Don't have an account? Create one!

News Stories

AuthorMessage
Meagan.
Thinking Happy Thoughts
Meagan.
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 462
September 3rd, 2008 at 08:43pm
Wow thats really scary.
I know that no town is safe but with Laurieton being so small and everyone bascially knowing each other you kind of think that nothing like that would ever happen.

But I mean when 2 teenages are playing with a loaded gun it was bound to go off.
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
September 10th, 2008 at 05:26am
A trip to the beginning of the universe

Personally, I love how casual this sentence is;

"It is possible the machine could generate extremely small black holes. Some fear these mini-black holes could merge and become one big black hole that would swallow up the earth and perhaps our solar system."
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
September 10th, 2008 at 05:43am

The best thing I've seen written about it so far is from news.com.au:
"We're not dead ... yet. The Large Hadron Collider experiment is now underway and as far as we can tell, we're still in one piece. For now."

LMAO. I love it xD
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
September 10th, 2008 at 06:05am
I really think no one believes that it's going to kill us, that's why everyone's joking about it.

Me and my friend were joking about how we're going to hell and were getting our slippers ready etc.
patrick wolf
Salute You in Your Grave
patrick wolf
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Posts: 2326
September 11th, 2008 at 03:50am
I love how the people saying that the world was going to end were all hippies lmao
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
September 11th, 2008 at 04:48am
Turns out a girl in India offed herself, fearing that the world was going to end.


All because all the doomsdayers we all "THE WORLD IS GONNA END!"


No one with any real brains and a sound knowledge of Physics truly thought that was gonna happen. The media loved playing on it. They keep emphasising what it wasn't; an experiment that might end the world. They're basically responsible.
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
September 30th, 2008 at 03:55am
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
October 29th, 2008 at 02:22am

Thoughts, anybody?

Personally, I think the whole thing is ridiculous.
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
October 29th, 2008 at 02:56am
Cam and I were talking about this last night -- I'm not a fan. It's going to cost way too much and do nothing. People have gotten around the filter in other countries. I mean, come on, it's the internet. You can't effectively ban ANYTHING. There's always loopholes to get what you want.

Also, I don't like being told what to do. I don't like being suppressed. Part of what I consider being Australian is freedom. Now, I most likely won't ever want to access one of the sites this filter is aiming to stop... but the thing is, where does it end? Once they take away that freedom, what else are they gonna take away on the internet? I don't particularly like following the Chinese route.
kayles
Bleeding on the Floor
kayles
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 1078
October 29th, 2008 at 06:12am
oh so australia is chucking out the freedom we pride ourselves on and making like the chinese? good work ruddy (Y)
</sarcasm>
sez
Bleeding on the Floor
sez
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 1416
October 29th, 2008 at 09:40am
Yeah, not happy about it. Like you said Rhiannon, I don't like being told what to do, and even though it's pretty unlikely I'll ever want to get onto a site that they're banning, it won't ever end, and maybe one day they'll ban forums with the word 'suicide' or 'anorexia' in anywhere, and gah. Stupid. Definitley not going to work.
sookeh.
Crash Queen
sookeh.
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 32114
October 30th, 2008 at 06:55am
will this filter block things like sites which broadcast tv and movies? (eg. surfthechannel.net).
because i thought i heard mention of it blocking illegal sites.
and if that is the case, it will extremely inconvenient.
sez
Bleeding on the Floor
sez
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 1416
October 30th, 2008 at 07:26am
It will be extremely inconvenient. I don't know about those sites, but I'd guess they'd try to.

Flamingo bashing =(
Dan.
Demolition Lover
Dan.
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 16770
October 30th, 2008 at 07:44am
From what I have read, the filters can not track file sharing software and P2P networks. They can not track emails as well. As for sites like that Agnes, I do not know if they will be blocked. I am not too sure about torrents either.

These filters have a high rate of false positives, just like any type of filter, meaning that they will identify sites as illegal even when they are not. The Government is saying that the filters will have a rate of 1%, but realistically it will be more higher than that. There is roughly 2+ billion websites on the internet, so by taking their 1% means that 20 million websites will be falsely identified as illegal.

sez:
Oh wow. D: Why would anyone do such a thing?
Plus I didn't know that flamingoes could live to that age.
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
October 30th, 2008 at 08:20am
^ I heard that it was aimed at blocking torrents also.

Will not happen. People loooove their illegal music. They will find a way around it.
the.sound.of.black
Jazz Hands
the.sound.of.black
Age: -
Gender: Female
Posts: 281
November 4th, 2008 at 05:52am
asha molly.:

Thoughts, anybody?

Personally, I think the whole thing is ridiculous.


Most ridiculous idea ever.

It will slow down our already slow internet speeds, all for the sake of 'protecting the children'. Right.


Leave our porn alone Laughing
spencer smith.
Devil's Got Your Number
spencer smith.
Age: 28
Gender: -
Posts: 36167
November 4th, 2008 at 06:01am
The general idea is not so bad, I suppose. They probably think it will lower the numbers of people with eating disorders and people wanting to participate in euthanasia, but what about for research purposes?
People are always going to find ways to hack things and make new websites that will go under the radar so to speak, I think it's just going to be a giant waste of money.

They already have people out there that look out for codewords to eradicate sites like the Anarchist's Cookbook and child pornography, but even then it takes them time to find these sites and delete them. How do they even expect to go about putting a giant parental lock on the entire country's internet?
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
November 4th, 2008 at 06:27pm

Plus they can only really take down sites with such content that are hosted in Australia, and people will probably find a way to get around it and find similar sites that are hosted in other countries.

I agree that it's ok in theory, but as Shannon said, what about research?
Also, what about discussion of issues like euthanasia? To be honest, I think shutting off any discussion about euthanasia in Australia would be wrong.
It's a massive issue, and there is so much legal debate about it, so why shut out the voice of the wider public?
the.sound.of.black
Jazz Hands
the.sound.of.black
Age: -
Gender: Female
Posts: 281
November 5th, 2008 at 04:07am
asha molly, sites hosted in other countries will be filtered, not just Australian hosted sites.

Research won't really matter. They don't care :p
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
November 5th, 2008 at 04:59am

... I never said it wouldn't be filtered?
I said that content hosted within Australia would be taken down, but if it's hosted overseas would be left up and thus subject to the filter, which people will no doubt eventually find a way around