Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

innovationaus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 294 posts

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#81

Post by 6nf »

javagram wrote: post #77
6nf wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Florida population is 21 million, Australia is 26 million. AUD 300 billion to save 70,000 lives, that's 4 million dollars per life saved. The median covid death is 85 years old. We spent 4 million dollars to save one 85 year old person for a few more years.

The median covid death is 85 years old? Where did you get that number? https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-... Using the US dataset as an example of mortality when covid-19 is allowed to spread unrestricted in a population, 700,952 died. Only 193k were 85 and older, so the median covid death must be younger than that - in the lower end of the 74-85 age cohort where another 185k have died.

I'm using the australian numbers

So you found one number in my argument that you dont like and that invalidates my entire point? Is that what you're saying? What number would you prefer instead of the 85? Does that change everything?

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#82

Post by postingawayonhn »

afarviral wrote: post #30

I live in NZ and feel that commentors of our govts approach overstate the level of authoritarianism we're experiencing. Its not universal but it feels more like the majority of people recognize that lockdowns and other restrictions are for the greater good. If you are arrested you are not going to be "disapeared", you will be processed like anyone else breaking a law. While we might collectively trust the current ele…

Things have been pretty sweet (except for the quarantine limits) in NZ until the last month or so. I spent all of last summer there and life was like normal.

Back home in Melbourne there's essentially been various levels of lockdown continuously for 18 months.

Currently there is a nighttime curfew in place, limits on how long you allowed outside (pretty much unenforceable though), compulsory mask wearing anywhere outside of the home, permits required to go to your place of work, no right to protest, no right to organise your fellow citizens to protest, etc. It's pretty scary to me that all that can be brought in and accepted by large parts of the population.

How long will it take to unwind all this? I imagine it will be at least another year or two before we properly return to normal.

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#83

Post by javagram »

6nf wrote: post #81
javagram wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The median covid death is 85 years old? Where did you get that number? https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-... Using the US dataset as an example of mortality when covid-19 is allowed to spread unrestricted in a population, 700,952 died. Only 193k were 85 and older, so the median covid death must be younger than that - in the lower end of the 74-85 age cohort where another 185k have died.

I'm using the australian numbers So you found one number in my argument that you dont like and that invalidates my entire point? Is that what you're saying? What number would you prefer instead of the 85? Does that change everything?

Why use the Australian numbers to argue that AU should have taken the USA’s approach of unrestricted covid spreading?

Australia’s numbers won’t match what happens when covid-19 spreads widely, because they successfully stopped it.

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#84

Post by LurkingPenguin »

grecy wrote: post #43
AndrewBissell wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the US keeping the land border closed, it will soon be impossible to leave Canada without being vaccinated (or bribing a border guard).

It's a forgone conclusion that no country in the world will let you in without proof of COVID vaccination. This has been the status quo for dozens and dozens of countries around the world with regards to for example Yellow Fever Vaccination, so it's nothing new at all. Many people just didn't know about it because they never tried to go to those countries before (West Africa is my personal experience)

> It's a forgone conclusion that no country in the world will let you in without proof of COVID vaccination.

There are countries that require all arrivals to quarantine regardless of vaccination status. I live in one of them (Taiwan).

The issue with COVID vaccination is that it's still possible to become infected and transmit the virus to others even if you're vaccinated, so requiring vaccination for arrivals is a good way for countries to reduce the risk of arrivals getting seriously ill and burdening their healthcare systems, but it doesn't at all prevent the virus (including possibly new variants) from being introduced into their populations.

The science shows that neutralizing antibody levels wane quickly after COVID vaccination, and with Delta, this appears to be what's causing large numbers of breakthroughs. For example, we had a case here recently where an ostensibly healthy airline pilot in her 40s caught a Delta breakthrough case just 2 months after she received her second Moderna jab.

A single jab of yellow fever vaccine on the other hand provides lifelong protection and we have decades of data showing its efficacy. Also of great importance to note: unlike SARS-CoV-2, yellow fever does not transmit directly from person to person.

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#85

Post by ryandrake »

taitems wrote: post #64

Cries of "Tyranny!" and "Give me liberty or give me death" are imported concepts that don't resonate quite as well here in Australia. The pearl clutching "Save Australia" protests were good for a chuckle[1], but are also accompanied by people advocating we rise up and murder our police[2]? When Florida has 50x the per capita death rate than that of Australia, it's pretty clear that the US chose liberty AND death[3].…

The words “tyranny” and “authoritarian” have become so overused since 2020 it’s almost comical. All over the English speaking world, not just Australia. Every little thing an authority does that someone doesn’t like is now called tyranny. Masks are tyranny. Vaccines are tyranny. Kicking a jerk out of your store is tyranny. The word has been watered down and exaggerated to the point of meaninglessness. After the boy cries wolf too often, if some kind of tyranny actually does happen, there won’t even be a strong word to describe it anymore.

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#86

Post by version_five »

taitems wrote: post #64

Cries of "Tyranny!" and "Give me liberty or give me death" are imported concepts that don't resonate quite as well here in Australia. The pearl clutching "Save Australia" protests were good for a chuckle[1], but are also accompanied by people advocating we rise up and murder our police[2]? When Florida has 50x the per capita death rate than that of Australia, it's pretty clear that the US chose liberty AND death[3].…

Per my other comment, this is one of the tyrannical neighbors that wants to control you. Should he / she really have a say in what you are able to do? I find the idea horrifying.

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#87

Post by TapWaterBandit »

ntSean wrote: post #37
chroem- wrote: post #3

It's been an odd experience having a few Australian HN posters attempt to rationalize to me why their police are justified in shooting people who leave their homes with rubber bullets, and why it's normal to be required to take surveillance photos of themselves in their own residences. I guess strict authoritarianism must be accompanied with equally strict media propaganda.

> police are justified in shooting people who leave their homes with rubber bullets This is not true at all. As an Australian who has been following protests closely and the police response, they are clearly only shooting rubber bullets at those who are: - Throwing glass bottles at police - Attacking "fake news" journalists - Damaging buildings and monuments. Black Lives Matter protests peacefully marched through the…

Police going door to door in NSW/VIC investigating protestors against lockdowns months after they have occurred. I assume you will support similar surveillance of BLM protestors?

NSW: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/09/23/australia...

VIC: https://twitter.com/sullydish/status/1447314509949984768

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#88

Post by hulahoof »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #71
hulahoof wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in Australia and for myself personally, I am not worried about how we are being treated _now_, I am worried about the powers that have the capacity to be abused in the future without a legal standing for opposition.

I feel the need to point out that you are probably not concerned about your treatment now because you have no power and are of no consequence. If you were a senior public servant and had uncovered some wrong doing in your, or any other department, you would care. If you were a journalist and writing a story that could embarrass somebody with power, you would care. If you were in the military and a witness war crimes,…

You are of course completely correct

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#89

Post by gruez »

stephen_g wrote: post #76
vel0city wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laws are always used to prosecute criminals. The tricky thing is the definition of criminal can quickly be changed to include you.

Or with the Access and Disrupt bill, it’s no longer much of a stretch to ‘add and modify’ some illegal material onto your computers and devices…

Doesn't that obviously fall under entrapment?

Re: Australians ‘complacent’ to rapid growth in digital surveillance

#90

Post by paranoidrobot »

6nf wrote: post #80
paranoidrobot wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AUD 300 billion to save 70,000 lives You keep quoting 300 billion, where are you getting that from?

https://budget.gov.au/2021-22/content/covid.htm Please explain how am I using this number incorrectly? What is the correct number I should be using instead?

You're using that number incorrectly.

It's like that classic Pirates vs Global Average Temperature chart[1]

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikaandersen/2012/03/23/true-f...

Post reply on HN