Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine • Hacker News Board

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#181

Post by Handytinge » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 2:26 PM UTC

throwawayfear wrote: post #124

ehnto wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The borders are closed so it's a choice you have made to enter the country and require quarantine, you know what you signed up for it is made abundantly clear. I think if you asked the majority of Australians they would say that they are happy people have to quarantine at the hotels and that they be guarded, since most of our outbreaks have been from quarantine breaches. So as far as a democracy goes that's right on…

So you're okay with increasingly stricter subversion of freedom, because you've consumed media fear-mongering about the pandemic. The pandemic is not deadly enough to justify building a totalitarian regime. What would have been the case if you asked the majority of Germans what they thought about certain restrictions in the 1930s? Democracy is more than the "whole community setting the rules for the community." It is…

> So you're okay with increasingly stricter subversion of freedom

Yes. Simple as that. Most of us are happy with the trade off of freedoms in this scenario.

Your viewpoint of what defines totalitarianism or miscarriages of liberty are fine, and you’re welcome to keep them or even share them. But you don’t get to don’t get to dictate to others why your fiercely individualistic ideals are definitively are better than the community trade offs being made.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#182

Post by Handytinge » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 2:32 PM UTC

This is an interesting choice of article of the many on this matter.

The title is wrong (it’s state government, not federal. You wouldn’t post “US government” when Florida enacts something).

The intent of this program is as a trial to see if this improves things or not.

I suspect a lot of the readers here are lacking any real knowledge of Australia’s treatment of COVID-19 beyond the odd random news article and are looking through their own localised lenses. Before criticising, it may be worth taking some time to research and understand.

Our death toll in total in 18 months is about the same as the current daily death toll in the US. We have achieved this via means that simply would not work in the US due to dissension between states and differing views on the practically of temporarily giving up freedoms for the greater good.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#183

Post by Handytinge » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 2:43 PM UTC

throwawayfear wrote: post #119

nineteen999 wrote: post #32

This headline is misleading ... "Australian gov" sounds like the Australian Federal government, but the government in question is the South Australian government, which is a State gov.

It is the article's headline, and there wasn't enough space to edit in the specific state. But is it actually a meaningful distinction as far as these policies being constrained permanently to just one part of Australia? Will this spread everywhere or is there a reason why this would only be constrained to a really small town no one really notices?

Did you post this article primarily so you could respond to everyone here touting your own opinions and disagree with anyone else’s? I get things are frustrating at the moment, but that’s pretty narcissistic.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#184

Post by ryandrake » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 6:38 PM UTC

throwawayfear wrote: post #140

bigiain wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Read out loud what you are saying. You are saying that government ordering you to quarantine in your house, with facial recognition and GPS tracking in your own home, is less oppressive than being forced to stay in one of their quarantine hotels. And you're saying that in response to all the "freaking out" about this. A slightly different reading of what they're saying is: "The government ifs offering to allow you…

It is not a choice no matter how often the people defending it insist it's a choice. It's no more a choice than someone holding a gun to your head and asking you which poison you'd like to drink. On what planet do we live, where all of a sudden that statement even in your version of the reading is in ANY way more palatable or reassuring? The government is offering you these choices: 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarant…

> 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarantine hotel for two weeks in a sealed room or > 2) Quarantine in your home with facial recognition and GPS tracking and random pings that send the police to your home if you do not respond within 15 minutes > This is not a choice.

What's your alternative? Just let sick people loose into the country, exponentially infecting everyone? I'm in the US, and that strategy did not work out very well. 660K deaths and counting. Quarantine has historically been a sensible, effective way to deal with deadly communicable diseases. I wish the US took it as seriously as Australia and NZ did.

EDIT: Crap, I just realized I responded to the article's submitter, someone who's already posted the same ax-grind 30 times to the article's threads. Guess I've been had.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#185

Post by sadfinger » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:34 PM UTC

throwawayfear wrote: post #124

ehnto wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The borders are closed so it's a choice you have made to enter the country and require quarantine, you know what you signed up for it is made abundantly clear. I think if you asked the majority of Australians they would say that they are happy people have to quarantine at the hotels and that they be guarded, since most of our outbreaks have been from quarantine breaches. So as far as a democracy goes that's right on…

So you're okay with increasingly stricter subversion of freedom, because you've consumed media fear-mongering about the pandemic. The pandemic is not deadly enough to justify building a totalitarian regime. What would have been the case if you asked the majority of Germans what they thought about certain restrictions in the 1930s? Democracy is more than the "whole community setting the rules for the community." It is…

Thanks, I appreciate you care about us. Australia has been on this path for a while now but similar changes are happening everywhere. It does feel like a frog being slowly cooked. I would still choose an app at home compared to paying for hotel quarantine though. There are more serious and permanent changes happening with surveillance (every phone number is attached to a government ID, metadata is saved for years, number plates are scanned and logged at state borders etc), indirect crimes (you did something a criminal might do, so that's a crime) or extremely petty things like the defamation law or carrying a 'sharp object' or even not being able to pull the tab when you fill gas to needing an ID to buy a knife from the supermarket. It's not just that they seem to be able to pass whatever weird or overreaching laws but there seem to be little to no legal safe guards or limitations about what they can be used for or when they can be used. There are limited means to civilly object as things instantly become crimes. Is Australia really considered a 'very free' country.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#186

Post by throwawaylinux » Tue, Sep 14, 2021, 12:28 AM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #180

throwawaylinux wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What examples? How do they demonstrate that? Clearly not all available examples were used! And nowhere did I say that that is the only reason a society would be willing to turn to the state for protection, so spare me the false counter examples dressed up breathlessly to look like some incredible gotcha.

I gave the examples in my first comment, you didn’t refute them but claimed their were some bad countries in Europe, which I agreed with (Ukraine, Russia, etc…).

Your examples didn't refute what I wrote.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#187

Post by ehnto » Tue, Sep 14, 2021, 1:24 AM UTC

throwawayfear wrote: post #124

ehnto wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The borders are closed so it's a choice you have made to enter the country and require quarantine, you know what you signed up for it is made abundantly clear. I think if you asked the majority of Australians they would say that they are happy people have to quarantine at the hotels and that they be guarded, since most of our outbreaks have been from quarantine breaches. So as far as a democracy goes that's right on…

So you're okay with increasingly stricter subversion of freedom, because you've consumed media fear-mongering about the pandemic. The pandemic is not deadly enough to justify building a totalitarian regime. What would have been the case if you asked the majority of Germans what they thought about certain restrictions in the 1930s? Democracy is more than the "whole community setting the rules for the community." It is…

You're extrapolating the pandemic situation out to the rest of societies problems and rules and we just can't have a good discussion like that.

There are ways in which I agree with you about Australia's future and reducing freedoms, especially around technology and tracking. But the pandemic is not trivial, look at countries like India and America that essentially had it run free, that is a lot of death, and it wasn't just covid patients. A health system full of covid patients can't help anyone else either.

The thing is that we have a plan and a path out of this, and it relies on controlling outbreaks until we are all vaccinated. To make that happen, people have to quarantine for 14 days. People thought their happiness was more important than the community and the community disagrees so we had to enforce it.

The community also thinks you can't let rodents live in your restaurant kitchen, and that you can't drive while drunk, etc. Laws often protect the community from the selfish and that is what happened here too. We tried to let people be adults but they left the hotel and caused untold damage to the community, so now they get babysat.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#188

Post by ehnto » Tue, Sep 14, 2021, 1:50 AM UTC

sadfinger wrote: post #185

throwawayfear wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're okay with increasingly stricter subversion of freedom, because you've consumed media fear-mongering about the pandemic. The pandemic is not deadly enough to justify building a totalitarian regime. What would have been the case if you asked the majority of Germans what they thought about certain restrictions in the 1930s? Democracy is more than the "whole community setting the rules for the community." It is…

Thanks, I appreciate you care about us. Australia has been on this path for a while now but similar changes are happening everywhere. It does feel like a frog being slowly cooked. I would still choose an app at home compared to paying for hotel quarantine though. There are more serious and permanent changes happening with surveillance (every phone number is attached to a government ID, metadata is saved for years, nu…

To be part of a society there needs to be a compromise. I agree not to not to steal things in exchange for knowing people aren't allowed to steal things from me.

That I understand, and the same for the quarantine rules. But things have been getting really complicated lately. As you have pointed out, these agreements aren't feeling like community decisions and technology has been making the application of law humanless and arbitrary.

If I forget to pay for a loaf of bread, walk out the store, and then go back to pay immediately, it would just be a human misunderstanding nd everyone would be happy with that outcome. Societal dues paid.

But if instead a facial recognition camera tracked me leaving and the security gate detected the item unpaid then the matter goes into an automated system and even if I realise my mistake and pay my societal dues the system doesn't care. If we aren't careful it could elevate the system above the society, and lose its original purpose of helping resolve social conflits. Instead it would just apply law without the capacity to fully appreciate it's role of societal mediation.

There are things in Australia that are already like that. Expired registration cameras for example. A police officer can suss out the situation and see if you just forgot to do it this morning, or if you are constantly driving without insurance. The camera can't figure that out, so a simple mistake can cost you.

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#189

Post by hilbert42 » Tue, Sep 14, 2021, 6:34 AM UTC

amanzi wrote: post #131

throwawayfear wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're okay with increasingly stricter subversion of freedom, because you've consumed media fear-mongering about the pandemic. The pandemic is not deadly enough to justify building a totalitarian regime. What would have been the case if you asked the majority of Germans what they thought about certain restrictions in the 1930s? Democracy is more than the "whole community setting the rules for the community." It is…

"The pandemic is not deadly enough..." I'm curious to know how many more deaths would be required, in your opinion, for it to be considered deadly enough?

Right, 'The pandemic is not deadly enough' argument quickly degenerates into a 'how much is a human life worth in dollars?' one. This then leads us down the slippery slope to us losing our humanity.

It seems to me that much of human misery down through the ages can be put down to a small percentage of humanity who thinks this way and we'd all be better off if they had bigger more highly tuned amygdalas to boost their empathy for other human beings.

(This question has always intrigued me, it would be very informative to see sets of normal distributions for given dollar amounts for the population.

Also, given that we're living in COVID times, distribution figures for a virus's infection/replication rate vs death rate per capita, etc. would be informative. Knowing when fear gripped everyone to such an extent that say 95+% of the population would be clambering for vaccinations would be useful if for no other reason than to put vaccination resources to best use. For example, if the death rate for COVID or any virus were one in three as it was for the Plague/Black Death in the Middle Ages, would we then reach a figure of 95+% vaccination rate? Surely such figures would be of great interest to medical professionals and behavioral psychologists.)

Re: Australian gov to use facial recognition and GPS tracking to enforce quarantine

#190

Post by hilbert42 » Tue, Sep 14, 2021, 7:45 AM UTC

ghoward wrote: post #144

jp0d wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a good argument or a fair comparison, mate! One is a highly infectious disease that is spreading through contact and via air and the other is history! Covid has killed more than a million people and is continuing to do so as it mutates to get deadlier and deadlier. Please don't tell me that it's a lie and a conspiracy theory as I've lost family members to this engineered microscopic monstrosity!

Viruses generally mutate to be less deadly, not more. And it is a fair comparison because both were used as excuses by governments for overreach.

'Viruses generally mutate to be less deadly, not more.'

Some might do but cholera, polio and smallpox and many, many other diseases are still just as virulent as they ever were down through the ages. (I know, smallpox only exists in labs but the last known case was a lab worker who died).

That argument is essentially a non sequitur, it's attempting to justify a position that doesn't really exist - and even if it did then it'd be by the very slimest of margins (apply with very strict constraints).

Even in cases where certain viruses have mutated to weaker strains - and given the high stakes involved (gambling with human life), then you would not only have to be extremely specific but also provide soild/reputable scientific evidence to backup your assertions (i.e.: for specific viruses/strains, etc.).