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

Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

digitalrightswatch.org.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 894 posts

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#231

Post by BrissyCoder »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #193
cletus wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I'm Australian but from the part no one ever visits (ie Perth). I say this because for most visitors Australia = Sydney, maybe Melbourne. Anyway, I've gone to live overseas a couple of times now. The most recent time was to the US 11 years ago. I'm still here. As many problems as the US has, the one big selling point it has is career opportunities and earning potential as a software engineer. Like... it doesn't ev…

> Like when the gay marriage issue was decided even the highly conservative former PM Tony Abbott basically came out and said the matter was settled and it's time to move on. Australia recognized same sex marriage in 2017. That was 3 years after after the USA did. I'm not sure I would call Australia as being progressive by that measure.

Cannabis laws as well...

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#232

Post by yonaguska »

wrycoder wrote: post #170
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Southern conservative as Democrats or Republicans like Jesse Helms and Trent Lott were very much in favor of not letting African Americans vote. Who they caucused with later is unrelated. But yes, to say it was Democrats or Republicans would be very technically inaccurate. It isn’t a coincidence that the states that were practicing Jim Crow before are the same states trying to discourage voting today.

The Democrats say that voting is being discouraged. What is being discouraged is invalid votes, to diminish fraud. Republicans would love to encourage an authentic black vote.

I'm not sure this is true, even as a black republican with several black republican voting family members. My experience is that most black voters are more conservative, but almost always vote based on race rather than policy. This is obviously changing, to skew towards black voters being less conservative- but calling candidates racist will usually trump all other values that go into the voting decision.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#233

Post by Jedd »

lsiebert wrote: post #146
tac0_ wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel you mate. Sad part is Australia has all the potential to have a really good future but the only thing missing is competent leadership. The liberal government continues to fuck up time and time again and the Murdoch press just turns a blind eye. Fucked up quarantine, fucked up vaccine rollout, fucked up climate policies, fucked up the news media bargaining code, and fucked up numerous policies just to prop up t…

For US folks, The Liberal Party is Center Right and further to the left than the Republicans, Labor is Center Left and further to the left of the Democrats.

> .. Labor is Center Left and further to the left of the Democrats.

Do you think? I'd have pegged things like Green New Deal, fairly strong consensus around fossil fuels and renewables, as strong US Democrat party line -- compared to AU's Labor being still wedded to a fossil fuel future, still keen to satiate Murdoch and co.

What broad policies / positions are you suggesting indicate AU Labor is more left than US Democrat?

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#234

Post by rosege »

wsc981 wrote: post #130
mc32 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Australia people are compelled to vote, so the problem looks like the majority having a different take. Not that I agree with their votes, but you can’t say they don’t vote. Ultimately what is one supposed to do in a democracy (never mind Australia for a moment) when you’re just not part of the majority opinion on something?

> Ultimately what is one supposed to do in a democracy (never mind Australia for a moment) when you’re just not part of the majority opinion on something? I think the only option is to emigrate. I didn’t and still don’t agree with most of the government policies in The Netherlands (regarding immigration, climate, EU, etc), but most Dutch voters apparently do. Eventually the best option is just to cut your losses and…

I moved from Australia to the Netherlands as well and felt the same about not having my tax dollars directed where I didn't want them to go. I unfortunately had to move back to Australia and now get to watch my tax dollars flow to the richest companies (including foreign luxury brands) thanks to Jobkeeper.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#235

Post by rosege »

api wrote: post #205
mc32 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Australia people are compelled to vote, so the problem looks like the majority having a different take. Not that I agree with their votes, but you can’t say they don’t vote. Ultimately what is one supposed to do in a democracy (never mind Australia for a moment) when you’re just not part of the majority opinion on something?

What percentage are property owners? Sounds like it's absolutely fantastic free money if you own property.

It is but it's a Ponzi that may well come down one day.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#236

Post by billiam »

siquick wrote: post #37

I've lived in Australia for 10 years and really considering my familys future in this country. We are sleep-walking towards a very average future. An undiversified export economy, out of control house prices, a job-market primarily focused on two cities, a government intent on selling all public assets, very limited political interest in positive climate policies. The latter is simply addressed with "technology will…

might not want to hear this as an adoptive Aussie, but two words, mate: New Zealand.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#237

Post by gregsq »

Nagyman wrote: post #204
WalterBright wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> compulsory voting This always seemed like madness to me. You can force someone to vote, but you cannot force them to vote responsibly. They may just vote "screw you" just for revenge. The right to vote includes the right to abstain from voting when one does not care. Forced voting sounds like a recipe for bad election results. I would expect the same from paying people to vote.

You can just submit a blank ballot. https://www.quora.com/As-voting-is-compulsory-in-Australia-a...

I don’t see this as anywhere near the same thing though. These so called ‘donkey votes’ are derided, and categorised as together with voting errors and other invalid voting forms. The right to withhold your vote is as fundamental as the right to withold your labour. Voter turnout is an important metric in its own right, and is observed tactically in, say, the UK. Compulsory voting simplifies competition, and destroys some forms of it. In particular, the ‘mandate’

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#239

Post by sbr464 »

cottsak wrote: post #114
glenngillen wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't vote on every bill, we vote on preferred parties every 3 years. It's still a predominantly 2-party dominated system though, and there's basically zero difference between the two on issues like this.

This is an important point. How do we vote for and elect representatives in sufficient quantities that will throw out privacy and security overreaches like this? Very few of the representatives in both houses will understand the technical means, underpinnings, and exploit and overreach potential of these bills because they simply don't understand the technology in the middle. All a party/member needs to do is draft t…

I think one solution could be to vote in a faceless/anonymous type candidate that simply provides the context/details up for any vote, then votes based on the outcome of a live poll from their constituents.

There would be several tech challenges, but it could provide a more pure form of the people’s will.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#240

Post by sigotirandolas »

nl wrote: post #152
lettergram wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I enjoy the quote from a political scientist, while ignoring the reality. In Australia we have an example of what happens when you force everyone to vote. It’s not going well, they literally have concentration camps, ask for papers, don’t let you leave your homes, etc. > I think your point about compulsory voting creating ripe conditions for more propaganda is not borne out by reality - the USA is just as flooded wit…

> It’s not going well, they literally have concentration camps, ask for papers, don’t let you leave your homes, etc. Anyone who thinks this is actually what is happening in Australia is falling for propaganda. > they literally have concentration camps Offshore detention centres for refugees seeking asylum is a stain on Australia that cannot be excused or erased. If you mean the quarantine centres they are finally bui…

I assume the parent was referring to the "five reasons to leave home", as far as I know vaccine passports haven't been implemented in Australia yet.
Post reply on HN