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

521–530 of 894 posts

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#521

Post by eru »

relativ575 wrote: post #432
runako wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(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.

> [...] but despite the best efforts by the conservative [...]

Those efforts were actually pretty half-hearted. They talked a big game, but they don't actually want to abolish it. (Reminds me of how the UK doesn't really want to face up to a no-deal Brexit, despite lots of brave talk. Or how no government in the UK has so far re-nationalised the railroads, despite re-nationalisation perennially polling high with the general public.)

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#523

Post by iotku »

Nursie wrote: post #505
Palmik wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it's "just" for 2 weeks of quarantine, being able to check-in within 15 minutes seems unreasonable. What about taking a nap, taking a bath, cooking, etc.? Many other countries trust their citizens enough that such draconian measures weren't required even at the height of the pandemic. Not to mention now. I'd be curious how violations to check-in are handled in practice.

> What about taking a nap, taking a bath, cooking, etc.? If you fail to check in, they try again a bit later on, if you fail again it falls back to the non app-enabled method of a police check at your home. The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks. It's a convenience, not an imposition. > Many other countries trust their citizens enough that suc…

>The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks

If the alternative is being harassed by the police it's not voluntary.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#524

Post by twelvechairs »

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…

Australia is still the same 'lucky country' written about over 50 years ago [0]. A second rate political and economic system survives on the back of huge unearned benefits - vast natural wealth, a comparatively small population, multi-culturalism, distant from war and most environmental issues, etc.

The result is still a very attractive place - lots of resources, educated people, safe, little poverty comparatively, etc. But people take it for granted and its sleep walking into a Corporatocracy with fast growing wealth gap.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lucky_Country

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#525

Post by californical »

xvector wrote: post #183
bean5 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see what that really achieves when all the chips and OSes are backdoored. Not to mention the fact that the entire backbone is meticulously tracked.

By this logic we should just give up on security entirely.

Or, realize that security is not only a tech problem. It’s also a people and societal problem. If we don’t live in societies that are conducive to personal liberty, it becomes extraordinarily hard to have any privacy.

If all encryption became illegal, for example, with a death penalty & minimal trial for those who are discovered to be using it — nobody is going to be using encryption. It doesn’t matter how technically savvy you are, very few people will risk death just on principle of “privacy”.

That’s an extreme example, but makes the point that you need both the tech and the society to support liberty and freedom. And it’s a similar dilemma that people are feeling today — what can you do if the government has compromised nearly everything? Those few uncompromised pieces probably don’t stand much of a chance. So instead, it really is a problem of people and society.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#526

Post by BelenusMordred »

fancy_hammer wrote: post #497
Aerroon wrote: post #225

I'm always kind of surprised by people who move to Australia. It's a country that has had an active policy of censorship on entertainment for a very long time - books, video games, movies. The fact that the populace is okay with such a policy would make me reconsider moving there. I've also read some really questionable things about policies regarding aboriginals in the northern territories. In 2007 the government 't…

> I'm always kind of surprised by people who move to Australia. It's a country that has had an active policy of censorship on entertainment for a very long time - books, video games, movies. The fact that the populace is okay with such a policy would make me reconsider moving there. On my list of things to be concerned about as an Australian, censorship of media is pretty low down. It's not something we run up agains…

> It's not something we run up against in day to day life.

Perhaps consider that instead you just don't hear about it? Australia has some of the harshest defamation laws on the planet and journalists routinely self-censor.

When evidence of Australian war crimes in Afghanistan came out the federal police raided the ABC head office taking hordes of hard drives and documents trying to find out who was the whistleblower. None of the evidence presented by the ABC was ever contested and has subsequently been proven true. The raid has been deemed entirely valid under Australian law. Maybe that doesn't bother you, but it's clear that investigative journalism in Australia runs the same risks as many basketcase countries.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/feb/17/federal-police...

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#527

Post by layoric »

stephen_g wrote: post #470
pmontra wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never used a voting machine: do they allow the equivalent of a blank paper?

We don't have voting machines in Australia. You write on paper with a pencil (I believe you can bring a representative with you if you're vision impaired and things like that).

We definitely have voting machines [0] that started being trialed back in 2007, and more widely in recent years.

The process I experienced last time I voted in local elections was you validated where you lived and were given a one use barcode/qrcode (can't remember) which you scanned at the machine, made your selections and dropped the barcode paper in specific bins.

[0] https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Depart...

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#528

Post by Nursie »

iotku wrote: post #523
Nursie wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What about taking a nap, taking a bath, cooking, etc.? If you fail to check in, they try again a bit later on, if you fail again it falls back to the non app-enabled method of a police check at your home. The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks. It's a convenience, not an imposition. > Many other countries trust their citizens enough that suc…

>The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks If the alternative is being harassed by the police it's not voluntary.

The app is entirely voluntary. Quarantine is not.

Effectively you get to choose -

  1. Stay in a quarantine centre for two weeks under guard (which you pay for)

  2. Quarantine at home with police visits

  3. As above but check in with the app
In that context, getting pissed off about the app is ridiculous.

You want to argue quarantine is unnecessary or wrong? Go for it, make those arguments. But what you’re doing is pissing and moaning about the easiest and least intrusive option. It’s not a good look.

As someone who is coming to the end of two weeks in a quarantine centre (actually a Novotel, and there’s no app or home quarantine for international arrivals), that app option looks mighty good. And as I am about to enter a state with no coronavirus, quarantine is looking like it’s been a great plan.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#529

Post by atlasunshrugged »

WanderPanda wrote: post #516
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…

The right to bear arms also seems to fit your framework quite well. If the police knocking on your door has to fear that you appear naked that is unpleasent but merely a nuisance. If you could be armed they will probably think twice if it is worth the risk.

I think in practice (from the US) they come in with 10 people, guns drawn, in bulletproof vests ready to fire at anything moving just in case which leads to unfortunate deaths which is why 'Swatting' is so dangerous in the US

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#530

Post by jeremyvisser »

tikwidd wrote: post #431
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 f…

> 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.

If there’s a cost difference, I’d say that “forced” is an unfairly neutral word to use.

SA is charging upwards of $3000 (for 1 adult, plus $1000 each additional adult, plus $500 per child) for hotel quarantine [1], and though I can’t find a definitive source, your link does say it is intended to be a “cost effective alternative to medi-hotel quarantine”.

So for a family of 2 adults, 2 kids, being charged $5000 to avoid using the app isn’t real freedom. If it means the difference between putting food on the table or not, it’s no choice at all.

[1] https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/restrictions-and-responsibili...

Post reply on HN