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

Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 363 posts

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#221

Post by EdwardDiego »

Gareth321 wrote: post #184
EdwardDiego wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kiwi here, we have? What are you referring to? We have a rather dim outlook of Australian federal/state government overreach too, and some of their populist policies that discriminate against us, often with racist origins. And we've often enjoyed a TV drama or three recounting horrendous corruption in various Australian police forces. (I highly recommend the Underbelly series')

New Zealand had some of the toughest lockdowns in the entire world. It only just lifted the last of the travel restrictions ( https://covid19.govt.nz/international-travel/when-new-zealan... ). It mandated vaccinations in all kinds of ways, including firing hundreds of nurses at the height of a pandemic for what appears to be the worst kind of virtue signalling I have ever seen. The latest democratic crisis involved h…

1) How do lockdowns to minimise deaths violate natural justice?

2) Refusing a reasonable request from an employer is grounds for termination in NZ employment law. Asking people working with vulnerable people to be vaccinated against the disease causing that pandemic is a reasonable request. The only virtue signalling was from the nurses who martyred themselves on the altar of misinformation.

3) No, the Three Waters reforms aren't just handing control over critical infrastructure to Māori. In the proposed legislation, 50% of members of the new controlling entities will be representatives of relevant territorial authorities, 50% representatives of mana whenua, that is, relevant Māori tribes. [0]

I can explain why the reforms are necessary if you like, but it's not directly relevant to the current discussion.

The make-up of the new entities is in line with the constitutional principle of partnership between the Crown and Māori, derived from legal interpretations of, and attempts to reconcile, the differing texts of the Māori version of the Treaty of Waitangi and the English version. [1] [2] Remember that NZ is a common law country, so, like the UK, we have no explicit constitution, and previous legal decisions set the basis for further decisions, so our constitutionality law is shaped by legal precedent.

The link you shared is misinformed at best, deliberate racebaiting misinformation at worst, there's a bit of that going around, and it's often expressed by people who grew up when racism against Māori was commonplace. The man who operates the website you linked runs a hydraulics firm, he's not a constitutional lawyer, just so you know.

I'm happy to explain more about our country if you're looking to learn more.

[0]: https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2022/0136/la...

[1]: https://nzhistory.govt.nz/politics/treaty/read-the-Treaty/di...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_the_Treaty_of_Wa...

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#222

Post by baazaa »

Barrin92 wrote: post #201
baazaa wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire tradition of thought around natural law and limits on the legitimate scope of the state have simply disappeared in Australia so far as I can tell. Everyone just accepts that the state has absolute sovereignty and it can pass any laws it wants. Commonwealth nations have largely devolved into illiberal elective autocracies with immense power concentrated in the PM's offices, minimal parliamentary autonomy (i…

>The entire tradition of thought around natural law and limits on the legitimate scope of the state have simply disappeared in Australia so far as I can tell Natural rights and an absolute sovereign aren't contradictory in the Anglo school of thought, see one of its most famous representatives, Thomas Hobbes. (There's no such thing as natural law, which is always a contractual human affair between the governor and th…

Locke had more influence than Hobbes in GB and the other British exponents of Liberalism like Mill (who was very influential among Australia's founders) also clearly advocated for limits on state power.

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#223

Post by [deleted] »

merek wrote: post #150
ioseph wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lot's of videogames have had to be modified to be released here, in recent memory Hotline Miami 2, Stick of Truth, Fallout 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_in_...

From your link: > Stick of Truth: Banned because of a scene of sexual violence involving minors. Sounds to me like the censors are doing a good job.

[deleted]

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#224

Post by bitwize »

Gareth321 wrote: post #182
motohagiography wrote: post #6

After a discussion with a lawyer friend (not australia, canada, so tangentially related), the "presumption of innocence" that would not obligate this person to have or produce a key for whatever gibberish someone sends to their devices, is what's known in legal circles as a "principle of fundamental justice," and it is not a right that is either absolute or inaliable the way that american rights are set up. One doesn…

When I was young, the thought of a "Constitution" requiring a supermajority to modify seemed arcane. "If it's the will of the people, let it be done." Today, I am forever jealous of America's Constitution. No matter which crazies are elected, they face an extreme uphill battle to remove basic rights. Sadly I do not see the UK/AU/NZ/CAN creating their own Constitutions. Those in power understand it would limit their p…

> No matter which crazies are elected, they face an extreme uphill battle to remove basic rights.

And yet, Roe was overturned. Gay rights are next.

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#226

Post by orestarod »

SilverBirch wrote: post #213
causality0 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact "causing economic damage" is a crime should be enough of a red flag by itself.

If I steal a car from a car dealership, what am I guilty of other than "causing economic damage"? Isn't economic damage the fundamental issue of any theft?

You are guilty of property theft. You forcibly took away something that belonged to another entity. The fundamental issue is property. No "economic damage" slips into the argument. If that was the case, market competition would be illegal as you cause economic damage to your competitors. Advocating for veganism would be illegal because you cause economic damage to meat sellers. Inventing new technologies would be illegal because you cause economical damage to the old guard. Leaving anything other than 5 star reviews would be illegal because you cause economical damage. Calling for boycotting of unethical companies or states would be illegal (all hail anti Israel boycotting laws in the US). Etc etc.

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#227

Post by Gasp0de »

mellosouls wrote: post #18

Note these are bail conditions (so presumably an alternative to a much more constrained existence in prison) for a charge that indicates potential for inflicting severe economic damage after organization via communication devices. When compared to bail conditions for other charged crimes which may also be strict and context-related (eg. trackers or keeping distance from a victim of violence) it sounds tough (and righ…

How is "blocking a road" a crime that inflicts severe economic damage?

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#228

Post by Gasp0de »

jaza wrote: post #166
causality0 wrote: post #21

The headline made me think he was a child pornographer. Holy shit, Australia does this for an illegal protest?

Not just any old protest. Chaining oneself to train tracks, stopping coal-laden trains from reaching the Port of Newcastle (the world's biggest coal export facility). Don't underestimate what the fossil fools in power here in Australia will do, to literally ensure that their gravy train keeps rolling along.

This guy blocked a road in Sydney, he didn't chain himself to train tracks.

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#229

Post by iam-TJ »

Aerroon wrote: post #206
josephg wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You need to get the government's permission to be able to publish your game in Australia. That sounds weird. I'm Australian and I've never heard of that. Can you share some links so I can learn more about that?

Sure! https://www.classification.gov.au/classification-ratings/wha... > Every film and computer game has to be classified before it can be legally made available to the Australian public, unless it is exempt or is being shown at a registered event. If they refuse classification then it is banned.

The same has been the case in the UK for at least the last 20 years with games requiring BBFC (British Board of Film Classification) or VSC (Video Standards Council) [0] ratings.

As of 27th July 2012 [1] UK enacted a Statutory Instrument "The Video Recordings (Labelling) Regulations 2012" [2] ...

> From today, it is a criminal offence to sell video games with a “12” rating to those younger than that age.

... manadated VSC as the sole organisation...

> The new law ends the dual system, gives legal backing to PEGI 12, 16 and 18 ratings and will result in clearer, unambiguous guidance about the suitability of games content for specific age groups.

... with responsibility for PEGI (Pan European Games Information)[3] ratings.

> PEGI provides age classifications for video games in 38 European countries. The age rating confirms that the game is appropriate for players of certain age. PEGI considers the age suitability of a game, not the level of difficulty.

[0] https://videostandards.org.uk/RatingBoard/about-history

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-rules-to-better-prote...

[2] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/1767/contents/made

[3] https://pegi.info/

Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone

#230

Post by krapp »

bitwize wrote: post #224
Gareth321 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was young, the thought of a "Constitution" requiring a supermajority to modify seemed arcane. "If it's the will of the people, let it be done." Today, I am forever jealous of America's Constitution. No matter which crazies are elected, they face an extreme uphill battle to remove basic rights. Sadly I do not see the UK/AU/NZ/CAN creating their own Constitutions. Those in power understand it would limit their p…

> No matter which crazies are elected, they face an extreme uphill battle to remove basic rights. And yet, Roe was overturned. Gay rights are next.

To be fair, Trump being able to stack the Supreme Court the way he did was the result of happenstance and decades of effort by the GOP. They did face an extreme uphill battle, but they were able to surmount it.

The real problem here is that the Supreme Court is a lifetime political appointment and, as long as their decisions have support in Congress, they're unimpeachable.

Post reply on HN