Welcome to the 3rd World, Australia

The previous government of Australia toyed with the idea of censoring the internet. It was always under the familiar cry of "Won't somebody think of the children". Eventually they were convinced that global internet censorship was

a) Not feasible from an infrastructure perspective

b) would come at great cost to our personal freedom, and

c) would make us an international laughing stock

They were right on all three counts. And so they put the responsibility for web content monitoring and filtering back where it belongs - with the parents and adults of Australia.

The new government, under Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, has seen fit to ignore this logic, and under increasing pressure from a fascist, vocal, right-wing Christian fundamentalist minority, announced that they would pursue an agenda of global internet censorship.

Originally this would be in the form of a "clean feed" that all ISPs would be obliged to supply on request as a service offering. There would be no charge to the user for this service, and all a user had to do was request that it be enabled for their internet account.

This I had no problem with. Yes, as a well educated adult I could see all the flaws in the practical application of this service, but as a concept I could understand the appeal.

But this was not enough for the oppressive forces of the religious right. And so the original proposal was modified. Now the censored feed would be the default option, and a user would have to opt out to get an uncensored feed.

OK. Not an ideal situation, as now it would be possible to easily report on all those who requested an uncensored feed, and if necessary treat their motives with unwarranted suspicion, but at least there would be an option there for the adults and free thinkers in our open society.

Well not any more. Yesterday the government announced that there would be censorship for all. Not option for an unfiltered feed. The clean feed option is still the default position, but now if you choose to opt out of the clean feed, you get a less censored feed.

Yes, this government can now stand proudly beside the governments of China and North Korea as an oppressive force in the free world. Again, this has been announced with all the right words - blocking child pornography (which it won't), blocking pro-anorexia and euthanasia sites (hello, freedom of thought and speech - not any more) - but what it really creates is an infrastructure for oppression and group think. Once this infrastructure is in place, it becomes far too easy to simply expand it's scope to appease any minority that wields any amount of influence.

How long will it be before Australians can no longer visit sites that have anything to do with

Evolution
The Exclusive Brethren and their cult like practices
Scientology
Anything that challenges the concept of global warming, no matter how scientifically based it may be

These are all likely targets because of the types of groups who are driving this government behind the scenes.

I have not always been proud of things our government has done over the years. There have been times when I have simply had to shake my head in wonder at the decisions that have been made. But today, as I write this, I am truly scared for this countries future, and ashamed to call myself Australian.

We are no longer a first world country with freedom and liberty. We are an oppressed people slowly being forced further and further under a religious doctrine being wielded by the faceless and the unelected.

Further reading :

No Clean Feed
Mandatory Internet Censorship : Conroy's Bait and Switch
Wild claims Hysteria Enthusiastic commentary on internet censorship: Ludlam in Senate Estimates
Internet Censorship and Civil Liberties in Australia

Not Quite Hollywood

Australia has one of the oldest film industries in the world. We boast one of the earliest feature length films, and for such a young and relatively small country, we have contributed in many important ways to the world film industry. Directors such as Peter Weir and Andrew Dominic, actors such as Peter Finch, Cate Blanchette, Russell Crowe and Naomi Watts, and DoPs such as Dean Semler have all contributed (and continue to contribute) to this art form.

As with film in all countries, the Australian industry has been cyclical and trend driven. During the 50s and 60s we made outback movies. During the 70s and 80s it was costume and historical dramas, often based around our military history. During the 90s it was quirky comedies and musicals, and into the 2000s we are desperately trying to create our own indy-type films.

Unfortunately, Australian movie critics have, historically, been our industry's greatest enemy. They have sat back, poe-faced, praising the most inane art films or tired historical dramas, believing that to truly critique and find them wanting is to be unsupportive. And yet god forbid we should ever produce a genre picture. Then the critics come out, all guns blazing. You see, while it is worthy and arty to create a sub-standard rip-off of the latest trendy indy film, create a horror or action piece, and you are simply mimicking the worst that Hollywood has to offer.

Then along comes Not Quite Hollywood, which doesn't just give the critics a gentle tweak, but punches them fully on the nose by celebrating a period in Australian film making that many critics have erased from their memory. You see, during the 70's and early 80's, Australia had a thriving, low budget genre business going on. Everything from action and karate movies to b-grade horror and nudie films. The critics could not stand them, but out of this almost underground movement came films like Patrick, Mad Max and Mad Max 2 : The Road Warrior, Razorback and of course, the infamous Turkeyshoot, amongst others. Around the world these films had a cult following, and in some cases, much more. Patrick reached the number one position in Italy for months, and spawned an italian sequel. Mad Max 2 inspired countless European rip-offs, and is still cited as having one of the greatest car chases ever filmed.

I urge you to go to the Not Quite Hollywood website and have a browse. Watch the wondrous trailers on offer, read about our forgotten film heritage. Then go and see Not Quite Hollywood when it hits a cinema near you. Hopefully it will inspire you to head out and look for our lost treasures (You never know where they will turn up - I found a copy of Patrick for $5.00 at the local newsagent !).

Australia should be as proud of their genre history as they (rightfully) are of the other contributions they have made to world film. A world without Mad Max would be a lesser place indeed.

Listen Up !

I recently decided it was time to stop trying to use my phone for things other than, well, being a phone. After all, a phone is a phone. I have yet to see a mobile phone (cell phone, for you Yanks) that did anything well, other than make calls (Note to all Apple fan-boys - this includes the over-grown Mac called the iPhone, OK). So I went out and got me an iPod.

OK - Full disclosure - I don't much like Apple. I don't like the company. I don't like the way it does business. I think it's OS is over-rated, sluggish and boring, and I think iTunes is un-necessarily intrusive and DRM based. However they do have the edge when it comes to purdy toys. Also, it didn't cost me anything.

So anyway, now I have this iPod (80 GB classic), so I start to fill it up. Movies - check. Music - check. What about podcasts ?

So I went looking for something to try. There is no shortage of topics and agendas out there in podcast land. Anything you can think of, someone is talking about it. And when it comes to film, there is plenty to wade through. Unfortunately, most of it is dross. Two I did find, however, are a great listen for people who love film.

Watching The Directors is now, unfortunately, no more. However it's back catalog is still available from it's website (for a short time), and through iTunes. I urge you to download all that you can before it is gone for good. Created by Joe and Melissa Johnston, WTD was a monthly podcast that covered the work, usually of a single director, either in it's entirety, or across a shorter time span (Hitchcock, for instance, got three shows). The tone is conversational, the detail is good without getting too technical, and overall it is a great listen. Running times of 60 - 80 minutes means it isn't to taxing either.

The Hollywood Saloon is a slightly different beast. Andy and John cover a wide range of topics, from car chases to David Fincher. They often go into more technical detail, have a great love for their subject matter, and will even wear their fan-boy hearts on their sleeves. They also are not afraid to push the running time envelope, with their Halloween podcast clocking in at 2 hours 50 minutes (a great listing for fans of Carpenter's original and the subsequent sequels), and their James Bond series, released in the wake of Casino Royale, runs to almost 6 hours over three shows. these guys are opinionated, knowledgeable, and hate Brett Ratner.

HDCP and You (or why you have to buy a new HDTV)

HDCP, or High-Definition Content Protection, hit the headlines recently. Everyone was screaming for Microsoft's blood (again) because they had announced that they would be supporting HDCP under Vista, and that some HD plasma and LCD televisions and projectors may not work because they did not support this standard. I have been critical for some time of the poor quality and lack of true standards with so-called High Definition plasma and LCD televisions. Now that people stupid enough to buy these televisions before they were truely prime-time ready are finding that there is even more pain ahead, they are blaming M$. But is this fair ?

Let's start with a couple of background facts, and then a couple of questions to owners of these 'dead' televisions.

Fact 1 : HDCP is NOT a Microsoft initiative. It was developed by Intel, and is being adopted by the MPAA as the new stadard for encrypting HD content on BluRay and HD DVD disks.

Fact 2 : Microsoft must implement HDCP if it is to continue to produce a media centre OS, or if future opertaing systems (Vista onwards) are to support large display devices and HD content playback.

Fact 3 : Apple will have to incorporate HDCP support into OSX and beyond for the same reasons. Microsoft is so far the only vendor to step up and admit there will be implications to it's adoption.

Fact 4 : Standalone BluRay and HD DVD players will also require HDCP compliant playback devices.

And now the questions, to all the whinging gits in the newsgroups and forums.

Question 1 : How many of you actually use large screen display devices on your PC, and were going to rush out and install Vista at the earliest opportunity ?

Question 2 : How many of you were not going to install Vista, but do intend to add a BluRay or HD DVD player to your home theatre system ?

Question 3 : How many of you think ditching windows and going to Linux will a) solve the HDCP problem, and b) teach M$ a lesson ?

If you answered yes to Question 1, then HDCP will not stop you running Vista, and will not stop you watching HD content from within Vista in most circumstances. Depending on how the copyright owner has configured the DRM, you may not get to see it at all, but in most cases you get to see the content, but at standard DVD resolutions. You should also bear in mind that XP will have to be made HDCP compliant, either through service pack or drivers, in order to play back protected HD content.

If you answered yes to Question 2, then you are completely off track blaming M$, as you will quickly find that BluRay and HD DVD players will require HDCP compliant displays to play back HD content at full res. The MPAA have mandated this to be the case.

If you answered yes to Question 3 then you are simply insane. Linux will only be able to display protected HD content through the use of commercial software. And we all know how much there is of that for DVD playback. And don't expect DVD Jon to come to therescue. DVD's CSS encryption was cracked more through luck and poor programming that by anything really clever. If a commercial vendor hadn't left a partial key open in the code, CSS would probably still be secure. HDCP is even stronger, and uses a public key infrastructure. Crack a key and it is revoked. And the software cracking it becomes worthless overnight.

So what did M$ do again ? Oh, I remember, they publicly stated they would provide the ability to play back protected HD content from their new operating system, in line with the standards being adopted by the entertainment industry. Imagine if they had stated they you would never be able to do this. How loud would the outcry be then ?

So I think I'll wait a while longer before ditching my trusty CRT television. How about you ?

Widescreen Television - Black Bars Are Your Friend

I know I shouldn't take it personally. I know I should just let it slide. After all, they don't know what they are doing. It's just a job. Right ? Who am I talking about ? TV sales people. OK, before they all get upset, I'm not talking about experts. Norlec, Encel. They know what they are on about.

I'm talking about the pimple-faced weekend sales people at the Megamarts and Retravisions. I walk into these places (usually out of a perverse curiosity - do they understand it yet ?) to be greeted by huge widescreen televisions with distorted images being shown uniformly across the wall. Heads stretched in some strange torture device. Strange ectomorphic people populate every movie and TV show being screened in these places. There is not a black bar in sight. Why ? Because the general population don't understand how widescreen works, and these simple-minded salespeople don't want to teach them.

It's simple, really. Television comes in two flavours. 4:3 (aspect ratio 1.33:1) is the standard, almost square tube we have been watching for years. 16:9 (AR 1.78:1) is the new kid on the block, called Widescreen. So what's the problem ? Movies. Damn it, movies are the problem. Movies come in a variety of shapes and sizes. Let's list a few movie aspect ratios for the folks, shall we :

1.33:1 How it was at the beginning
1.66:1 Kubrick liked this. Strangelove actually shifts between 1.33 and 1.66
1.78:1 Widescreen TV
1.85:1 Probably the most common format used today
2.20:1 Not uncommon. 2001 was shot on this format
2.35:1 The EPIC ratio. Still used a lot today. Think Lawrence of Arabia
2.40:1 Super epic widescreen

And there are a few inbetween these as well. Notice something about this list. Only two of them fit exactly the screen ratio of television. All the rest will have black bars top and bottom (or vertical black bars on a widescreen TV in the case of 1.33 and 1.66). This is A GOOD THING. Why ? Because that is how the director shot the film. They made a deliberate decision to use this particular aspect ratio to hold their vision. If you want to watch their movie (and hey, it is their movie, not yours), this is how it should be watched. Saying (as some do) that having black bars means you get less picture is about as intelligent as saying daylight savings fades your curtains because of all the extra sunlight. In fact, you are missing out. Depending on the original aspect ratio, you could be seeing only half the picture.

Don't believe me ? Still don't understand how it all works ?

Have a look at this aging, but still relevent web site. It is one man's crusade to get the american people to see the light. There is also a very nice, brief explaination on the Die Hard special edition DVD.

And next time you go into a Megamart store, ask the salesperson standing there why you would want to buy a TV that stretches all the images. I bet they don't get the joke.

Why digital television in Australia is a farce

Digital Television arrived late in Australia. The free-to-air commercial networks had lobbied as hard as they could to stop it, but it was inevitable. So they took the next step - they agreed to allow it to happen, but the government had to set certain limitations. These included

• No further networks to be licensed for 7 years
• Reduce the requirements for a signal to be called High Definition
• Any extra channels that were set up could only show News. No entertainment.
• Set standards that were unique in the world to ensure a delay in provision of equipment
  

They then embarked on a very backhanded advertising campaign that explained the virtues of digital television in terms of how much extra it would cost you to get a free product. They didn't actually mention prices, but explained that to get digital TV you would have to purchase a set top box (STB), and that digital TV would be widescreen, so you need a new television to really enjoy it.

So 4 years on, where are we ?

Well, prices of STBs have finally dropped to a reasonable level, especially if you only want Standard Definition (read : DVD quality picture, CD quality audio on your existing CRT television). All the major suburban areas have digital coverage, although you may need to factor in the cost of a new aerial anyway. If you want High Definition (HD) expect to pay $$$$$s for a new television that can accept the signal, and even them expect to get screwed over. Because of the very loose version of HD we have in this country, many Plasma and LCD televisions pass as HD because they have 720 or more vertical scanlines. 720p (progressive) is the minimum HD requirement in Australia, however many HD programs, especially blockbuster events, are broadcast in 1080i. Televisions that can show 1080i without compromise make up about 0.0001 percent of the televisions available on the market.

There are only two new digital only channels. Both are run by government funded stations. One shows only native laguage news services from around the world. The other show repeats of childrens programs and documentaries. We do not have any of the features promised years ago, such as multi-angle viewing of sports programs. The electronic programme guide, by which digital Personal Video Recorders (PVRs) are programmed, consists of the programme that is on now, and the programme that is on next. And these are rarely accurate, and sometimes do not get changed for hours. The commercial stations often buy the cheap version of overseas content, so we get 4:3 versions of product viewed elsewhere in glorious 16:9.

The real joke in all this. The idiots within the Australian government who put all this together are starting to look stupid. The take up of digital television is this country is well below the take up rate for DVD and plasma. This is dispite Australia's deserved reputation as an early adopter of new technologies (we have the fastest take up rate of mobile phones, one of the fasted of DVD, and one of the highest penetration rates for both). Their response to this is to begin a governmental enquiry into the poor take rate of digital television services in Australia in the hope of determining exactly what is wrong with the Australian people, and why aren't they availing themselves of this marvellous new technology. The reason is obvious : we voted for morons who were more interested in the good publicity they might get from the commercial stations if they bent over, than in the best interests of the Australian people.

Yes, I own a digital STB PVR. It is standard definition because there is no incentive to go High Def, certainly at the outrageous cost to do so (a subject of another post some day), and I am not a happy television watching constituent of this wide brown land.