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

351–360 of 894 posts

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#351

Post by smcleod »

fhe wrote: post #245
smcleod wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost 11 years in Melbourne (from NZ) and I couldn't agree more. The 220~ days (and counting) that Melbourne has been in lockdown has certainly worn me down, but even before C19 the political climate, attitude towards technology, cost of housing and the impact of increasing bushfires has taken an enormous toll on the country over the past decade that I've been here.

How would you compare NZ with Australia? What are the big differences you noticed? Thanks.

In my experience New Zealand is more different from Australia than a lot of Australians seem to assume.

Generally speaking New Zealand is far more socially liberal than Australia, however there are greater financial / job opportunities in Australia due to it's size.

In New Zealand you're less likely to own a fancy new car or have has many expensive possessions but to me at least it didn't feel like you "need" them as much as in Australia.

There weren't many tech job opportunities in New Zealand given its small population, however I suspect the global rise in remote work coupled with New Zealand's relatively capable internet infrastructure may be changing this.

Entertainment wise New Zealand hands down has more stunning, enjoyable, accessible nature and outdoors - while Australia pre-covid has a far more international offerings (musicians, comedy etc...).

Property prices are absolutely insane in both countries if you want to live in city / inner suburbs.

It's hard to explain but I've always felt that if Australia was socially and politically the USA, New Zealand would perhaps be somewhere in Scandinavia.

What's stopping me from moving back to New Zealand? - My life (friends, work, cat) is in Melbourne, if I was offered a good job opportunity back in the South Island of NZ and moving costs covered - I'd certainly be considering it.

Of course this is all highly subjective and only based on my experiences / observations.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#352

Post by pessimizer »

cletus wrote: post #276
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

So, for the record, I 100% support gay marriage and abortion rights. What you have to realize about the US is that the Supreme Court deciding these issues is... controversial. Many view it as undemocratic (although it's worth noting that many of those same people don't feel the same way about the Supreme Court's pro-2nd Amendment interpretations of modern times). We're still seeing the ripple effects of Roe v. Wade b…

American liberals have a bizarre authoritarian idea of how governance/power works because they were spoiled for the Warren court for so long. They think of government as a tree of daddies and mommies of increasing wisdom and credentials with SCOTUS at the root, to gift you civil rights if you're pure of heart and can just word your petition correctly. They've completely given up on getting buy-in from the ignorant, downtrodden, misunderstood, and miseducated masses that vote for them (don't even ask about the ones who didn't.)

The recent ruling on the Texas heartbeat law might make a dent in that, although I doubt it.

Changes made by pure fiat don't last. Gay marriage in the US could absolutely turn out to have been temporary for just the reasons you explained.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#353

Post by astrange »

mbo wrote: post #119
okareaman wrote: post #35

It's ironic that a country founded by England with prison convicts who pushed out the indigenous people would eventually choose to create a police state. Edit: Fixed for people who knew what I meant but want to bust my...

Maybe it isn't ironic at all. This is the conclusion by Waleed Aly (quite a prominent journalist in Aus) that I read a while ago: > The British arrived with Governors, ready to assume the role of governing. [...] Then, these governments set about building infrastructure in a way they never did in Britain. They were not managing a society that existed. They simply crushed the Indigenous ones that did, then proceeded a…

I remember riding the Melbourne Eye, which has a narrator explaining that "before Melbourne, there was nothing here" and then later mentions the Aboriginals used to live in pretty much the same places.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#354

Post by thenewewb »

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…

With regard to gay marriage - Donald Trump ran and won in 2016 on a platform that included the recognition of gay marriage as a settled right. AU and US aren’t so different!

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#356

Post by astrange »

kernoble wrote: post #133

One thing no one is mentioning is how China is the no.1 beneficiary of a pacified and monitored Australian populace. They are already completely dependent on the Aussie natural resource exports, and are deeply interested in Australia continuing to be friendly towards them, and could easily overwhelm them in a fight.

China has switched to near-open hostility recently.

https://www.hudson.org/research/17228-how-china-overreached-...

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#357

Post by __jerbl »

Australian here, have left the country along with a friend because of the bad vibes such as: - not being allowed to leave, aggressive cops arresting pregnant women, raids on journalists, culture of fear growing, increasing surveillance and police powers and intimidation tactics, defunding the arts and humanities, rising costs of living, house crisis and stressed out friends, tall-poppy crushing boring uninspired alcoholic culture.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#358

Post by boba-men »

dane-pgp wrote: post #279
adventured wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the reality on the ground though? The reality on the ground is that all Western European nations have stricter voting laws / requirements than the US does and almost nobody on HN will dare to talk about that fact because it's inconvenient to the propaganda game. It's the sick joke of eg Major League Baseball moving the All-Star game from Georgia to protest new voting laws, shifting it to Colorado which alre…

> all Western European nations have stricter voting laws / requirements than the US does The UK* has never required voting ID for elections, and it is possible to walk into a local polling station and be given a ballot paper after just stating your name and address. Sadly that may no longer be the case for future elections, because the UK Conservative party has decided to introduce a voter ID requirement, modelled on…

You pointing out edge cases isn't a very convincing argument against Europe as a whole.

In general, Europe has more strict voting ID laws (fact).

In general, Europe has more restricted immigration laws (fact). I mean in the US the debate isn't even about who to let in, rather if we should even have a border and allow people to come in as they please.

In general, Europe is more racist. When Orlando Patterson, a renowned race-baiter in the US, surveyed the evidence he found that America was less racist than any other white-majority country by far. Americans are more open than Europeans to living next to a neighbor of a difference race. And we have sharply rising level of intermarriages.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#359

Post by cenophor »

JesseWright wrote: post #328
cenophor wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say the same things about a lot of things in many countries, someone can probably say the same about the one you live in. I suspect the censorship that you talk about are not as black and white as you seem to be trying to project. It's easy to cherry-pick the things that you don't like to get your own view across. Not really sure what you are trying to achieve here than to push your own personal viewpoints on…

> Not really sure what you are trying to achieve here than to push your own personal viewpoints on things that you don't like? I mean, I could say something like "I'm always kind of surprised by people who want to move to the US because the lack of gun laws", and what does that achieve? The previous post simply engaged the original with additional comments on why someone might not want to move to Australia. You could…

> The post hardly felt pushy to me, and I don’t understand the skepticism of the poster’s intentions.

Two things that lead me to thinking that:

* Blanket statement on censorship without providing further details and references * Picking a policy that affects a small part of the population and referencing articles that already say that many experts already find problematic

I think it's great that you could read the comment with good intentions, but the way that the details are presented and cherry-picked doesn't sit right with me.

I can only agree to disagree on your point that's just part of how we communicate.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#360

Post by tikwidd »

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…

Isn't Australia showing the exact opposite, that you don't need CCP-style top down control to enact powerful surveillance laws? That's always been possible in a "free democracy".

The Australian government has explicitly aligned itself with the US and against China in the current tensions, as a member of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue. In my view Australia (and New Zealand) are being seduced by US power above all else.

For example, in 2020 a Strategic Dialogue took place between the US and NZ, which was barely reported on. Items for discussion included "the strategic and economic architecture of the Indo-Pacific" and " the U.S.-NZ strategic partnership, including security cooperation"[1]. I bet you less than 1% of Kiwis know that this high level military dialogue took place - an impressive level of control over a population of a kind that the CCP could only dream of.

[1] https://2017-2021.state.gov/joint-statement-on-united-states...

Post reply on HN