<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Feature &#124; Part 1: The future of your online privacy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://snatchbot.net/2008/10/21/feature-part-1-the-future-of-your-online-privacy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://snatchbot.net/2008/10/21/feature-part-1-the-future-of-your-online-privacy/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 18:30:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://snatchbot.net/2008/10/21/feature-part-1-the-future-of-your-online-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-100</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:52:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snatchbot.net/?p=68#comment-100</guid>
		<description>I definitely think that if this is to go ahead there certainly needs to be a way to opt out.

The privacy of what people do when browsing the internet needs to be preserved here, and as Fred said privacy and filtering are separate things. 

Unfortunately for us the Australian public is too mellow and complacent to really do anything about this, and if this is to go ahead (which I don&#039;t think it will, not for quite a while) then it will happen so with a whimper rather than a bang.

I do agree with you though Jay - who decides what is allowed and what is not allowed to be viewed? More importantly, where does it end? Does it start with this, and then the grip gets tighter and tighter, relieving us of access of less and less of the internet? 

The internet is different to radio and print in a multitude of ways, moreso that it is just another medium through which we access the world. Much like sound and sight these days. The internet is not &quot;media&quot; per se, even though I just referred to it as a medium. Know what I mean?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I definitely think that if this is to go ahead there certainly needs to be a way to opt out.</p>
<p>The privacy of what people do when browsing the internet needs to be preserved here, and as Fred said privacy and filtering are separate things. </p>
<p>Unfortunately for us the Australian public is too mellow and complacent to really do anything about this, and if this is to go ahead (which I don&#8217;t think it will, not for quite a while) then it will happen so with a whimper rather than a bang.</p>
<p>I do agree with you though Jay &#8211; who decides what is allowed and what is not allowed to be viewed? More importantly, where does it end? Does it start with this, and then the grip gets tighter and tighter, relieving us of access of less and less of the internet? </p>
<p>The internet is different to radio and print in a multitude of ways, moreso that it is just another medium through which we access the world. Much like sound and sight these days. The internet is not &#8220;media&#8221; per se, even though I just referred to it as a medium. Know what I mean?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred Smith</title>
		<link>http://snatchbot.net/2008/10/21/feature-part-1-the-future-of-your-online-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-99</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snatchbot.net/?p=68#comment-99</guid>
		<description>Filtering and privacy are separate issues. 

Before people go emo over filtering let&#039;s recognise that ALL media are restricted, whether through &#039;censorship&#039; law or through other law such as defamation and trade practices. 

Contrary to myths about &#039;free speech&#039; (which in practice is usually restricted to political speech) all countries have some restrictions on what can be said. That&#039;s often a good thing, because not everyone has the same ability to defend themselves and because lies can have serious consequences for the victim. Neither Australia nor Canada allow people to cause injury by &#039;shouting fire in a crowded theatre&#039; (one restriction) or to maliciously claim that someone is a thief or paedophile (another restriction). 

Canada censors. So does Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and other &#039;small l liberal&#039; countries. (The Scandinavian censorship is often tougher than that in Australia. Bums on the box in dot-se are fine, ads for cancer sticks aren&#039;t. Child porn? No way). 

Why is the internet different to radio, tv or print?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Filtering and privacy are separate issues. </p>
<p>Before people go emo over filtering let&#8217;s recognise that ALL media are restricted, whether through &#8216;censorship&#8217; law or through other law such as defamation and trade practices. </p>
<p>Contrary to myths about &#8216;free speech&#8217; (which in practice is usually restricted to political speech) all countries have some restrictions on what can be said. That&#8217;s often a good thing, because not everyone has the same ability to defend themselves and because lies can have serious consequences for the victim. Neither Australia nor Canada allow people to cause injury by &#8217;shouting fire in a crowded theatre&#8217; (one restriction) or to maliciously claim that someone is a thief or paedophile (another restriction). </p>
<p>Canada censors. So does Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and other &#8217;small l liberal&#8217; countries. (The Scandinavian censorship is often tougher than that in Australia. Bums on the box in dot-se are fine, ads for cancer sticks aren&#8217;t. Child porn? No way). </p>
<p>Why is the internet different to radio, tv or print?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harreh</title>
		<link>http://snatchbot.net/2008/10/21/feature-part-1-the-future-of-your-online-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-98</link>
		<dc:creator>Harreh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 04:46:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snatchbot.net/?p=68#comment-98</guid>
		<description>Fear is a great way to slowly steal away the rights of a countries citizens, unfortunately what we see here is a prime example of that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fear is a great way to slowly steal away the rights of a countries citizens, unfortunately what we see here is a prime example of that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spengbab</title>
		<link>http://snatchbot.net/2008/10/21/feature-part-1-the-future-of-your-online-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-97</link>
		<dc:creator>Spengbab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 04:43:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snatchbot.net/?p=68#comment-97</guid>
		<description>Maybe time to move to canada, I&#039;ve heard good stories of that place.

Australia is such a cunt of a place to live sometimes, especially when we&#039;ve got some dusty old coot who has knowledge of nothing newer than Valve radios and is the minister that controls the internet in australia.

Hell, the douchebags think we aren&#039;t adult enough to have R Rated games.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe time to move to canada, I&#8217;ve heard good stories of that place.</p>
<p>Australia is such a cunt of a place to live sometimes, especially when we&#8217;ve got some dusty old coot who has knowledge of nothing newer than Valve radios and is the minister that controls the internet in australia.</p>
<p>Hell, the douchebags think we aren&#8217;t adult enough to have R Rated games.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
