The message is to entrepreneurs: don't build companies - build protocols.
Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
31–40 of 100 posts
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#32The headline is a little misleading. It's much more terrifying than that. It isn't just Australia. It is the US, Australia, Canada, UK, and New Zealand all together (known as the "Five Eyes")[1]. Australia is just the country that put the memo together. > The "Five Eyes", often abbreviated as "FVEY", refer to an intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.…
For those that don't know about the FVEY, here is a good documentary about it:
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#33Digital Rights Watch has more information and a submission system to help people write their feedback to the government: https://digitalrightswatch.org.au/2018/08/19/defend-encrypti...
This video they made is absolutely hilarious, and shows just how un-hilarious and fucked up these proposed changes are:
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#34I feel like the linked article on ABC has a much more detailed and balanced description of the bill [1]. The Government says that "systemic" weaknesses cannot be demanded. That said, the third part of the demands that can be made, the "technical capability notice", seems ripe for abuse. At the very least, the acceptance of a bill like this will erode trust in app stores. I would expect to see some sort of checksum ve…
By "some sort of checksum verification by users", I guess you mean some sort of informal alternative / addition to this:
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, but once you introduce a bill of rights all your commom law protections go out the window.. including stuff you didnt know you had
The US bill of rights doesnt define the rights. The bill of rights calls out special rights that the govt shall not touch. The rights are granted to us by our creator aka natural law. The same law used to declare our independence from the crown and an inherent part of the fabric of the US. Not sure if this is clearly stated yet.
The Constitution and Declaration of Independence are legal documents setting out the foundations of a government and a nationstate, not some divine text from a higher power. The founding fathers were not a group of infallible prophets.
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#36There are many things to admire about Australia and many reasons that I am grateful that I grew up in Australia.
But the ongoing ritual humiliation of Australian technologists over the past several decades is really tiresome.
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#37This is mostly about "terrorism", right?
And for Australia, about immigration from flooding areas in Southeast Asia, right? Which arguably has follow-on roles in "terrorism". [I use scare quotes because the definition of "terrorism" is so politicized.]
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#38The headline is a little misleading. It's much more terrifying than that. It isn't just Australia. It is the US, Australia, Canada, UK, and New Zealand all together (known as the "Five Eyes")[1]. Australia is just the country that put the memo together. > The "Five Eyes", often abbreviated as "FVEY", refer to an intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.…
For those that don't know about the FVEY, here is a good documentary about it: https://ispydoc.com
I skimmed it and that site seems highly sensationalist. I don’t know if that a good documentary. A couple of things from the site:
“Operating independently from its governments...”
Are the agencies involved not part of their governments? Am I missing something?
“Hackers Can Disable a Sniper Rifle—Or Change Its Target...”
It wants me to post this to social media. What’s the context of this quote? It gives none. It seems like it wants me to post clickbait.
If you want to learn about FVEY you’re probably better off just reading Wikipedia:
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
But even so, having something in the constitution is of relatively little protection if the judiciary and government are in favour of an idea. For example, the bill of rights talks about "right of the people to be secure ... against unreasonable searches and seizures" and yet asset forfeiture is still a legal option. Actual practices surrounding plea bargains also look to run counter to the spirit of the BoR, but I m…
In Australia (unlike the US), constitutional amendments are decided by both a majority vote in both houses of parliament and by referendum where the public votes and a double majority (majority of people in the majority of states, and the majority of people in the country) must vote YES in order for a referendum to pass. And in Australia voting is compulsory so there's no question about election turnout spoiling the…
If your point is that it's harder to pass an amendment in Australia than the US, based on your description, I would disagree. The US system requires more than a majority vote by representatives, in a couple different ways. The Australian system does sound more democratic.
Re: Australia Wants to Take Government Surveillance to the Next Level
#40It’s interesting these are all common law Anglosphere countries which declared independence from Great Britain. The UK still has a lot of soft power.