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

251–260 of 894 posts

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#251

Post by ientan »

cletus wrote: post #185
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…

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…

[flagged]

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#252

Post by dunco »

xvector wrote: post #189
chadcmulligan wrote: post #127

There is a lot of trust in Australia that their elected officials and the public service / police will do the right thing. These new laws being introduced if used in the spirit they are intended could be good. The continual refusal of the current federal government to introduce a federal crime and misconduct commission as most of the states now have is a disturbing trend. For instance three local councils were placed…

> These new laws being introduced if used in the spirit they are intended could be good. Please find me an example of a government throughout any point in human history that has not turned on its citizens.

every government that peacefully left office after electoral defeat?

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#253

Post by chii »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #223
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…

>I really think Australia desperately needs this system but negative gearing is so ingrained in Australian culture now that it's political suicide to try and change it. I believe Labor made noises about this in a recent Federal election and suffered the consequences. The senior ministers of the ALP came to a similar conclusion. Mid this year they announced no changes to negative gearing or capital gains tax offsets.…

negative gearing allows the average person investing to have the same tax advantages as a company investing (in anything), because for a company, only profits (revenue minus expenses) are taxed.

If there were no "negative gearing" for investment properties, then either there would be fewer such properties, or people would have to form businesses to perform such investments (which adds an extra bit of friction with accounting and tax).

Making it possible to deduct "expenses" from "revenue" of a person doing the investment makes sense.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#254

Post by brezelgoring »

BrissyCoder wrote: post #227
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…

I mostly agree with everything here but will point out that SE salaries have risen quite dramatically over the past 10 years in Aus. If you are a (genuinely) senior engineer you should be on $170k+. In a place like Brisbane (if you can handle the summers) that's a reasonably liveable salary. But yeah - I fear it's going to end up like the rest of the country fairly quickly... One of my major gripes is that education…

The ones that got chairs back then got them, its not feasible to get property now unless you cheat or someone else gives it to you.

At least that's how I interpret it.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#255

Post by dragonwriter »

mrkstu wrote: post #97
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.

What is the reality on the ground though? For instance: "Texas ranks number 10 overall when it comes to engagement among African American voters, including being first overall in proportional representation of blacks in state legislature and national party conventions." https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/african-americans-in-texas-...

Yeah, that's the problem that the new voting restrictions aim to fix. Likely also the redistricting; both because the Voting Rights Act, by which the federal government prevented Texas (among other states) from wholesale disenfranchisement, is out of the way.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#256

Post by Aerroon »

spaginal wrote: post #213
kylebyproxy wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sic aside, I don't follow your line of reasoning. Care to elaborate?

Disengaged voters will simply vote for the current leadership or loudest guy, typically the same thing, without a thought towards the issues. Strongmen love compulsory voting, it creates a false perception of legitimacy, because corruption or no corruption, if only 30% of a population is engaged in the issues and the other 70% could give two shits, that is a slamdunk for incumbents.

There's some evidence for this. Chile adopted voluntary voting in 2012. According to this study[0] this decreased the incumbent's advantage in the elections that follower.

[0] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-political-s...

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#257

Post by x3n0ph3n3 »

grecy wrote: post #168
fieryskiff11 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say stolen, I say conquered.

If I came into your house at gunpoint and literally took everything you own, would you say I stole your stuff, or that I conquered you?

The difference is that there is currently a government to mediate disagreements between you and I, as well as a shared set of laws.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#258

Post by chrisco255 »

d_t_w wrote: post #29
chrisco255 wrote: post #3

Aren't we Five Eyes nation members all affected by this? The U.S. should pull out of this. We need to re-assert privacy rights and avoid trade as much as possible with any countries that enact these kind of laws.

Four eyes spying on your citizens and sending reports back to your intelligence agency is sort of the point of Five Eyes (well, one of the points). It ain't cheating if you're not spying on your own people.

We can redefine it that way. Time to re-assert our sovereignty.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#259

Post by chrisco255 »

burlesona wrote: post #4
chrisco255 wrote: post #3

Aren't we Five Eyes nation members all affected by this? The U.S. should pull out of this. We need to re-assert privacy rights and avoid trade as much as possible with any countries that enact these kind of laws.

Such as the US largest trade partner, China?

China is number 3 behind Mexico and Canada. We do import more crap from there than anywhere else though: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/t...

But yes, we can't cut the cord fast enough. Still, trade is another matter than shared mass surveillance. If the USG is sharing our data with the CCP, I'd very much want some people fired and perhaps jailed over it.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#260

Post by alliao »

eunos wrote: post #220
alliao wrote: post #207

CCP is literally cancer on all citizens living in currently free democracy. They show that it's possible to keep a huge population under control with current tools and technology. Our politicians show public disdain, but fuck are they being seduced. And Australia is just stepping into it step by step while asking it's citizens to trust the government because they seem to be at odds with CCP publicly. As someone who l…

In short tech surveillance are both working and attractive. Regardless of CCP, Australia, US, FB, GOOGL, etc.

I don't know if you're being intentional, but one of these isn't like the rest. The reach and ambition of CCP though without much elegance is overwhelmingly overshadowing any efforts shown by others.
Post reply on HN