Help Has Arrived For Australians Worried About 'Spams & Scams' Coming Through The Portal

from the filter-this dept

We recently wrote about how Australian Minister for Broadband, Stephen Conroy, lover of government censorship and surveillance over the internet, had his "series of tubes" moment when he declared that 20,000 people were "getting infected by these spams, or scams, that come through, the portal." Not one to miss out on an opportunity, it appears that an Australian consumer electronics firm, Kogan, has decided to help out Conroy and all those other "victims." Reader cofiem points us to a new product listing specifically for making Australians safe from "spams and scams that come through the portal":
See, Conroy? No regulations needed... Maybe you can work out a deal with some of those charities sourcing mosquito nets...

Update: As pointed out in the comments, they've also put together this fantastic video commercial for it:


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Satisfied Customer, Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 4:29am

    G'day

    I just received mine today!
    This is a wonderful invention and I would recommend this prodct to everyone, not just Aussies.
    Have to run, got shrimp on the barbie ...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    ComputerAddict (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 5:01am

    Brilliant! Simple, Elegant, Now if they only made one where the mesh was tight enough from people's fingers slipping through the net and using the keyboard we'd really be safe.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 5:02am

    Just goes to show the world needs more satire, my day feels better already

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Steve R. (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 5:32am

    Unexplored Issues

    Mike's comment "See, Conroy? No regulations needed... " raises a pro-regulation concept that tends to be overlooked. While this is a humorous spoof, it still raises the issue of why should we have to BUY a product to protect ourselves?

    If companies/individuals are not ethical enough to control their avarice and the product clearly appears phony, regulatory action would then be justified. We pay taxes for a reason. Under the mantra of "less regulation" why should we be "forced" to pay a protection tax to a company (your local mob affiliate) for protection.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      nasch (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 3:36pm

      Re: Unexplored Issues

      I don't get what you mean. Nobody is making you buy anything. Fraud is already illegal, the point is that trying to impose a government filter on the internet (for anything - fraud, dissent, child porn, etc) will be, at best, ineffective.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Steve R. (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 6:46pm

        Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

        You must be oblivious to the junk mail, telemarketing calls, viagra emails, lottery winning emails, that you receive including dubious ads for virus protection, and spyware protection.

        No, no one is "forcing" you to buy anything, the point you are missing is that companies believe they can intrude into your personal space, call you during dinner, use your valuable time in the name of selling you garbage. Note that I am not using the word "fraud". Do you believe that everyone has a right to interrupt you at their whim to sell you stuff? If you don't like it, that you have to pay for "protection".

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          nasch (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 7:14pm

          Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

          You must be oblivious to the junk mail, telemarketing calls, viagra emails, lottery winning emails, that you receive

          Physical junk mail goes in the recycling, but I think that's outside the scope of this discussion. I get few telemarketing calls (surveys and charitable organizations only) and very little spam. But I don't pay anything for antivirus or spam protection, and yes I'm talking about Windows. It can be done for free.

          Do you believe that everyone has a right to interrupt you at their whim to sell you stuff? If you don't like it, that you have to pay for "protection".

          If you're talking about phone calls, then I'm happy to say there's a government program in the US that actually works. Seriously! It's called the Do Not Call Registry. You sign your phone number up and telemarketers aren't allowed to call you. Skeptical? I was too, but the calls dropped to zero after I signed up. I hope every country with this problem considers this if they haven't done it already.

          Where do you live? What's the situation there regarding telemarketers?

          If you're talking about the internet, then A) that doesn't interrupt me B) no, I don't have to pay and I also don't have to put up with it and C) I have not heard of any way the government would be able to solve this problem.

          Now I went back and looked at the post again and saw that C may not be relevant either. Is Conroy talking up some plan to filter or censor the internet to protect against this stuff, or just urging citizens to protect themselves? You know, from the spams and scams. Coming through the portal.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Steve R. (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 8:10pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

            You demonstrate my point that there is a place for regulation so that you did not have to pay protection money for a commercial product. You wrote "If you're talking about phone calls, then I'm happy to say there's a government program in the US that actually works. Seriously! It's called the Do Not Call Registry. You sign your phone number up and telemarketers aren't allowed to call you."

            Junk mail is not outside the scope of this discussion, since the discussion concerns preventing unwanted intrusions. The video clearly demonstrates that throwing a physical object, such as a can of spam easily bounces off the Kogan Protector. Why not place it on your mail box?

            Yes, there will always be situations were government will not be able to solve an "intrusion" problem. In fact your ability to view a lot of stuff on the internet is dependent on accepting the advertising being thrown at yet you. In fact there are even programs that can disable some advertising.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              nasch (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 8:33pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

              You demonstrate my point that there is a place for regulation so that you did not have to pay protection money for a commercial product.

              Yes, but I think we're talking about the internet. I don't think any such program is going to work there.

              Junk mail is not outside the scope of this discussion, since the discussion concerns preventing unwanted intrusions.

              The original post is specifically about internet concerns. You've raised other questions, but I just don't think they're particularly relevant.

              The video clearly demonstrates that throwing a physical object, such as a can of spam easily bounces off the Kogan Protector. Why not place it on your mail box?

              You know that's a joke, right?

              Yes, there will always be situations were government will not be able to solve an "intrusion" problem.

              I agree. In fact, I haven't ever heard of a government solving any of these problems on the internet. Phone calls, yes. Physical mail - I've never heard of one even trying. Internet, no. The CAN-SPAM act, for example, definitely did not stop the spam. If anything, it made it clear what companies need to do to keep spamming legally.

              In fact your ability to view a lot of stuff on the internet is dependent on accepting the advertising being thrown at yet you.

              Not in my experience. It's pretty unusual that I have to have ads on my screen to get the content I want. Or at least they aren't ads I notice.

              In fact there are even programs that can disable some advertising.

              Yeah, and they're free. ;-)

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Steve R. (profile), Jun 24th, 2010 @ 11:05am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

                nasch, you wrote "You know that's a joke, right?" I will let you ponder on that. Since many people claim that intellectual property is need to promote the generation of products and content, why would anyone waste time preparing an ad that costs time and money if they did not have a real product to sell? I hope that you are not implying that those who developed the Kogan Protector are clueless idiots. After all patents and copyright promote innovation.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  icon
                  nasch (profile), Jun 24th, 2010 @ 12:14pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

                  Hang on here, you're saying a physical mesh net to place over your computer to guard against viruses and spam is a real product? And that they're selling it for $3000? Seriously, that is what you're telling me? Because if that's really what you think, you really should just stop talking about anything electronics-related right now, because you have no idea how any of this works.

                  I can't believe you're really telling me that though. You can't really be that clueless, right? So what are you really saying? I've pondered, but it's not coming to me.

                  why would anyone waste time preparing an ad that costs time and money if they did not have a real product to sell?

                  There are plenty of reasons, but I never said they don't have a product to sell. Only that this isn't it.

                  I hope that you are not implying that those who developed the Kogan Protector are clueless idiots.

                  Not at all, I found their video quite entertaining.

                  After all patents and copyright promote innovation.

                  Do you have any evidence of that?

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          athe, Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 7:27pm

          Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

          Here in Australia, we have something called the "Do Not Call" register - simply put your name on it and no more annoying phone calls (the odd one may get through, but since I've been on it, not a one).

          As for the physical stuff - "No Junk Mail" sticker on the post box, and that takes care of it, and if something does get through, I drop it in the bin on my way from postbox to house door...

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Eldakka (profile), Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 11:17pm

      Re: Unexplored Issues

      why should we have to BUY a product to protect ourselves?


      I agree. I shouldn't have to buy a bike chain, car alarm, burglar alarm, or any type of locking mechanism for my house or my car!

      We pay taxes for a reason. Under the mantra of "less regulation" why should we be "forced" to pay a protection tax to a company (your local mob affiliate) for protection.


      Again I agree.

      I hate having to pay protection to lock manufacturers and locksmiths.

      Maybe the government should introduce regulation making it illegal to enter someone's property and take stuff. Or climb into my car and drive off with it. That'd be great! And they should also employ people to enforce those laws!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Steve R. (profile), Jun 24th, 2010 @ 10:48am

        Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

        Your missing the point. This is not about persons who have an intent of breaking and entering in order to steal something. This about preventing those who feel that they can accost you anywhere and at anytime to present a commercial message; like the the emails and pop-up ads for viagra. People (corporations)should have enough civility not to force a sales pitch on you and you should not have to buy protection for this type of abuse.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          nasch (profile), Jun 24th, 2010 @ 1:04pm

          Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

          People (corporations)should have enough civility not to force a sales pitch on you and you should not have to buy protection for this type of abuse.

          That's all fine Steve, but what do you propose should be done about it? Or are you just wishing it weren't so?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Steve R. (profile), Jun 24th, 2010 @ 1:37pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

            You pointed previously pointed out the do-not-call list. The concept can be expanded. Essentially, I don't have a problem with "regulation" that serves a public purpose, such as stopping spammers.

            Unfortunately in this country many people seem to think that it is perfectly acceptable to intrude to the point of irritation to make a sale. Furthermore, when the word "regulation" is uttered everyone dumps on you for advocating intrusive government regulation and whining that "regulations" don't work.

            We need to have an acknowledgment that people do not have a right to accost you for purposes of making a sale. We live in an imperfect world. We need to balance civility and regulation to assure that people are not imposed upon by salespeople. After all, if they can impose on you shouldn't you have a right to impose on them?

            To throw in an "extreme" position, if the government is not allowed to protect us through regulation and the the salesperson won't stop pestering me, then I should have the right to shoot him!!!

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              nasch (profile), Jun 24th, 2010 @ 2:11pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unexplored Issues

              You pointed previously pointed out the do-not-call list. The concept can be expanded.

              A do not email registry? Telemarketers have to have offices with people and phone lines. They can be tracked down and subjected to penalties for breaking laws. Spammers have demonstrated that they have none of these vulnerabilities. What they do is already in many cases illegal, with no repercussions generally. A do not email registry would just be a source of active email addresses to spam.

              Furthermore, when the word "regulation" is uttered everyone dumps on you for advocating intrusive government regulation and whining that "regulations" don't work.

              Whining that all regulations never work is dumb. Recognizing that some regulations don't have much chance of working, and that much other regulation will be co-opted by the regulated industries, is just realistic.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 6:45am

    I thought pr0n was banned in Australia. Maybe that's why you get all them spams and scams on your tube.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 23rd, 2010 @ 7:06am

    Have you seen the youtube video yet of the Kogan filter? I love how they throw cans of spam at it. Pretty funny!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-enBtKjgcU

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Dave, Jun 24th, 2010 @ 1:10pm

    Funeeeee!

    But any chance of genuine orders from the Australian government now goes right down the pan! Do they care, however? Probably not. After all, with these charmless idiot Oz politicians at the helm, Obama being given an internet "kill" switch and extremist nations blocking popular sites, pretty soon there won't be much of an internet to worry about!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This