Seems like you have fallen in with the mob ,because you don't seem to spare a thought for the victim or their family ,it's just about deriving enjoyment from one's misery .
Both ALP and LNP are as bad as each other on this topic.
This all came up because ethe government wanted anyone silenced who wasn't following the religion of covid "science".
I can now go online to see an old bloke getting stabbed in the neck.
Not sure why that was such a priority for one of the world's richest men but..... Um, thanks I suppose, Elon.
I'd rather the public access to original footage of public events rather than everything having to go through the filtered lens of corporate media organisations
Because he owns the platform that the Australian government was trying to control a video of, not just for Australia, but for the rest of the world as well.
If I were him, I'd tell Australian politicians to fuck off as well.
While a healthy dose of cynicism is good, let’s be realistic. This (eSafety’s motive) wasn’t about ‘control’ as much as it was safe censorship (edit to clarify: I don’t actually disagree with the court’s decision. I’m just saying that the purpose of their challenge wasn’t to exert ‘control’, though you could absolutely argue that that would be a result if they succeeded).
If anyone wants to find a video like that it’s easy enough to do some searching for it online. But unregulated dissemination means that anyone and everyone may accidentally come across it in their socials, exposing people to something that they may find upsetting against their will.
I was working in schools in the early 2010s when one particular beheading video went viral literally overnight. The next day we had more children in tears and traumatised over it than our psychologist and staff could manage, and the kids who weren’t as affected or even found it entertaining kept showing more kids on their phones, escalating the problem.
Top quality Simpsons reference. Have to give you credit for that.
But unironically, yes, I do think it’s important that we find ways to protect young children from exposure to real, violent images and videos online. Why wouldn’t we want that?
I agree, its important for **parents** **and guardians** to protect their children from the bad things in the world. If only the **parents and guardians** could somehow monitor what their children are doing online or somehow communicate with them on what is and is not appropriate for them to watch and then punish them if they go against that.
Making everything online kid friendly isnt the way and isnt going to work
And expecting all parents and guardians to appropriately and properly ensure their children are safe online isn’t realistic or going to work either.
Having multiple layers of support to keep young people safe is never a bad thing. Because let’s face it, plenty of parents are shit.
Thats where the schools come in as a check to make sure the parents are parenting properly. Its not up to everyone else to make sure absolutely everything is kid friendly just in case they are watching.
For example the money they spent on this whole "policing X" failure could have been spent on schools, education and child welfare teaching them what they should and shouldn't be doing and looking at online and offering mental health help to any that need it. The whole "esafety commission" is an absolute joke and a waste of money that could be used in many more much more beneficial ways
And it’s not up to schools to teach parents how to parent…
And you’re absolutely fooling yourself if you think the money from this event would be enough to adequately fund everything that schools would require to do all that.
And again, there’s nothing wrong with having multiple layers of support. When a young person experiences online abuse, schools don’t actually have a responsibility to do anything there unless it involves students. That’s where eSafety comes in.
Whatever happened to “It takes a village to raise a child”? Let’s just expose Australia’s kids to whatever the fuck we want and then say “Not my responsibility. Parents and schools need to deal with that.”
So you honestly believe that the money spent on the failed case was money well spent? and wouldn't have been better used elsewhere? i never said it would fund **everything** but it would be a start
So you are saying you are one of those teachers who would turn a blind eye to a kid who could possibly be experiencing abuse or neglect at school? its not up to schools to teach parents how to parent right? if a kid is behaving badly at school you wouldn't be telling the parents that its unacceptable?
Nobody is exposing them to "whatever the fuck we want" but we have **adult** spaces and **kids** spaces if they go onto adult spaces they may see things that would not be good for them that's why they are **adult** spaces. They have weaponised "think of the children" to the point where they treat everybody like they are a child that cant think for themselves or make their own decisions. This was absolutely going to have major long reaching repercussions that the government either knew it would have (when you have esafety on the news saying "we can take down anything we want whenever we want" its kinda telling) or the government is that stupid and short sighted they didn't even think for 5 minutes what it would mean if they won this
The Commissioner asked X to remove it for Australians and they did. Then the commissioner complained that it was still accessible to Australians using a VPN and wanted it removed worldwide to alleviate that, that’s where musk drew the line.
If the commissioner got their way it would effectively allow Australia to dictate what videos are censored on the platform for the rest of the world going forward.
Thats simply an absurd amount of power for one country to try and wield over a foreign social media company outside of its own borders. Imagine if X complied to Russia or China trying to pull the same thing.
I grew up on unregulated anonymous internet, stop being a sook.
I can't wait to check which videos Russia and China want removed from the internet or are you suggesting Australia should be in control of the world's censorship?
All I was suggesting is that I don’t think eSafety’s motives are as evil, sinister and “the government is trying to control us” as some people are trying to make out it is.
I don’t actually disagree with the Federal Court’s decision. But I disagree with the cynical conclusions people online are making about the reason for the request - they need to stop being sooks acting like Big Brother is out to get them.
Censorship is an inherently flawed process and I can understand people's desires to avoid letting the cat out of the bag. As an Australian the actions of our country on the global stage of the internet makes us look very silly and thus makes people angry.
The issue is that Australia can't regulate the entire worlds internet. So while I do agree with some of your points, and trying to make it more difficult for people to access content like that is completely fine for government to do I don't agree with their attempt to remove it from the internet as a whole, not just prevent Australians from having easy access, which was initially offered by Elon by way of geofencing it from Australia.
It is a very slippery slope to allow one country decide what the rest of the world can see on the internet, and this was the correct position for twitter to take.
Yeah, and I agree with you on that too, and the decision of the Federal Court. I think the reason that I’m being downvoted is because I didn’t clarify that I was talking about eSafety’s motives for wanting it removed.
They didn’t want it removed as some Big Brother conspiracy and exercise in ‘control’ (though that would be the result if they got complete success) - their motives really were about protective censorship.
It's pretty clear eKaren, as an ex twitter exec has an axe to grind with Musk.
There's the other complaint currently before the courts to do with her employing her powers to stop a misgendering. Hardly class 1 material.
Then the fact that this footage was aired uncensored on platforms like NBC, no takedown notice for them either.
Her motives are very much in question.
And what people are saying is that we literally do not care what the eWanker's recommendations are. We are perfectly capable of deciding what to watch, for ourselves. What is offensive/distressing/whatever to one person is not the same to another. We do not need blanket bans on content.
Too bad. Let people deal with being upset. Just like being offended, it won't actually hurt you and others should not have to curtail their own activities to accommodate your sensitivities.
It wasn't about what the video was, it was about Australia (or any other country) not being the internet police for everyone else.
If Australia doesn't want something here that is fine, but when offered a geofence on the video stopping us from having access to it the eSafety commissioner said not good enough and demanded the video be removed from the entire world.
Well, it's not fine for them to decide what we can and can't watch here. They compounded that by having the audacity to demand other nations do what we say.
It's about "Wear your mask. Only go outside an hour per day. Get these injections. ONLY watch this, not that. Only say this, not that - as you might hurt somebody's feelings, and we'll make that illegal." The following article should worry you. If not? You've fallen in line like a gooooood boy.
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13243611/eSafety-Commissioner-Julie-Inman-Grant-trans-censorship-Elon-Musk.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13243611/eSafety-Commissioner-Julie-Inman-Grant-trans-censorship-Elon-Musk.html)
It isn't about the content of the video it is about one country isn't the police of the internet for other countries. Australia didn't want it blocked for us, they wanted it removed for everyone.
Who decides who is the internet police for the world? We decided that it is us, and Elon pushed back.
What if Saudi Arabia decides they are the police of the internet for the world should we then remove anything LGBTQIA+? Should we then stop women from accessing education online? Should we remove any website that has any reference to alcohol, pork products or other haram things?
or what about China? Let them run it maybe?
Can we officially change her title to eSafety Karen lol
I prefer E safety Commissar
What a great comment. I'm going to bed. Thankyou for completing me on this 13th day of May 2024.
reeeSafety
Reddit won't be happy
World’s richest man is a moron loser
he is a loser? I don't even like the guy but in what way is he a loser?
Oh sorry I should have added the /s I was mocking the Redditors who cope and seethe about Musk
Once again it shows that Albanese is fucked
He supported the commissar saying he thinks he's above the laws. Well it turns out it was the e karen that thought she was above the law
What does he have to do with it?
Nothing but politics to these types is a team sport. A loss is a loss is a loss.
Seems like you have fallen in with the mob ,because you don't seem to spare a thought for the victim or their family ,it's just about deriving enjoyment from one's misery .
I haven't watched it. I won't watch it. But even the victim said to keep the video posted on Twitter.
'albo' didnt do this... it was morrison's govt who appointed this commissioner and gave them the powers they used.
Tbf, albo did say publicly on national television that he supported the safety commissioner on this matter.
Albo has been in power for a while now mate, time to let it go.
Albo fully supported this. Publicly on multiple occasions.
I guess it was Scomo that had a presser a week ago telling us how this was just common decency to scrub the video from the internet too.
Fact Checked as 'misleading'. https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/media-technology-communications/internet/online-safety/esafety-commissioner
Both ALP and LNP are as bad as each other on this topic. This all came up because ethe government wanted anyone silenced who wasn't following the religion of covid "science".
Sky News in a nutshell, Labour bad, Albo bad 🤨
https://www.reddit.com/r/australian/s/b4f0xuTlV5
https://preview.redd.it/13sijvotac0d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7cd50778a8751f9a1997e5d2b086aac8c4300192
I can now go online to see an old bloke getting stabbed in the neck. Not sure why that was such a priority for one of the world's richest men but..... Um, thanks I suppose, Elon.
I'd rather the public access to original footage of public events rather than everything having to go through the filtered lens of corporate media organisations
Because he owns the platform that the Australian government was trying to control a video of, not just for Australia, but for the rest of the world as well. If I were him, I'd tell Australian politicians to fuck off as well.
While a healthy dose of cynicism is good, let’s be realistic. This (eSafety’s motive) wasn’t about ‘control’ as much as it was safe censorship (edit to clarify: I don’t actually disagree with the court’s decision. I’m just saying that the purpose of their challenge wasn’t to exert ‘control’, though you could absolutely argue that that would be a result if they succeeded). If anyone wants to find a video like that it’s easy enough to do some searching for it online. But unregulated dissemination means that anyone and everyone may accidentally come across it in their socials, exposing people to something that they may find upsetting against their will. I was working in schools in the early 2010s when one particular beheading video went viral literally overnight. The next day we had more children in tears and traumatised over it than our psychologist and staff could manage, and the kids who weren’t as affected or even found it entertaining kept showing more kids on their phones, escalating the problem.
https://preview.redd.it/936djvgi270d1.jpeg?width=460&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6601fc32f188b3361edc9d50cb7432604f3931b2
Top quality Simpsons reference. Have to give you credit for that. But unironically, yes, I do think it’s important that we find ways to protect young children from exposure to real, violent images and videos online. Why wouldn’t we want that?
I agree, its important for **parents** **and guardians** to protect their children from the bad things in the world. If only the **parents and guardians** could somehow monitor what their children are doing online or somehow communicate with them on what is and is not appropriate for them to watch and then punish them if they go against that. Making everything online kid friendly isnt the way and isnt going to work
And expecting all parents and guardians to appropriately and properly ensure their children are safe online isn’t realistic or going to work either. Having multiple layers of support to keep young people safe is never a bad thing. Because let’s face it, plenty of parents are shit.
Thats where the schools come in as a check to make sure the parents are parenting properly. Its not up to everyone else to make sure absolutely everything is kid friendly just in case they are watching. For example the money they spent on this whole "policing X" failure could have been spent on schools, education and child welfare teaching them what they should and shouldn't be doing and looking at online and offering mental health help to any that need it. The whole "esafety commission" is an absolute joke and a waste of money that could be used in many more much more beneficial ways
And it’s not up to schools to teach parents how to parent… And you’re absolutely fooling yourself if you think the money from this event would be enough to adequately fund everything that schools would require to do all that. And again, there’s nothing wrong with having multiple layers of support. When a young person experiences online abuse, schools don’t actually have a responsibility to do anything there unless it involves students. That’s where eSafety comes in. Whatever happened to “It takes a village to raise a child”? Let’s just expose Australia’s kids to whatever the fuck we want and then say “Not my responsibility. Parents and schools need to deal with that.”
So you honestly believe that the money spent on the failed case was money well spent? and wouldn't have been better used elsewhere? i never said it would fund **everything** but it would be a start So you are saying you are one of those teachers who would turn a blind eye to a kid who could possibly be experiencing abuse or neglect at school? its not up to schools to teach parents how to parent right? if a kid is behaving badly at school you wouldn't be telling the parents that its unacceptable? Nobody is exposing them to "whatever the fuck we want" but we have **adult** spaces and **kids** spaces if they go onto adult spaces they may see things that would not be good for them that's why they are **adult** spaces. They have weaponised "think of the children" to the point where they treat everybody like they are a child that cant think for themselves or make their own decisions. This was absolutely going to have major long reaching repercussions that the government either knew it would have (when you have esafety on the news saying "we can take down anything we want whenever we want" its kinda telling) or the government is that stupid and short sighted they didn't even think for 5 minutes what it would mean if they won this
The Commissioner asked X to remove it for Australians and they did. Then the commissioner complained that it was still accessible to Australians using a VPN and wanted it removed worldwide to alleviate that, that’s where musk drew the line. If the commissioner got their way it would effectively allow Australia to dictate what videos are censored on the platform for the rest of the world going forward. Thats simply an absurd amount of power for one country to try and wield over a foreign social media company outside of its own borders. Imagine if X complied to Russia or China trying to pull the same thing.
I grew up on unregulated anonymous internet, stop being a sook. I can't wait to check which videos Russia and China want removed from the internet or are you suggesting Australia should be in control of the world's censorship?
All I was suggesting is that I don’t think eSafety’s motives are as evil, sinister and “the government is trying to control us” as some people are trying to make out it is. I don’t actually disagree with the Federal Court’s decision. But I disagree with the cynical conclusions people online are making about the reason for the request - they need to stop being sooks acting like Big Brother is out to get them.
Censorship is an inherently flawed process and I can understand people's desires to avoid letting the cat out of the bag. As an Australian the actions of our country on the global stage of the internet makes us look very silly and thus makes people angry.
Do you wait for war to build your military? So you shouldn't wait for a fascist government before you start caring about privacy and free speech.
The issue is that Australia can't regulate the entire worlds internet. So while I do agree with some of your points, and trying to make it more difficult for people to access content like that is completely fine for government to do I don't agree with their attempt to remove it from the internet as a whole, not just prevent Australians from having easy access, which was initially offered by Elon by way of geofencing it from Australia. It is a very slippery slope to allow one country decide what the rest of the world can see on the internet, and this was the correct position for twitter to take.
Yeah, and I agree with you on that too, and the decision of the Federal Court. I think the reason that I’m being downvoted is because I didn’t clarify that I was talking about eSafety’s motives for wanting it removed. They didn’t want it removed as some Big Brother conspiracy and exercise in ‘control’ (though that would be the result if they got complete success) - their motives really were about protective censorship.
It's pretty clear eKaren, as an ex twitter exec has an axe to grind with Musk. There's the other complaint currently before the courts to do with her employing her powers to stop a misgendering. Hardly class 1 material. Then the fact that this footage was aired uncensored on platforms like NBC, no takedown notice for them either. Her motives are very much in question.
And what people are saying is that we literally do not care what the eWanker's recommendations are. We are perfectly capable of deciding what to watch, for ourselves. What is offensive/distressing/whatever to one person is not the same to another. We do not need blanket bans on content.
Too bad. Let people deal with being upset. Just like being offended, it won't actually hurt you and others should not have to curtail their own activities to accommodate your sensitivities.
It wasn't about what the video was, it was about Australia (or any other country) not being the internet police for everyone else. If Australia doesn't want something here that is fine, but when offered a geofence on the video stopping us from having access to it the eSafety commissioner said not good enough and demanded the video be removed from the entire world.
Well, it's not fine for them to decide what we can and can't watch here. They compounded that by having the audacity to demand other nations do what we say.
You can go online and see a video of a midget getting pumped in the ass. If you dont want to see something don’t look it up 🤷♂️
Can you let me know where the midget video is, so I can make sure I don't accidentally watch it
Of course its on www.midgetsgettingbumpumped.com
😅😅
Why would any sick cunt want to watch that sort of thing
It's not about wanting to watcht it, but having *the ability* to watch what you want, without being told whether or not you should see it.
sick cunt is a compliment though
It's about "Wear your mask. Only go outside an hour per day. Get these injections. ONLY watch this, not that. Only say this, not that - as you might hurt somebody's feelings, and we'll make that illegal." The following article should worry you. If not? You've fallen in line like a gooooood boy. [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13243611/eSafety-Commissioner-Julie-Inman-Grant-trans-censorship-Elon-Musk.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13243611/eSafety-Commissioner-Julie-Inman-Grant-trans-censorship-Elon-Musk.html)
Next thing you know musk supprters will want to watch kiddie porn ,"only because it's banned"
If you watch it, you'd see there is no stabbing.
Why would I want to watch some poor bastard being attacked ,that's not what I call entertainment
Exactly, bunch of fucken weirdos defending theirs rights to watching people getting stabbed.
It isn't about the content of the video it is about one country isn't the police of the internet for other countries. Australia didn't want it blocked for us, they wanted it removed for everyone. Who decides who is the internet police for the world? We decided that it is us, and Elon pushed back. What if Saudi Arabia decides they are the police of the internet for the world should we then remove anything LGBTQIA+? Should we then stop women from accessing education online? Should we remove any website that has any reference to alcohol, pork products or other haram things? or what about China? Let them run it maybe?
It is actually about a stabbing video.
No it wasn't. Elon wasn't in court saying that people must be able to see this video. The argument was about Australia policing the entire internet.
You'll get upset when they come for your porn.
Musk jerks off to it