Chairman Krudd - Stop internet censorship in Australia

Each approach has advantages and disadvantages. These are discussed here in the context of optional filtering i.e. for the purposes of protecting children. Overall, filtering in the ISP is the poorest alternative. This is yet another reason to suspect that Chairman Krudd's real agenda is controlling adults, not protecting children.

Attribute	PC	Router	ISP
Flexibility to adjust for ages of children	Best	Good	Very poor
Flexibility to adjust for tastes of household	Very good	Best	Very poor
Ease of overriding temporarily when the filter blocks something that the parents think it shouldn't	Best	Reasonable	Very poor
Resistance to bypass	Best	Very good	Worst
Cost to implement	Best	Moderate	Worst
Speed impact	Best	Moderate	Worst
Resistance to tampering	Moderate	Very Good	Best

Why not remove illegal material?

In the case of illegal material, there is a better alternative too, namely, to remove it, not to block it. If this material is so bad that it is illegal, why only block it? Blocking it just leaves it there where motivated people will still be able to access it. It seems as if Chairman Krudd is more interested in appearances than actually doing the hard work. Blocking without removing is just sweeping the problem under the carpet. Conversely, if the material is removed, there's no need to block it.