While Facebook and Instagram make their stances on naked flesh relatively clear, where and when they enact their nipple and nudity censorship have become infamously arbitrary. These examples — from Picasso artworks (banned) to Kim Kardashian nudes (allowed) — show just how arbitrary the policy is.

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has approved the use of the 451 HTTP status code for websites that are inaccessible for legal reasons such as government censored content or blocked copyrighted material. There are limitations as to whether internet users in different geographical regions will see this error code but the approval of 451 is an acknowledgement of the prevailing issues of internet censorship and the online piracy.

Just two days before the election, the Coalition has announced it will introduce an internet filter that would be switched on for all broadband services and mobile devices by default should it win. Quite aside from the political timing , the plan seems light on technical detail to the point of confusion. UPDATE: The Coalition is now saying the policy it issued was an "incorrect document", though that leaves several questions unanswered.

Google's latest Transparency Report shows an uptick in the number of requests by government agencies to be removed, but the total number is still low. The big lesson? When you're assembling a list of issues to worry about, content removal requests will be low on the list.

Twice a year, Google issues Transparency Reports covering government requests for information. The latest figures covering July to December 2012 suggest that the Australian government is maintaining a steady pace when it comes to demanding data from the search giant.

Every six months or so, Google updates its Transparency Report, which shows requests for content removal from governments. While the number of requests globally has gone up, Australian government agencies and courts were much less active.

Twitter has emulated Google and released a transparency report disclosing how often it has been asked for user information by national governments in the first six months of 2012. The Australian government and legal system apparently hasn't engaged with Twitter much yet, having made fewer than 10 requests for user information over that time.

Someone in a Canberra office has been busy with their browser. Between July and December last year, Australian government agencies asked Google to remove 646 items online.

Communications minister Senator Stephen Conroy last week reminded us that internet filtering is still very much an item on the government's agenda. That's a worrying prospect, but it could be worse: the UK is contemplating a plan where access to all adult content would be 'opt in', with adult material blocked by internet service providers (ISPs) unless customers specifically ask for it to be switched on.

Bugger. Just when Senator Stephen Conroy got back into our good books with the long-overdue inquiry into price gouging, he gets all gung-ho and says the internet filter censorship plan is still actively moving forward with new developments "soon". Stephen, oh Stephen, when will you learn?

Australia hasn't yet seen a blogger die in custody (that was Bahrain) or had a major internet service provider deliberately redirect users onto pages featuring malware (that was Belarus). However, internet censorship rules still see Australia featuring on the 'Enemies Of The Internet' list of countries produced by Reporters Without Borders.

One of the more tedious arguments used by people who favour compulsory Internet filtering and other forms of censorship is "People who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear from these systems". In his LCA keynote today, security researcher Jacob Appelbaum highlighted a simple point that's worth making when people say that: if you have nothing to hide, why are you wearing clothes and why are there curtains on your house?

Federal government plans to impose compulsory internet filtering have dropped off the radar somewhat, but here's more evidence that it's not exactly top-of-mind for most parents: according to new Telstra-sponsored research, just one-third of Australian parents have installed any kind of blocking software.

Google has been issuing transparency reports detailing government requests to have content removed for a while now. The latest instalment promises more detail, including when governments have asked for individual user data. For Australia, the number of removal requests has dropped, but there were 345 requests for individual user information between July and December 2010, and Google coughed up in around 280 cases.

Next week, Channel Nine will begin showing Come Fly With Me, the latest show from Little Britain creators David Walliams and Matt Lucas, in an 8pm Monday timeslot. Walliams and Lucas' risque approach doesn't fit well with 8pm viewing regulations, so Nine has decided to trim the episodes for that slot while showing the uncut versions on Go.

The Egyptian government cut internet connections across their country to silence protests, leaving nearly all of its citizens without online access. But they weren't entirely successful. When governments shut down broadband and mobile connections, here's what to do.

We've known since mid-year that the ludicrous Internet filter concept was on the backburner pending a classification review. Based on current plans, that means there'll probably be no chance to introduce it before 2013.

Google has just released its biannual figures on what content government bodies asked it to remove in the first six months of 2010. The biggest surprise? Just how many items on Google Groups were removed at the request of the Australian government.

We've covered similar territory before, but the post at Gizmodo by Colin Jacobs from the EFA showing five ways any filter can be avoided in two minutes is well worth checking out. What exactly is this plan to create a secret government list of banned sites protecting us from again?