Australia passes contentious encryption bill opposed by Apple, other tech companies

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 47
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,022member
    macguy85 said:
    loopless said:
    The current conservative government in Australia is self-destructing just like the Republicans in the US, hopefully the next government will change this stupid law. 
    And don't knock Australia's democracy, it is a far more democratic country that the US. No gerrymandering, no dis-enfranchisment of minorities, and a far greater percentage of eligible voters actually get out and vote (on a weekend!) And far, far fewer guns. Oh, and universal healthcare. But I digress...
    You obviously do not understand Australia Law.  Australian, by law, have to vote.  If they do not show up at the polls they receive a fine from the government.  That's why it's held on a weekend.  In fact, it unfortunately throws of their economy within the country leading up to an election because Australians will typically not travel at that time so they can vote without a fine.

    Australia is a fantastic country, but to think they don't have their own issues is a gross assumption.
    I’ve never heard of this criticism of compulsory voting. I think there are two points to make.

    1. You have to turn up at a polling place and have your name marked off the roll. You then get a ballot paper and you get to vote in secret. Hint: who said you had to mark the paper :) A good percentage of votes are informal, deliberate or otherwise

    2. If you know you are travelling you can do two things: pre-poll ballot, they’re available for a period of time before the poll date. Or you just turn up at a polling booth where you are and get the form for your electorate. In any event, the fine is $20 and can be waived.

    This legislation passed because there were two bills before the parliament (specifically the senate) on the last sitting day of the year. One was to compel the government to treat sick asylum seeking children in Australia based on doctor’s advice (rather than at the discretion of the minister responsible for immigration), the other was this piece of shit. Both of these bills had to be discussed in the Senate.

    The opposition and the government were both playing games.

    The opposition had agreed in principle to this encryption bill but had wished to make amendments. These had to be debated in the senate before they became law.

    The government did not want to have to deal with the refugee bill because passing in the senate would send it to the lower house, where it would have lost a vote - it would then become law. This would have signalled a loss in the confidence of the government. In a traditional situation, a government would dissolve parliament and cause an election. This is because the government has lost the power of a significant piece of legislation. A significant party of the ruling party’s platform is based on managing refugees, if you want to use a term loosely.

    So the government filibustered the vote on the refugee bill until the lower house shut down for the year. In the ordinary course of events, and it happens often, a movement is made to the extend the hours of the lower house. No such movement was made. The government would rather not deal with refugees, or their loss of confidence that would ensue, and as a consequence, they were prepared to risk not passing the encryption bill.   

    In the meantime, the government wedged the opposition on the encryption bill, claiming terrorists and pedophiles were going to run riot on whatsapp over Christmas. So the opposition crumbled and waved the bill through without considering the amendments.

    So that’s why we can read your messages. It seems like a bit of a Trojan horse to be honest. It allows us to provide state aid to those other states who seek it. Including those states whose maximum penalties for offences is death. This is also at odds with australia’s Moral stance on capital punishment.

    All in all, a really poor showing by our government and opposition. 
    derekcurriebaconstangsennenwatto_cobra
  • Reply 42 of 47
    macguy85 said:
    loopless said:
    The current conservative government in Australia is self-destructing just like the Republicans in the US, hopefully the next government will change this stupid law. 
    And don't knock Australia's democracy, it is a far more democratic country that the US. No gerrymandering, no dis-enfranchisment of minorities, and a far greater percentage of eligible voters actually get out and vote (on a weekend!) And far, far fewer guns. Oh, and universal healthcare. But I digress...
    You obviously do not understand Australia Law.  Australian, by law, have to vote.  If they do not show up at the polls they receive a fine from the government.  That's why it's held on a weekend.  In fact, it unfortunately throws of their economy within the country leading up to an election because Australians will typically not travel at that time so they can vote without a fine.

    Australia is a fantastic country, but to think they don't have their own issues is a gross assumption.
    Strange, elections have never once impacted my travel plans. Apart from pre-polling there is also postal voting where you can register and they will send your forms anywhere in the world for you to vote and then send back.

    Of course you have to find a suitable representative to watch you vote which is harder than it sounds, but then if all else fails they allow you to submit a letter stating you have made best endeavours to locate a person but couldn’t. 

    I did this for the last by-election and have not heard from anybody that I have been found in breech.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 43 of 47
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,140member
    cropr said:
    chasm said:
    Anti-democratic.
    A law passed by a democratically elected parliament is by definition a democratic law.  You don't have to agree with the content, but you cannot call this anti-democratic just because you don't like it.
    The current  parliament has so many in answered questions about it validity there is no confidence it is democratic. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 44 of 47
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,022member
    mattinoz said:
    cropr said:
    chasm said:
    Anti-democratic.
    A law passed by a democratically elected parliament is by definition a democratic law.  You don't have to agree with the content, but you cannot call this anti-democratic just because you don't like it.
    The current  parliament has so many in answered questions about it validity there is no confidence it is democratic. 
    That I would agree - there are number of members on both sides who are under an eligibility cloud, the problem is they are their own gatekeepers on the particular issues (s44 of our constitution) so that despite all the bluff and bluster, nothing is happening.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 45 of 47

    @derekcurrie - overreact much?

    Drink some water or take a xanax and chill - you’re being quite irrational. 

    While modern day Russia has developed some flaws in it’s democracy, it is quite a stretch to consider it a totalitarian state. Or is it that you forgot the Berlin wall came down as the USSR collapsed and broke apart? 

    No arguments on China.

    It is very disappointing that bill was passed into law - but stating that it makes Australia a totalitarian state just shows your ignorance. Read the post by @Loopless and perhaps do some research before making ludicrous statements.

    While you’re at it - look up both ‘Five Eyes’ and ‘Pine Gap’. The results will give a thorough understanding of just how flippant and uneducated your closing sentence is.

    In future may I suggest you spend a few minutes researching before trying to be clever by posting incorrect almost laughable statements.

    gatorguywatto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 47
    lkrupp said:
    entropys said:
    If you want to see true fascism, the nanny state with its corporatist triumpherate of Big Corporates working with Big Unions enabled by Big Government, watch Australia.  Regulated to enervation.
    And they’ve already disarmed the population so the people can do nothing about it.
    Right? Because otherwise everyday citizens from all across the vast landscape would descend on Canberra and seize control of the nation by force. Sure the government has trained troops and tanks and artillery and fighter jets, but they're no match for a bunch of good ol' boys with assault rifles! Especially considering the sheer number of highly motivated participants a revolt is likely to attract. It doesn't matter that many people don't care enough about politics to VOTE, 'cause there's no way they'd pass up the opportunity to sprint, guns blazing, into a firestorm, right? All those bank tellers, grocery store cashiers, school teachers, soccer dads, retail sales people -- the entire gamut of a typical society -- would surely represent a force too formidable for any government to repel.

    Yes, the issues of data privacy and gun control are inextricably entwined.

    With that out of the way, what causes me the most concern isn't even the gummint accessing MY personal information. I'm more concerned about bad actors penetrating corporate and infrastructure systems. There's not much point in my phone being an impenetrable fortress if the bad guys get all my information by hacking my bank. Laws that diminish security are just as destructive to big systems as to small ones like phones.
  • Reply 47 of 47
    Screw 'em!   No iPhones for down under.
    Sorry, but no other way to say it, but the Australians are idiots for allowing this.  Sad day down under!  
    Do you people really think us individuals want this?

    Our major party politicians are all scumbags who only care about pressing the flesh and giving themselves pay rises. 

    I did the best I could by voting for Derryn Hinch but no minor party will ever get in. 

    Yet I’m an idiot and don’t deserve an iPhone 🙄
Sign In or Register to comment.