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

Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

smh.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#21

Post by rustynails77 »

acqq wrote: post #18
sev wrote: post #17

Every time I try to explain the implications of privacy intrusion to friends some always argue, "who cares, as long as you're not doing something wrong" - they also don't care about identity theft or anything...they simply don't care. And I want them to care...how do I force them to?

Why do you think you have the right to "force" them? Just explaining, only when they are interested to hear, and not giving theory but the real-life examples is the only sensible advice. Of course, you have to do your homework first.

Do you remember the blue ribbon internet campaign back in the late 90s? At the time, I went into Australian #irc channels raising awareness. I was assuming that most Australians on the Internet (back then) were technically literate and would care. I had quite a few people who said "go fuck yourself" in different forums when I raised the issue. I hate to say it, but I do consider many of my Australian bretheren to be "redneck" like, but not quite like the "stereotype" you see in the movies. Hoping for the average Australian to "give a fuck" is not going to happen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ribbon_Online_Free_Speech_...

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#22

Post by halviti »

acqq wrote: post #3

One commenter there wrote and I'd like to read some reasonable answer to that: This is old news, obviously no one watched 4 Corners years ago – I think 15 – 20 yrs ago. I think it was about a program called Echelon. Remember the time a New Zealander broke into one of those unmanned “Pine Gap” sites (in NZ) and found mainframe computers downloading telecommunications data. Did we care then?

Nobody cared then because they didn't understand it.

If all you show someone is a building with some equipment and say that they're monitoring you, it doesn't take much hand-waving to convince someone that these complex systems are only targeting certain people, etc.

Now, rather than just knowledge of a room with blinking lights, we have dumbed-down presentation slides that definitively show even the most computer-illterate person that their own personal data, not just the data of specific people, is being targeted, collected, stored, data-mined, etc.

It goes from a feeling of "it's probably legal, and targeting criminals" to "that's MY data they're stealing"

That's why people care. Moreover, it's just important that people DO care. If everyone adopted the same "why should we care now" attitude, then the powers that be have already won.

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#24

Post by voltagex_ »

dcfindlay wrote: post #16

Interesting that nobody I've talked to over here seems to be that surprised about the extensive data collection. A few people are annoyed about the unaccountable way it's been done and the abuse of power, real or potential, though. It takes a lot to shake Aussies out of the "she'll be right" mentality, and we don't have a Fourth Amendment to be violated like the US does. I also fear that the aware, technically litera…

Oh I dunno, a few well placed Murdoch headlines seem to do the trick. If only he were on our side...

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#25

Post by swombat »

chii wrote: post #14
mtgx wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any reason why privacy couldn't become an issue as big as gay marriage? I don't think so. People just have to want it as badly and fight for it.

> Is there any reason why privacy couldn't become an issue as big as gay marriage? many more laymen can understand gay marriage (whichever side of the fence they are on) than privacy implications of massive surveilence.

I don't think so. We just need a compelling human story to make the average person understand.

For example, "police militarisation" is a bit of an abstract idea, but once you start telling stories of how the police broke in and shot the 8-year old labrador who was sleeping on the couch, everyone gets it.

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#26

Post by xyzzy123 »

arjn wrote: post #5

Note that Telstra was once owned by the Australian government. Recently their stake was reduced to about 10% (according to wikipedia) but IMO the Aussie government still dictates a lot of what Telstra can do.

It is still a political project. We have to assume it's compromised, although by friendly government.

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#27

Post by ihsw »

swombat wrote: post #25
chii wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there any reason why privacy couldn't become an issue as big as gay marriage? many more laymen can understand gay marriage (whichever side of the fence they are on) than privacy implications of massive surveilence.

I don't think so. We just need a compelling human story to make the average person understand. For example, "police militarisation" is a bit of an abstract idea, but once you start telling stories of how the police broke in and shot the 8-year old labrador who was sleeping on the couch, everyone gets it.

There's already been a compelling story: the Stasi[1].

> By the 1970s, the Stasi had decided that methods of overt persecution which had been employed up to that time, such as arrest and torture, were too crude and obvious. It was realised that psychological harassment was far less likely to be recognised for what it was, so its victims, and their supporters, were less likely to be provoked into active resistance, given that they would often not be aware of the source of their problems, or even its exact nature. Zersetzung was designed to side-track and "switch off" perceived enemies so that they would lose the will to continue any "inappropriate" activities.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi#Operations

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#28

Post by stephen_g »

daegloe wrote: post #13
dcfindlay wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In our area the NBN has gone up recently, and we've received letters saying that the existing copper network will be decommissioned in a year so all landline phone users will need to get an NBN connection. If the Aus govt is baking intercept points into the NBN (not hard to imagine) then they'll be able to intercept phone traffic as well, whether they get cooperation from telcos or not.

From what I understand, the government has required the telcos to sign agreements forcing them to cooperate with the transition to NBN infrastructure.

There's nothing like that happening. They are paying Telstra and Optus a pretty good deal to migrate customers off legacy HFC and copper telephone networks though. But no forcing is happening...

Re: Leading Australian Telco storing data on behalf of US government

#29

Post by swombat »

ihsw wrote: post #27
swombat wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so. We just need a compelling human story to make the average person understand. For example, "police militarisation" is a bit of an abstract idea, but once you start telling stories of how the police broke in and shot the 8-year old labrador who was sleeping on the couch, everyone gets it.

There's already been a compelling story: the Stasi[1]. > By the 1970s, the Stasi had decided that methods of overt persecution which had been employed up to that time, such as arrest and torture, were too crude and obvious. It was realised that psychological harassment was far less likely to be recognised for what it was, so its victims, and their supporters, were less likely to be provoked into active resistance, gi…

The problem with that story is two-fold:

1) It's too abstract and distant. It feels like it screwed around with people in weird ways in a different world to ours. Communist Germany does not seem like a reasonable parallel to our society for most people. "It wouldn't happen here" is a natural reaction.

2) Even though it's not that far off the reality of what could happen, it sounds like an exaggeration, a bit like a Godwin Law condition. The fact that it sounds like "Nazi" (and that probably some sizeable percentage of americans have never heard of the Stasi and so will hear "Nazi" and repeat that) really doesn't help.

What we need is a more immediate and tangible human story, something that arouses sympathy and at the same time a clear realisation that "this could happen to me".

Post reply on HN