51–60 of 168 posts
I read a lot of these wacko things coming out of Australia, but is any of it really enforced? Wasn't there a thing about banning encryption? I remember when Malcolm Turnbull made the quote: “The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia,” [1] https://www.newscientist.com/article/2140747-laws-of-mathema...
>The online world should not be a wild west where bots and bigots and trolls and others are anonymously going around and can harm people I can't express how much I hate this. The online world SHOULD be a wild west, away from government reach, in my opinion.
>trolls I hate their usage of 'troll' too. To me, 'troll' means a guy who argues about 0.9 bar not equaling 1 in a math forum. I have no idea what the hell these people mean when they say 'troll'.
Australia’s proximity to China is maybe affecting its western ideals. This is one of many things it’s done and doing recently to make it a less free country and this can only be a slippery slope which they are already sliding on.
South Korea spent much of the 20th century under military dictatorships, going from one military coup to another. Singapore's single-party system (with suspiciously fascist iconography[0]) is notorious for harsh authoritarianism. Japan today is a lot more liberal than it was a century ago, but their criminal conviction rate is too high to be believed and public support for the death penalty is around 80%. All three of these are nice countries in many respects, but I don't think any of them are particularly liberal by anglosphere standards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think about this approach every two weeks, when I hear that somewhere in the world there's a new initiative to treat the internet like a kindergarten. Sure why not, but I would like to sign up for the wild west, the easily offended and gullible can live happily on the safe side, thanks.
Exactly. I used yo be a total Internet freedom proponent and that's what I want for myself but now as everybody (of whom the majority is mentally unprepared) is on Facebook I admit it makes no sense - Internet kindergartens have to be there for the people who need them (and most of these people just naturally go to places like Facebook and Instagram).
And the more defeaning the silence is when the idiotic ideas these people float about as plausible and desirable things, the more confident and less cautious that they are in support and pursuit of those things.
As somebody who spent the last week reading Facebook post after post from these people specifically in Australia not just defending but promoting concentration camps, military round ups and forced medication, I cannot emphasise enough caution in the idea that they should just be left alone in their harmless walled gardens with their amusing but inconsequential fantasies, not subject to the trauma of critical inquiry by third parties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>trolls I hate their usage of 'troll' too. To me, 'troll' means a guy who argues about 0.9 bar not equaling 1 in a math forum. I have no idea what the hell these people mean when they say 'troll'.
The modern definition of troll seems to be more closely related to one of the personalities that got its start at a particular notorious imageboard, who constantly posts flamebait and thrives off of pushing the limits of how much they can upset others. I haven’t seen the original more innocuous definition used in a long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>trolls I hate their usage of 'troll' too. To me, 'troll' means a guy who argues about 0.9 bar not equaling 1 in a math forum. I have no idea what the hell these people mean when they say 'troll'.
But 0.9 bar isn't equal to 1. Oh! I see what you did there! I think they are using it to mean something closer to "cyberbully", maybe.
This is a foundational problem in our anthropogenic decimal system of math (which we only use because of the evolutionary accident of a modal (n.b.: not average) human happening to have ten fingers); the whole issue doesn't even exist in the only correct representation of numbers, ternary (base-3).
For example, let's multiply 1 / 3 * 3:
In decimal `1.0 / 3.0 == 0.3 bar * 3 == 0.9 bar` and we've proven that 1 equals 0.9 bar, which is clearly nonsense and falsifies the whole concept of decimal representation of numbers.
In ternary, though, `1.0 / 10.0 == 0.1 * 10 == 1.0` -- see? no contradiction. Maths just work properly if you use the true numeric base.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk. I will not be taking any blasphemous questions from unbelievers about dividing and multiplying by two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>trolls I hate their usage of 'troll' too. To me, 'troll' means a guy who argues about 0.9 bar not equaling 1 in a math forum. I have no idea what the hell these people mean when they say 'troll'.
The modern definition of troll seems to be more closely related to one of the personalities that got its start at a particular notorious imageboard, who constantly posts flamebait and thrives off of pushing the limits of how much they can upset others. I haven’t seen the original more innocuous definition used in a long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But 0.9 bar isn't equal to 1. Oh! I see what you did there! I think they are using it to mean something closer to "cyberbully", maybe.
> But 0.9 bar isn't equal to 1. Oh! I see what you did there! This is a foundational problem in our anthropogenic decimal system of math (which we only use because of the evolutionary accident of a modal (n.b.: not average) human happening to have ten fingers); the whole issue doesn't even exist in the only correct representation of numbers, ternary (base-3). For example, let's multiply 1 / 3 * 3: In decimal `1.0 / 3…
I read a lot of these wacko things coming out of Australia, but is any of it really enforced? Wasn't there a thing about banning encryption? I remember when Malcolm Turnbull made the quote: “The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia,” [1] https://www.newscientist.com/article/2140747-laws-of-mathema...
Australia is a highly compliant/obedient society. It’s also highly litigious, lots of fines for anything and anything. It’s the defamation capital of the world. Yes this will be enforced, it’ll be enforced selectively against critics of the current government. There is a video of the announcement with the current PM grinning and smirking in the background like a little kid when this is discussed https://www.reddit.co…
The media landscape in Australia is extremely consolidated, to the degree that there are only a few major media players, and they are almost completely aligned in their agenda and messaging.
There is an incestuous relationship between the media and the politicians - the hyperconsolidated media acts as kingmaker, which gives an incentive for the government to coddle them. In return for favourable legislation, the media runs stories (or doesn't run them) to the benefit of their favoured political party. That party is almost always the conservative LNP, if you're ever wondering why Australia has such a prominent right-wing authoritarian streak, know that the Murdoch media has a dominant print market share, a monopoly on cable TV, and a large majority of the free to air TV market is ideologically aligned.
I would bet real money that any random HNer who has clicked on the recent posts regarding Australia's incursions into digital freedom has heard more about it than the average Aussie.