fuck. this fucking site is fucking fucked.
fucking wordpress.
::Edit:: I’m in the process of restoring the archives. Love and kisses to the tool who managed to totally fuck the old site by inserting something like this:
<div id=wp_internal style=position:absolute;left:-8163px;top:-3600px>
followed by a really long list of spammy links, over and over again.
Yeah, thanks a lot. Fuckwit.
Here’s Pegz (and some other familiar faces) in an unusually sexy oz hip-hop video - No Attachments (12MB H.264 x MP4).
I’m not sure what’s happening here, because everyone knows that Australian Hip-hop is like the internet - there are no girls involved.
Following up on (and giving me another chance to use Soviet Ruddkips), I’ve been waiting for Dale Clapperton from EFA’s response to the Rudd government’s plan for mandatory ISP-level internet censorship. I was waiting, and yet STILL managed to miss it! Anyway, on Wednesday, EFA published a press-release roundly condemning the government’s plans:
“Waving the ’save the children’ flag may be good politics, but it ignores serious technological problems which will likely cause the proposed scheme to fail,” said EFA Chair Dale Clapperton. “Furthermore, Australia is supposed to be a liberal democracy where adults have the freedom to say and read what they want, not just what the Government decides is ‘appropriate’ for them.”
“These announcements smack of the condescending paternalism which contributed to the downfall of the Howard government,” Clapperton continued. “The proposals threaten the free speech rights of every Australian, and our concerns will not be silenced by Government sound bites equating free speech with access to child pornography.”
EFA has previously raised concerns about Australia joining North Korea, China and Burma in the club of nations who censor their citizens’ access to the internet. While the Minister makes no apologies for this alarming development, he has given us little reason to put our faith in his bureaucrats to administer such a system competently, transparently and fairly.
“Who decides what is ‘appropriate’ for adult Australians to read on the Internet, and according to what standards?”, asked Clapperton. “What will happen if the Government decides that information about abortion or gay marriage is ‘inappropriate’ at the behest of Family First Senator Steve Fielding?”
In an attempt to dismiss the policy’s critics, Senator Conroy said “If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd-Labor Government is going to disagree.” EFA notes, however, that child pornography is already illegal, and very unlikely to come to the attention of either the casual web user or the censors themselves. “senator Conroy’s attempt to equate freedom of speech with access to child pornography is a transparent attempt to deter criticism of this fundamentally flawed proposal,” said Mr Clapperton.
[...]
ISP based filtering will not make the Internet safe for children, and may even cause harm in and of itself. If parents are deceived into believing that a ‘filtered’ Internet service is safe for children, they will be less likely to take sensible precautions such as supervising their children while they use the Internet.”
At a time when all sides of politics acknowledge the importance of developing our information economy, EFA feels that this announcement sends the wrong message to the rest of the world. “The Coalition was rightly ridiculed by the rest of the world when they announced in the late 1990’s that they would censor Australian’s Internet access. The Coalition, at least, sensibly realised that their proposals were technologically infeasible. It seems that the current Minister with responsibility for the Internet has yet to learn that lesson.”
The editorial in yesterday’s Courier-Mail largely echoed these sentiments:
BLANKET censorship of any kind in a democracy should be viewed with deep suspicion.
And so it is with the Rudd Government’s proposal to require all internet service providers in this country to provide a “clean feed” to Australian subscribers.
This will be achieved by filtering “inappropriate” websites - those with explicit sexual or violent content - at the ISP level.
Ostensibly the move is designed to protect children from accessing unsavoury web content, but it will catch every Australian internet user in the process. Some cynics might also suggest that the policy is at least in part aimed at appeasing some independent members of the Senate, such as Family First’s Steve Fielding.
What is to be deemed inappropriate will be determined by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, although we are yet to see any clear definitions of what will be permissible and what will be banned.
Those users who wish to access unfiltered content online will have to contact their ISP and formally “opt out” of the filtering, whereas the previous government had proposed a system whereby subscribers could “opt in” to a clean feed. Will there be a register of Australian internet users who elect to “opt out” for whatever reason?
[...]
The other danger with this style of censorship is the ability of regulators, once it is in place, to extend the parameters of what is unacceptable and deserving of a ban - a creeping cancer of government censorship in the worst-case scenario.
Ultimately, however, it comes down to parental responsibility. Sex and violence have existed since the dawn of time, and responsible parents have managed to shield their young from the worst of it without the compulsory help of a Big Brother.
The Rudd Government should concentrate on delivering on its promise to improve broadband access and efficiency in this country, and not try to impose itself as some draconian nanny watching over all of our shoulders.
Leave the parents to do the parenting.
That is all.
Four rowdy motherfuckers one night at the HQ in Adelaide = cinematic magic (”The Greatest Hit” “And Now For Something Completely Different”; 22MB H.264 x MP4)!
(Images snatched from Reflux’s MySpace)
Cop it now. It’s how hip-hop is supposed to sound.
I consider myself fairly open minded, but fat admiration is something that I just cannot understand (32MB H.264 x MP4).
ZOMFG INTARWEBS ONLY SPECIAL FEATURE 11!!1
“Debbie” animatooned:
The creative process, SBX style, from Words from the City ($):
Part 1 (15MB H.264 x MP4).
Part 2 (9MB H.264 x MP4).
Heh. It sho’ ain’t no Snoop Dogg style crib!
ZOMFG NEW-YEARS-DAY, INTARWEB ONLY, SPECIAL FEATURES !!1!ONE11!!:
Here’s Exodus (4MB MP3) from Mortar’s Sacred Geometry ($). Suck it up fags!
And, here’s some more stuff:
The beast has taken to sitting *between* the stacked plastic chairs. Who knows…
This has been another slightly out-of-focus post brought to you by my phone. Suck it up.
Does that program even exist anymore? Stupid Yahoo.
I’m not sure that my cameraphone has ever quite managed an in-focus photo. Still cute though. (The dog that is. Although the phone is also quite the chick magnet. Nothing draws in the ladies like shiny devices that do many things, poorly.) Enough.
Conjoined fruit and vegetables are teh w00t.
…and it seems I’m not the only person who thinks so.
[update, 10.11,2005 @ 11.56am]: After an exhaustive round of fact-checking that ran late into the night, I can finally confirm that the bananas have been eaten. When confronted about the eating of the conjoined bananas, the eater reported that “…they were a bit much. It was like eating two bananas at once”. Indeed.