This isn't going to end well:

Firing one of the first shots in the net neutrality war, AT&T has blocked 4chan’s /b/ image board. AT&T subscribers are unable to connect to /b/ and /r9k/ (both of which are hosted on img.4chan.org). However, subscribers can get on any of the so-called «worksafe» boards that 4chan.org offers.

And confirmd by moot via a post on 4chan's status page:

Sunday, July 26, 2009

It's come to our attention that AT&T is filtering/blocking img.4chan.org (/b/ & /r9k/) for many of their customers. There is no remedy at this time.

If you've been affected, I would advise you call or write customer support and corporate immediately.

by moot @ 6:41 PM

Source.

Whilst it doesn't affect us (yet), it's a sign of what's to come when/if the Conroy Filter goes ahead. Thoughts?

4chan is s*** so it wont matter

I think filtering is absolutely s*** however its' AT&Ts network so they get to decide what runs across it (or what doesn't). So the solution is to pack up and change to another provider if the one you're with starts blocking the content you want.

i would vote with my feet:

if my isp started censoring my internets, i would drop them so fast

Exactly. Regardless of the benefit /b/ offers the word (read: next to none), it's a scary sort of thing when one of the bigger providers in the US takes it upon themselves to be judge, jury and filterer of sites. I dread to think what sort of stuff the /b/tards are going to do in relation, especially since it probably won't be very pretty (and will likely do very little to change people's opinions of the block)..

I dread to think what sort of stuff the /b/tards are going to do in relation

It has already begun.
http://a.imagehost.org/0507/AT_T.png

i would vote with my feet:

+1

what happens if your PM starts filtering your internets?

Something about voting with your feet - although that would looks strange - lying on your back and trying to get your feet onto the shelf in the voting booth.

you use your feet to boot his ass out at the next election
which I intend to try again anyway

That's the worst bit - Unless the Libs come out with an even more draconic plan to filter stuff, I'll be voting Coalition for the first time in my life next election...

I probably would vote for the liberals if they put out an anti-filtering policy, but I realy doubt they will.

Haha, at the moment they are trying to have fake story's about the CEO passing to lower their stock prices.

That's the worst bit - Unless the Libs come out with an even more draconic plan to filter stuff, I'll be voting Coalition for the first time in my life next election...

Ha, I used to vote Labor in federal because I didn't like the way Howard handled a lot of things but now that Labor is in power I'm going to be voting Lib for the exact same reason. Democracy simply does not work.

I don't hold much hope for the Libs not pushing a filter either since the idea first originated with them. What I do hold hope for is that if they do it, it won't be communist China style and it will be opt in.

The problem with the vote with your feet idea is that a lot of people get locked into 2 year contracts when signing up to the internets. Not me, I'm with node but the majority of Australians are with Telstra who will contract your ass at every corner.

Government and Corporations are trying to kill the internet as a free exchange of ideas. If they get away with banning 4chan whos next ?

Anti israeli sites ?
Jewish groups in England are trying to gather support whereby comparing Israels attacks on Gaza as being similar to Nazis attacks on jews would be considered a crime punishible by Prison time.

The internet is the modern day printing press.
"The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure." --Thomas Jefferson

"The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty and property of their constituents. There is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves, nor can they be safe with them without information. Where the press is free, and every man able to read, all is safe." --Thomas Jefferson

Anti israeli sites ?

Sigh. You do realise there are much more important issues in the world than Israel and Palestine, right? Let's not forget the war atrocities and genocide going on in Central Africa (one example of many), okay?

oh deadlyf you're so, so wrong.

I have a problem with Governments telling ISPs what to do, but in this case that isn't so.
ISPs should be free to block whatever content they want. If they want to create a broadband network without wasting their bandwidth on 4chan nonsense then they should be allowed to do so. If AT&T subscribers don't like it they should take their business elsewhere. If someone wants to create a niche ISP that will only let you access a small handful of sites and services then that would be excellent for certain customers, and would reduce the cost for doing whatever it is they're doing. Similarly if an ISP wants to target a specific community by being a net nanny as well, then they should be able to create such a business.

Pulling a swifty on existing contract holders is a bit s*** and hope people kick up some s*** over that, but ISPs tend to hide behind cowardly terms and conditions that let them do that kind of stuff.

last edited by thermite at 13:41:08 27/Jul/09

then they should be able to create such a business.

Agreed. As long as they allow users to terminate existing contracts when significant changes are made.

Rather than voting for the other side of the same coin if you want to lodge your protest against this sort of stuff (and both Labor and the Coalition do have roughly similar stances on this stuff) why not instead give your first preference etc. to one of the smaller parties that do have a policy against net censorship? Of course if you're a left winger and can find such a party on the left of politics, vote for them, and if you're a right winger and can find such a party on the right of politics, vote for them.

You can still preference whichever of the ALP and the Coalition you hate least above the other further down the ticket after all.

Sure, it's only 1 vote you might say, but at worst it'll probably have as much direct impact as preferencing the major parties first, and at least it'll send a message to those major parties that people aren't happy with their policies.

Vote for me. I'll be too busy spending all the donations and funding on sports cars, holidays, etc, to bother setting up any kind of filter. With the one exception of blocking news.com.au, of course.

thermite, i coudlnt agree more:

that is exactly how australia should handle its censoring of broadband;

government should encourage isps to be family friendly and then market them as such

perfect solution, all the wowsers are happy because they get their nice sanitised internets, im happy coz i can still watch my puppy stomping vidoes and im more than happy to be responsible for spook jnrs internets

i mite send that in an email to the krudd right now

What do you do when both parties in a 2-party system have policy agenda that is contrary to the public desire? Nobody (sane) really wants the smaller special interest parties to get a lot more power.

Feels like a f***ing dictatorship to be honest. "Sending a message" via preferences only works if the c***s are listening, which they are not.

oh deadlyf you're so, so wrong.

Haha what part? If it's the Simpsons quote, I might have to slap you.

I have a problem with Governments telling ISPs what to do, but in this case that isn't so. ISPs should be free to block whatever content they want. If they want to create a broadband network without wasting their bandwidth on 4chan nonsense then they should be allowed to do so. If AT&T subscribers don't like it they should take their business elsewhere. If someone wants to create a niche ISP that will only let you access a small handful of sites and services then that would be excellent for certain customers, and would reduce the cost for doing whatever it is they're doing. Similarly if an ISP wants to target a specific community by being a net nanny as well, then they should be able to create such a business

What happens when all the ISPs are owned by say 2 operators who both decide to block say Gay Porn or 3D shooting game servers or P2P ?

The government is stepping inside the business of the ISPs to take over the Internet in Australia by deciding what ISPs can allow their consumers to access.
Thats what happens in China.
Communism on top of Capitalism.
Chairman Krudd. The Manchurian Candidate.

you don't vote the opposite just because you don't like a few policies the current govt has
you vote for who has the least wrong policies. Just because the opposition isn't in doesn't mean they don't have s*** policies.

you don't vote the opposite just because you don't like a few policies the current govt has
you vote for who has the least wrong policies. Just because the opposition isn't in doesn't mean they don't have s*** policies.

For a long time now in Australia a party hasn't been voted in, instead one has been voted out.

that may be so, that doesn't make it right however.

I recall that the libs looked into the net filter, decided it was retarded and dropped the idea.

yet another reason why libs are the best

I've never wanted to go to that site...ever. Don't care.

One day very soon it might be your site that is blocked.

yours maybe
but not mine

I think alot of americans are blowing up about it because just like us, they fear faceless censorship that has no transparency in its process.

you don't vote the opposite just because you don't like a few policies the current govt has you vote for who has the least wrong policies. Just because the opposition isn't in doesn't mean they don't have s*** policies.

You are such an idealist. So you vote on the basis of the policies that the parties claim they support and not based on the policies they have actually proven to support? Because the policies a party have at election time and the ones they actually keep once they get into power are to very very different things. Not to mention that there are a lot of things you simply can't tell until someone is in power. Like I never knew Rudd would base decisions off of A Current Affair programs before he became PM but now I do.

Based off of your reasoning everyone in this thread should vote for the Democrats next election.

idealism > just voting the opposite

I wonder if an ISP deciding to suddenly start blocking certain websites would require amnesty on all contracts? You'd kinda hope so...

you would be able to terminate under the trade practices act - the service is not fit for the purposes it was intended i.e. downloading tentacle sex pron or whatever you are seeking to fulfill your desires.

We already know what the Libs think of censorship, it's called personal responsibility not a greater nanny-state. they gave away client side windows software to filter the Internet to anyone that wanted their Internet filtered

but the Howard hating media rideculed it for being backwards and a waste of money.

it was backwards and a waste of money though, howard-hating or not
whether something else worse comes along or not, doesn't make it any less dumb

The 'forces' behind Internet censorship are far more powerful than any Political Party here in Little China.
I have no doubt that if the Libs were in power they would do the same.

just stay the f*** out of the internet if you don't like it. what's there to "fix" about it.

for a pretty decent minority party check out the liberty and democracy party - http://www.ldp.org.au/

like most of the minorities it can seem a little idealistic and at times put ideology before practicality but it tries hard and i like that :) plus its pretty much the only true libertarian party out there, left wing on social issues and right wing on economic issues. i've preferenced them before a major party once or twice when they've run a candidate in my seat.

anyway, back on topic thermite pretty much summed it up imo.

last edited by taggs at 18:29:44 27/Jul/09

ISPs should be free to block whatever content they want

Should they? Can they still be called an "Internet Service Provider" ? How much of the internet can you block while still calling it "internet" access?

I have no real problem with a business advertising filtered internet access, as long as they call it what it is.

I am against the censorship of 4chan. It keeps the mentally ill people of the internet herded together at a site which I can easily avoid.

In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.


In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Gotta stand up for the rest of the internet before it's too late..

what happened after they came for you?

They're coming for you tonight Jim

imitation - That poem is fail. Hitler was a Catholic. The Nazis also went after the communists and trade unionists first, then the Jews.

Bad Boys Bad Boys
They're Coming For You...


Insert Will Smith an that chick when she was smoking hot..

Or into if you like :P

Ha, I used to vote Labor in federal because I didn't like the way Howard handled a lot of things but now that Labor is in power I'm going to be voting Lib for the exact same reason. Democracy simply does not work.

This is amazing. A white guy saying Democracy doesn't work.

Yet people think it's the bees knees of government.

you vote for who has the least wrong policies. Just because the opposition isn't in doesn't mean they don't have s*** policies.

Why don't they just combine their powers and form a captain planet of governments and create a wonderful country?

please outline some of the more viable alternatives to democracy.

and as fond as you are of imaginary friends, theocracy is not a correct answer.

k go

please outline some of the more viable alternatives to democracy.

Getting together in a park and having a bbq


The internet is not democracy... it allows fringe people who'd get beaten up or ridiculed until they cried and cut themselves at the BBQ to spout extremist crap.

This is amazing. A white guy saying Democracy doesn't work.

How is this not a racist statement dude - you're super quick to jump on other people for stuff like this? Is it because you're speaking about "white people"?

yeah, thats like a black guy saying fried chicken isn't awesome!@!@

please outline some of the more viable alternatives to democracy.

and as fond as you are of imaginary friends, theocracy is not a correct answer.

k go

Terrorism of course.

How is this not a racist statement dude - you're super quick to jump on other people for stuff like this? Is it because you're speaking about "white people"?

Pointing out someone's colour isn't racism. Holding it against them is.

p.s: Technocracy

last edited by greazy at 11:49:12 28/Jul/09

Democracy is fantastic and, like free markets, is one of the major social developments since the renaissance.

Minorities that are otherwise imprisoned, executed, or marginalised now have equal votes and equal status before the courts and government.

Sure democracy has struggled with the over-correction of affirmative action, proportional representation and political correctness, but I would rather struggle with those problems than having minorities abused like we are seeing in China and Iran at the moment, and was happening in Iraq under previous governments.

Democracy is great!! <3 And I say that to annoy every fascist dictatorship theocracy loving poster out there! :D

And it's also great that democracy allows its opponents to say they hate democracy. Doesn't that just make democracy even more great! YAY!

it absolutely is the bees knees of government greazy

This is amazing. A white guy saying Democracy doesn't work.

If marginalising people based on the colour of their skin isn't racism then what is it? Hypocrisy? The guy who invented Communism was white, the royal family (Imperialism) is white and the leader of the greatest democratic country in the world is black.

That aside, it's a Simpsons quote and not meant to be taken seriously.

p.s: Technocracy

please elaborate.

also what the f*** is obes on about?