The types of conditions are very much contextual to the circumstances. You gave examples of misuse of a computer. Parliament has dealt previously with situations of imposing conditions on people who use computers to communicate with children for the purposes of luring, for example, and part of that was actually a power enacted by Parliament to provide conditions or prohibitions on people's use of computers.
Likewise, if the activity involves supporting terrorist groups by distributing material, etc., or being involved on the Internet, if it's reasonable that the person not go on the Internet or only go on the Internet with supervision, that could be a reasonable condition. It really depends on the circumstance: if the conduct of an activity has nothing to do with the computer, then prohibiting someone from communicating on the computer would not be reasonable. It really comes down to that question.
The other question you asked me was about the purpose of the recognizance with conditions. As the minister indicated, the purpose of that provision is not to detain a person. It's not preventative arrest. It is recognizance with conditions.
The purpose is to put a person under judicial control. It's to put some conditions on the individual. It is not to detain them for a long period of time, hoping that in that period of 14 days you'll put your case together and get enough evidence such that you can actually lay charges. That's not the purpose of this measure. It's very much, as the minister said, a provision to disrupt activity for people who have not yet committed a crime, or for whom there is not enough evidence to charge them or others. It's a means of putting some judicial control on the individual.
Of course, once you put judicial control on this individual, you've also indicated to others that the authorities are essentially investigating, and they will know that something is up. It may deter others from actually participating and going further with their ideas.