Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Australia is becoming a surveillance state

ia.acs.org.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 437 posts

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#291

Post by strken »

c_o_n_v_e_x wrote: post #243
gonzo41 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm Australian. Respectfully, you're totally wrong. Government should be for everyone. Parties should have a platform that is for a majority. For the most part, Australia has populist fairly centrist small c conservative governments. It's getting bad at the moment here mostly because the current governing party is past due for it's turn on the opposition benches. And it also seems that everyone's having a go at being…

Re: voting, it's not a "right" if it's compulsory. It's an obligation.

What's the practical meaningful difference between exercising your right to not vote, vs fulfilling your obligation to vote by showing up to the polling place and drawing dicks on the ballot paper?

Pretend you're an Australian and have a long tradition of fining people minor sums of money for not showing up. Why would you change to non-compulsory voting?

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#292

Post by stOneskull »

octodog wrote: post #85
lethologica wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m seeing so many negative comments about Australia and yet this is the Australia that I know and love deeply. I wonder what’s causing the stark differences in view.

Just different perspectives I suppose. American elections seem farcical to me but lots of Americans don't seem to agree with me.

the president being partisan makes it quite a circus.

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#293

Post by gonzo41 »

swader999 wrote: post #289
gonzo41 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's a pretty low impost obligation. But I'd refer to it as a minor duty to the community.

Not voting though is a form of protest in many cases. I suppose though even if it is compulsory you could show up and spoil your ballot. I'd be fine with that.

Many do just that.

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#294

Post by handrous »

stackedinserter wrote: post #137
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns in the hands of the Australians who want guns in their hands is an outcome that's about a thousand times worse than a "disarmed people". Also, anyone think that a US civilian militia has more than a snowball's chance in hell against any committed government-deployed force? Tell 'im 'e's dreamin'

> Also, anyone think that a US civilian militia has more than a snowball's chance in hell against any committed government-deployed force? I do think that in case of armed resistance, US government will step back instead of nuking Oklahoma City. Also, search "chechen wars". Large well-equipped Russian army with tanks, artillery and air force lost to people armed with AK's, determination and grassroots support from lo…

I am skeptical of the utility of private arms in resisting a home-grown tyrannical government. I'm extremely skeptical that they're better to have around, than not to have around, from a preserving-liberty perspective, in a developed state, especially.

I'd welcome any evidence that they're of much use for that. I see too many mixed outcomes (private arms aiding in the installation of tyrannical government, notably, of which I'm aware of way more examples than the reverse) and cases that are too different to compare—every single example I'm aware of involves extensive foreign intervention and/or resistance to a foreign occupier, which is very different.

I think the odds of an armed US militia resisting tyranny being popular enough not to end up being opposed by even more armed militia who are pro tyranny, in a situation in which the military is not also mostly on the anti-tyranny side, is effectively zero. I think the reverse is far more likely (private arms supporting tyranny). I'd welcome evidence that would change this view, but as far as I can tell the scales strongly lean toward my take.

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#295

Post by 1337shadow »

partomniscient wrote: post #283
1337shadow wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you dig deeper, there are(/were?) other video sources that had the union leader saying things along the lines of "this guys not with us, we don't know who he is, take of your mask and protest peacefully like the rest of us". It's actually in the video you posted so I've seen it. They were there with masks, they were not protesting, but they were standing peacefully: that is what I see in the video. > The Canadia…

I found the video I actually wanted to post. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ6cdLNWzlI This is what happens when you don't have continuity/all the pieces. Watch it and weep. Welcome to the misinformation age. John Perry-Barlow was right. This was from 2011. They've presumably gotten a lot better at it now.

All right, we can see he has a rock in his hand in that video, however...

He's facing the crowd of actually masked protesters, surveilling them which is probably why he got caught, they completely outnumber him, which makes me thinks it's probably better for his defense to hold a rock in his hands.

I mean, look at this crowd of masked people, some even wearing gasmasks, holding red flags, with god knows what in their backpacks, claiming that the infiltrated agents are there to "provoke them", what a joke of bad faith.

You don't want them to do that? Letting them do more preventive surveillance would be a solution then, that'd be an upgrade for everyone. But you don't want that either so I guess we're stuck in this status quo.

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#296

Post by kwere »

shell0x wrote: post #244
throwawaylinux wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skilled immigration is neocolonialism. I truly can't believe how many (supposedly enlightened) people I've had try to tell me with a straight face how wonderful it is to have all these doctors/engineers/etc coming to their country, and how great it is for their economy and healthcare system etc. Like, you don't think all the people in India or The Philippines or Chad need doctors or economic advancement?? It's just i…

As an expat, I go there where I get treated best. Why wouldn’t I? Do I owe my country of birth anything?

for a collectivist mentality you owe everithing to the community thats own you

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#297

Post by systemvoltage »

thisone22 wrote: post #84
retsibsi wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you flesh this out more? I'm not asking for academic rigour, but at the moment it's hard to engage because your critique is so sweeping and unspecific.

It's just bog standard Australian cultural cringe. I've spent a good chunk of my adulthood living in various countries in Europe, and Australia. Europhilic nonsense such as in the GP betray their almost total lack of understanding as to the actual state of affairs in European countries. Corruption is everywhere. Corporate interests influence policy.. everywhere. Moronic government decisions abound.. literally everywh…

As an American, we always look up to Europe for many but not all things.

There are bits and pieces that I like about Asian countries as well. For instance, I would love USA to have a larger repair and hacker culture like Shenzhen. A ritualistic and respectful culture as Japan. A more socially cohesive culture as India.

I also think USA has some aspects that I don’t want to give up - philosophically, the constitutional rights and materialistically, the cost of living, job market, access to natural beauty and availability of land.

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#298

Post by otikik »

c_o_n_v_e_x wrote: post #243
gonzo41 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm Australian. Respectfully, you're totally wrong. Government should be for everyone. Parties should have a platform that is for a majority. For the most part, Australia has populist fairly centrist small c conservative governments. It's getting bad at the moment here mostly because the current governing party is past due for it's turn on the opposition benches. And it also seems that everyone's having a go at being…

Re: voting, it's not a "right" if it's compulsory. It's an obligation.

It's easy to forget that every right comes with obligation.

Say you have the right to own property. That comes with the obligation to respect other people's property. And so on.

When a right comes obligations it isn't a right. It's a privilege. That's the stuff kings used to have (and still have, in some places).

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#299

Post by partomniscient »

strken wrote: post #291
c_o_n_v_e_x wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re: voting, it's not a "right" if it's compulsory. It's an obligation.

What's the practical meaningful difference between exercising your right to not vote, vs fulfilling your obligation to vote by showing up to the polling place and drawing dicks on the ballot paper? Pretend you're an Australian and have a long tradition of fining people minor sums of money for not showing up. Why would you change to non-compulsory voting?

Your scenario also needs to account for free sausage sandwiches. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_sausage

Re: Australia is becoming a surveillance state

#300

Post by Pet_Ant »

thisone22 wrote: post #120
logicchains wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it hilarious? The whole point of human rights is they they don't just disappear whenever there's an emergency, otherwise the next dictator who comes along will just declare an emergency and violate everyone's rights, as has happened countless times in history. It's sad not funny that people protesting their rights being violated just leads to their rights being violated even more.

Ok, this is a spectrum. How far along the spectrum does the emergency need to get to justify a lockdown? For example - The Black Plague which killed 30%~ of Europe. At what point would a lockdown be justified? - Germany just invaded my northern border. Again. Am I allowed to force my residents to turn their lights off to avoid bombing? Rights aren't universal, and no serious person argues this. There is always an eme…

> Rights aren't universal, and no serious person argues this. There is always an emergency that's bad enough.

I feel like this is the point of contention. Many people truly don't consider things that can be taken away a right. Is the constitution a suicide pact a serious question that has been argued in the US Supreme Court (that phrased originated by a justice arguing that it wasn't... he was in the minority opinion).

I will try to keep this neutral, but people say things like "driving isn't a right, it's a priveledge"... what distinguishes between rights and priveledges?

Post reply on HN