Well, folks...

I have a thesis.

It is 20200 words, including bibliography and other faffing about. It is 96 pages long, and it has a frontispiece, a title page, acknowledgements and a table of contents. Also I somehow managed to edit all of it last weekend AND write big chunks of the third chapter AND write the conclusion.

It is now in the hands of Awesome, who, being awesome, is editing it for me. I am very glad she gave me a deadline of Monday by which to have it in her inbox, or I don't doubt I'd have been awake until 5am next Sunday-Monday, and since the bastard thing is due next Monday, that would have been bad.

I *may* also have sorted out my grudge against the Sermo Lupi ad Anglos. If we're lucky.

~

In other news... I've been spamming all my own blogs in my procrastination. You may or may not be interested in my NP post on Arthurian fanfic and medieval tradition. Iris, I did as I threatened and rec'd you with the highest praise ;).

More on Internet Filtering

active_apathy has her two bob to say about the government's ISP filtering plan. Which is GREAT, since she has a really wide readership. Plus, there's an Avenue Q joke.

Eggs Maledict had his rant on Friday, and noted that, at that stage, there was only one Australian news report on the non-opt-out plan, but we do rate a mention in The New York Times, one in the Inquirer and a mention by the leader of the Swedish Pirate Party, the latter in reference to the Swedish government's wiretapping plans. There may be more articles by now, but a cursory glance at the SMH will show you that the mainstream media still haven't decided it's worth remark.

Active Apathy had a link to Electronic Frontiers Australia, whose rules of incorporation state:

OBJECTS AND PURPOSES
1. To protect and promote the civil liberties of users of computer based communications systems and of those affected by their use.
2. To advocate the amendment of laws and regulations in Australia and elsewhere which restrict free speech and unfettered access to information.
3. To educate the community at large about the social, political, and civil liberties issues involved in the use of computer based communications systems.
4. To support, encourage and advise on the development and use of computer based communication systems, and related innovations.
5. To research and advise on the application of the law (both current and proposed) to computer based communication systems and related technologies.

Y'know what? I like these guys. I'm seriously considering joining, which is saying something given that I've stubbornly avoided all forms of political activism right throughout her uni career.

Now, let's consider some of the articulate information concerning and arguments against the filter which the EFA and nocleanfeed.com have to offer:

( long discursive discussion of how filtering is supposed to work, and how it in fact does not )

Now, as the EFA state, all this effort will in fact do NOTHING to protect children and other internet users from the threats which the government has identified as most prevalent on the 'net:

Labor’s own policy document, Labor’s Plan for Cyber-safety, identifies several risks children face online, including:

* online identity theft
* cyber-bullying
* having photos published online without their permission
* computer addiction
* picking up a virus or trojan
* online activities of child predators

None of these risks would be in any way mitigated by the clean feed internet filter. This all suggests that resources to protect and educate children about online risks and appropriate online behaviour could be spent better than on the clean feed, especially as free filters are already available to all parents concerned with content risks for their children.

This 10.5 million dollar package is 10.5 million dollars which is not being spent on tracking and charging child predators. It's 10.5 million dollars which is not being spent on policies and avenues by which to prevent cyber-bullying and/or prosecute those who are guilty of cyber-bullying. It's not even stopping anyone from publishing photos of them online without their permission, even explicit photos: any halfway-savvy predator or bully will have access to an anonymising service which will connect him/her to an overseas ISP and allow them to upload to overseas sites. All this plan will do in that regard is prevent australians from viewing that content. I don't know about you, but the idea that someone could upload a photo of my child (had I a child) to a site which is blocked in Australia, which means I might never find out about it, is really quite disturbing.

And does that mean that if it's not visible in Australia, Australian law enforcement isn't going to help you? Out of sight, out of mind, so to speak?

ETA: Aaaand this is why activist groups come in handy sometimes. The EFA have a list of ways to complain to the government, including a form letter you can edit according to your needs and send on to Senator Stephen Conroy.

Observe:

( The Nesting Habits of the Thesis!Bird )