine about it. Reducing access to content that is already regarded as illegal can only be a good thing. The issue is the execution. Mainly the fact that it can potentially slow down internet speeds, which have never been great to begin with.

Stop acting as if the slightest hint of restrictions on what we see/do/say is another step towards a worldwide dystopia. I for one would be quite content to live in a world where child pornography can't be accessed online, and people are arrested for harassing others based on their skin colour, sex or sexual orientation etc.

The issue is that it isn't ANY governments responsibility to censor such a thing.
They are censoring AA cup breast pornogrpahy too and euthenasia websites.

They are imposing thier values on an entire nation of people.
And that is bullshit.

 

[Wolf-AUS]

The problem with getting Abbott in as PM is that he's ALSO a hardcore conservative Christian. Australia is pretty much screwed over a barrel no matter what happens, unfortunately. The only progressive thinkers at the moment in politics are stuck in minor parties who don't carry any of the vote.

Abbot made fun of a man dying of Asbestos poisoning, did nothing as health minister and is overall a complete arsehole. If he gets in I lose faith in politics forever.

I agree, I really don't like Conroy or Atkinson, but Abbot is something else. He has something seriously wrong with him, every time he opens his mouth in front of a camera he says something stupid.

 

[fletch_talon]

But sireously, whatever happened to freedom of information?

I don't know just how informative looking at naked children is but child pornography is what happened.

Now I'm not claiming for an instant that this internet filter idea is perfect. But the way everyone reacts is as though even thinking of censoring the internet is blasphemy.
The idea is a noble one, regardless of how much you ***** and whine about it. Reducing access to content that is already regarded as illegal can only be a good thing. The issue is the execution. Mainly the fact that it can potentially slow down internet speeds, which have never been great to begin with.

Stop acting as if the slightest hint of restrictions on what we see/do/say is another step towards a worldwide dystopia. I for one would be quite content to live in a world where child pornography can't be accessed online, and people are arrested for harassing others based on their skin colour, sex or sexual orientation etc.

The issue is that it isn't ANY governments responsibility to censor such a thing.
They are censoring AA cup breast pornogrpahy too and euthenasia websites.

They are imposing thier values on an entire nation of people.
And that is bullshit.

Actually I believe it is a governments responsibility to censor things which it has deemed illegal. Now as to whether such things should be illegal or not, that's a different matter.
I'd certainly argue that under the right conditions and with the right consideration, euthanasia should be legal. Arguing about the internet filter however will not change the government's stance on it one way or another.
Its the same deal with the breast size issue. Regardless of what happens with the internet, the government will keep its stance and ban all the depictions which it can, and likely prosecute possessors of banned material.

The way I see it, the filter is like the police. They enforce some laws we disagree with, but for the most part, they do us a favour. If you do have a problem with the laws an officer is upholding, you don't take it up with them, you take it to the government.

 

[chronobreak]

Grassroots organized petitioning, leafleting, websites, demonstrations... or send porn to a website? Well, no surprise that they would have chosen the porn.

 

[Eisenfaust]

how terrrorist of them... but i'm bloody hoping the filter doesn't get put up... the obvious reasons aside, won't it massively tax bandwidth or some nonsense? in a country where broardband isn't the standard, they shouldn't even be considering slowing it down more, let alone it being the tiniest bit oppressive and all...

 

[RN7]

Well, the way I see it is that what they're doing and what they did is basically like the Boston Tea Party, only with porn. And all that did was inevitably lead the colonies to war with England, so following that... Australia is going to war with England. Good luck.

Oh, and don't worry. If a bunch of colonists can beat a great nation, so can a bunch of ex-convicts.

Yeah but the UK dosen't really such as much as Australia anymore. Sorry, but the Aussies are gonna get their asses handed to 'em

 

[OmegaCheese]

Well, the way I see it is that what they're doing and what they did is basically like the Boston Tea Party, only with porn. And all that did was inevitably lead the colonies to war with England, so following that... Australia is going to war with England. Good luck.

Oh, and don't worry. If a bunch of colonists can beat a great nation, so can a bunch of ex-convicts.

Yeah but the UK dosen't really such as much as Australia anymore. Sorry, but the Aussies are gonna get their asses handed to 'em

Why wont the damn Queen intervene, she has power why wont she use it god-damn it!

 

[OmegaCheese]

how terrrorist of them... but i'm bloody hoping the filter doesn't get put up... the obvious reasons aside, won't it massively tax bandwidth or some nonsense? in a country where broardband isn't the standard, they shouldn't even be considering slowing it down more, let alone it being the tiniest bit oppressive and all...

This is true, if you go to a blacklisted site it will slow your internet down considerably, and in a country where about, i dunno 50% have adsl 1 and lots of people still use dial up!