coljac
  • Entries
  • Popular
Recent Posts
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • April 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • April 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • November 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • April 2007
Popular Articles
  • Why The Greens will definitely block the filter (15)
  • Superfreakonomics and bad incentives (10)
  • Blurring the lines (9)
  • Why I joined the Greens (7)
  • Hey, Tweeter. You're fired! (6)
  • Home
  • About
  • Media
  • Writing
  • Contact
  • Astro

Data retention TV spot

Posted by Colin on Jul 28, 2010 in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Data retention TV spot

I did a short spot on Channel 7’s “The Morning Show” (which was helpfully  captured by a supporter on the web).

The issue surrounds this story that details how the Government have been secretly lobbying ISPs to come up with a new and far-reaching data retention system. This would oblige ISPs to preserve logs all all activities – up to and possibly including things like proxy logs that would detail web browsing history – in case they are needed in a criminal investigation.

What I didn’t get to say on the spot below – which was cut shorter than I expected due to a story about Orlando Bloom’s honeymoon – is that the real privacy risks come from the potential for data breaches and possibly rogue employees. Once these large databases exists, there can be no guarantee about what will happen with them; history has shown us that. Therefore the onus is on the Government to demonstrate why they would be necessary. Rather than do that, they have conducted the discussions in the utmost secrecy, and journalist Ben Grubb’s FOI request yielded a ridiculously paltry result – apparently due to fears  of sparking a “premature unnecessary debate”.

Can debate about a far-reaching policy like this ever be unnecessary? Is it premature when the Attorney-General’s department is already in meetings with your ISP?

Comments are closed.

Archives

  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • April 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • April 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • November 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • April 2007

Blogroll

  • Andy Social
  • EFA
  • Larvatus Prodeo
  • Nic Suzor
  • Open Internet
  • Pharyngula
  • Somebody Think of the Children
  • Stilgherrian
Designed by Elegant Themes | Powered by Wordpress