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

Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

digitalrightswatch.org.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 894 posts

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#511

Post by JimTheMan »

desertraven wrote: post #53
siquick wrote: post #37

I've lived in Australia for 10 years and really considering my familys future in this country. We are sleep-walking towards a very average future. An undiversified export economy, out of control house prices, a job-market primarily focused on two cities, a government intent on selling all public assets, very limited political interest in positive climate policies. The latter is simply addressed with "technology will…

I’m also here, and quite concerned. I’ve seen how quickly a country can erode (Syria, Ukraine, Hong Kong) and am questioning the future of this country.

I guess I don't really follow the reasoning with the examples.

Syria has always been a somewhat dangerous place. Ukraine got invaded by Russia. Hong Kong was taken from China by the British, became it's own nation and is currently being ... taken back against its own will in a sense.

Not that it couldn't happen. But Australia is not really a place I would imagine a violent uprising happening compared to most other places. I think we have too much social cohesion, even between those who are politically opposed.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#512

Post by siquick »

prawn wrote: post #326
brokenmachine wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine how psychologically demotivated you would feel if you didn't have the property...

And were watching others' properties rise aggressively in price, and further out of your reach. I can imagine that many people feel quite helpless.

All the while being bombarded with ads from real estate companies trying to FOMO you into buying a very average house for a price you really can't afford.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#513

Post by switch007 »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #495
roody15 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1200+ cases in NSW out of a population of over 8 million. So we should extend a strict lockdown … to do what exactly? Is the plan to manage this virus with a series of alternating lockdowns and get the number of cases to zero? Is this realistic, is this the type of world you want to live in? The virus appears to be as contagious as chicken pox, vaccines help with serious cases but are doing little unfortunately to st…

To answer the last question they plan to open up once double vaccination rates hit a target I think 80%. I think this makes sense.

The target will move once it hits 80%. This is so obvious I feel sorry for all of you/them

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#514

Post by dtn »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #332
dtn wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can point to Australia's COVID death rates (~4 per 100,000) in comparison to the United States and the United Kingdom (~200 per 100,000) and make a case for that. This legislation is far less justifiable, and should have no reason to exist. By associating the two issues, you are weakening the case against it.

Is it good practice compare a very large island that has 2/3rd the population of California, or it’s 1/10th the population density of the whole of the USA? Seems like a flawed argument for at least a dozen more reasons.

I'm not interested in pursuing this debate, but I will point out that our highly urbanised population means that it's not as cut and dry as you're making it out to be.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#516

Post by WanderPanda »

fallous wrote: post #401

I've lived to see this kind of thing enacted in a good portion of the Anglosphere and my visceral reaction is to engage in a combination of civil disobedience and a determination to undermine every overstep made. With regards to things like the Aussie requirement for phone check-ins every 15 minutes or they will deploy police to follow up and confirm your location, turn off the phone and make them eat the cost of hav…

The right to bear arms also seems to fit your framework quite well. If the police knocking on your door has to fear that you appear naked that is unpleasent but merely a nuisance. If you could be armed they will probably think twice if it is worth the risk.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#517

Post by quickthrower2 »

switch007 wrote: post #513
quickthrower2 wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To answer the last question they plan to open up once double vaccination rates hit a target I think 80%. I think this makes sense.

The target will move once it hits 80%. This is so obvious I feel sorry for all of you/them

We’ve been in and come out of a lockdown before. I’m not worried.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#518

Post by cromulent »

a_bonobo wrote: post #466
inkyoto wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the only thing missing is competent leadership I keep hearing this every now and then, but the incompetent leadership does not come from nowhere nor has conceived itself. The country leaders have been legitimately elected, which means the leadership is the direct reflection of the country people's will. People consciously elect incompetence that bears the incompetent leadership, for that is what they desire for one r…

>. The country leaders have been legitimately elected, which means the leadership is the direct reflection of the country people's will. People consciously elect incompetence that bears the incompetent leadership Counterpoints: 1. Australia's two big parties are closer to an oligarchy than an egalitarian system, these parties recruit from university politics so there's a whole pipeline that will seed out people who h…

Good points. I would also add, in relation to:

> the leadership is the direct reflection of the country people's will.

Every 4 years you get to influence the politicians for a few days and they do their best to make you happy. On all the other days, the lobbyists and party factions get to influence them.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#519

Post by tpoacher »

zomiaen wrote: post #85
nickysielicki wrote: post #79

These "data disruption warrants" are the most interesting to me: > Data disruption means adding, copying, deleting or altering data held in a computer. This can only be done in order to frustrate the commission of offences or determine relevance of data. To assist disruption, a warrant can also authorise other facilitative activities, such as entering specified premises, using electronic equipment to obtain access to…

They're a member of the FIVE EYEs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

For a second there, I thought I was reading omnipedia instead. Scary stuff.

Re: Australia’s new mass surveillance mandate

#520

Post by prawn »

cblconfederate wrote: post #459
prawn wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And were watching others' properties rise aggressively in price, and further out of your reach. I can imagine that many people feel quite helpless.

and resort to cryptocurrencies

Which is (at least for most people) more or less gambling.
Post reply on HN