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

431–440 of 894 posts

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#431

Post by tikwidd »

fallous wrote: post #401

I've lived to see this kind of thing enacted in a good portion of the Anglosphere and my visceral reaction is to engage in a combination of civil disobedience and a determination to undermine every overstep made. With regards to things like the Aussie requirement for phone check-ins every 15 minutes or they will deploy police to follow up and confirm your location, turn off the phone and make them eat the cost of hav…

You seem to be referring to the South Australia Home Quarantine app [1]. There has been a lot of misinformation circulating about this app recently. I'd just like to clear up some things:

The app only applies to people that need to quarantine, not the general population.

The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app.

It is a way for authorities to make sure people are quarantining correctly, and to follow up cases of contact if people break their isolation bubble. Police are not arresting people for failing to check in. (My guess is that they would reset your isolation duration, follow up contacts and/or move you into a managed quarantine).

[1] https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/home-quarantine-app

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#432

Post by relativ575 »

runako wrote: post #203
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.

(I am not a lawyer.) The USA recognized same sex marriage in 2015, but we did so via a Supreme Court ruling. The Court's composition has changed since then, and the new Court has signaled a willingness to overturn settled precedents. While our current detent may persist, I would imagine that an action taken by the Australian Parliament would tend to be more durable.

> I would imagine that an action taken by the Australian Parliament would tend to be more durable.

I'm curious to understand why you'd think a law passed by elected lawmakers is more durable than a verdict by judges who have their position for life? Obacare was surely very controversial, but despite the best efforts by the conservative and an ideologically hostile Supreme Court, it remains in place after ten years.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#433

Post by smcleod »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #367
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.

Why are they still in lockdown? Vaccine rates seem fine enough to at-least let most people do whatever they want.

No, unfortunately Australia is only 31% fully vaccinated!

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/datablog/ng-inter...

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#435

Post by malwarebytess »

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.

The name that fits best imo is digital panopticon. It is a virtual prison for entire societies.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#436

Post by stephen_g »

roody15 wrote: post #269

I simply cannot wrap my mind around what is happening in Australia. Continuing a lockwdown while the number of positive covid cases remains in the low hundreds and the daily death rate in the lower tens to single digits. Nothing makes sense here. Draconian laws, complete shutdown over something that is and has been statistically under control and managed from months. Am I alone here or do people really think what is…

Perhaps you're misinformed.

The laws the article is talking about are the big problem - they're Federal and permanent (at least until we have a sane Government elected to reform and repeal them).

The COVID lockdowns are all operating under temporary state of emergencies under the State Governments. There's no actual reason to think they will be 'extended forever' like some crazies seem to think. For several states, our State Governments are actually much more competent and better in many ways than the Federal Government. Of course, a big part of the reason lockdowns are needed is because the Federal Government botched some vaccine deals with Pfizer etc. so we started vaccinating very late and have been continually supply-constrained since then.

The lockdowns have actually have tended to work effectively - for instance, in my state we've had a few lockdowns and have been able to quash every outbreak so far. So we've been mostly COVID free as we are at the moment, so there is no lockdown right now. Right now I can freely travel to any state except NSW, ACT and Victoria (which are hotspots). I would have to quarantine to go to WA though, but hopefully our state goes from "Low Risk" to "Very Low Risk" by their Government's rating soon so I can take a holiday there without two weeks quarantine.

The main actually ridiculous restriction is the Federal Government's ban on travel out of the country. That is wrong, and probably unconstitutional. Travel out should absolutely be allowed, just with the proviso that there may not be quarantine capacity for months to return (perhaps you should need to have to book in advance and pay a deposit if you intend to return in the next year). Although apparently it is actually ridiculously easy to get an exception to leave, I have a few friends that have taken jobs overseas and their applications were approved in hours with no questions (not even asked for any evidence they actually had a job offer).

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#437

Post by Nursie »

gorwell wrote: post #429
Nursie wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ban on alcohol in some communities is (AFAICT) welcomed by those communities, which have massive problems with it. There are laws in other states which allow people to declare their house a “dry place” which is then enforceable by law, to try to stop anyone from bringing alcohol into the house. I can’t tell you whether any of these measures work, but they aren’t implemented for reasons of racist suppression, from…

As the Australian government rapidly moves toward an authoritarian police state, does part of you wonder if they'd be so cavalier if their citizens had guns? Or if that might be a deterrent to tyranny at some point?

I don't think it is moving towards being an authoritarian police state any more than any other western country, and I wouldn't want to live in a country where citizens had easy access to guns, and suffered the violence and mass shootings that seem to come from that, like in the US.

Hope that helps.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#438

Post by didibus »

inkyoto wrote: post #162
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…

the only thing missing is competent leadership I keep hearing this every now and then, but the incompetent leadership does not come from nowhere nor has conceived itself. The country leaders have been legitimately elected, which means the leadership is the direct reflection of the country people's will. People consciously elect incompetence that bears the incompetent leadership, for that is what they desire for one r…

> The country leaders have been legitimately elected, which means the leadership is the direct reflection of the country people's will

I think this is only true if the Australian voting system is Condorcet based. Otherwise I think technically you can elect someone overall less popular, but that has a very strong base of dedicated voters.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#439

Post by moneywoes »

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…

Sounds like Canada

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#440

Post by Nursie »

chrisseaton wrote: post #420
Nursie wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in democracies like the UK, people who don’t vote are disregarded as lazy and ignored too. I agree, you should be able to withhold as a protest, in practice it’s 100% meaningless.

They aren’t ignored - parties try to woo them over.

In a system where there are many more parties, and ballots can still be spoiled, I don't see how that would be different.
Post reply on HN