Australian Census Stirs Up Storm of Privacy Concerns (buzzfeed.com)

How much is the fine for false information? by penguinoid · 2016-08-04 04:42 · Score: 1

$1800 fine for not submitting a paper? I wonder how many people born on January 1st live at 123 Example St?

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways

Re:How much is the fine for false information? by npslider · 2016-08-04 04:50 · Score: 1

You never know, maybe there really are 23 million Jon and Jane Does down under.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by jarkus4 · 2016-08-04 05:13 · Score: 2

"The ABS will certainly try to force compliance—fines range from AUS$1800 (~£1,000 or ~$1,370) for providing false information to AUS$180 per day for failing to submit the form. But the agency will have no real way to verify the answers provided by those who do complete the form as accurate. Failure to vote in the Federal Election last month resulted in only a AUS$20 fine."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by bluefoxlucid · 2016-08-04 05:36 · Score: 2

Mandatory voting laws should be handled by writing yourself in.

--
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by ewibble · 2016-08-04 06:16 · Score: 2

mandatory voting is OK as long as long as the following options are available:
1. None of the above you are all bunch of self serving morons.
2. How the hell should I know? I haven't got enough information to make an informed decision, so you want me to vote to introduce random noise in the vote to distill the vote of people who actually care. Go major parties.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by ewibble · 2016-08-04 06:27 · Score: 1

Here is a question what if you submit a mainly blank census? you have submitted it and it contains no false information.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by Jester998 · 2016-08-04 06:44 · Score: 1

In Canada, not filling out the census has not only monetary penalties, but potential jail time. So if you're one of the unlucky 25% of households that got the "long form" census this year, you had to -- under threat of fines and jail time -- provide information like whether you have any "emotional, psychological or mental health conditions" (question 11e), the address you normally work at, how you get to work, what time you leave for work and how long it takes you to get to work (questions 42, 43, 44a and 44b), how much you paid for child care, child support and spousal support (48, 49), if your house needs repairs (F6), how much you pay for electricity, heating and water (F8a-c), and how much your mortgage payments are (F10a).
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by ShanghaiBill · 2016-08-04 07:03 · Score: 1

Here is a question what if you submit a mainly blank census? you have submitted it and it contains no false information.
I know nothing about the Australian census, but in America you are required to give your address and the number of people living there. All other information on the census form is not legally required, and although they may pressure you to provide it, you can refuse. Do not believe any promises that information will not be abused, because that has ALREADY HAPPENED: During WW2, the census bureau provided information that was used to round up citizens of Japanese ethnicity, and place them in internment camps.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by BradMajors · 2016-08-04 07:26 · Score: 1

The US government has not been prosecuting persons who don't return their census form.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by Hotawa+Hawk-eye · 2016-08-04 07:43 · Score: 1

Is "None of your damn business" an acceptable option for any or all of those questions? I think it is.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-08-04 08:29 · Score: 1

It is my understanding in AUS that turning a blank ballot counts as voting as far as the mandatory voting law is concerned.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by Dantoo · 2016-08-04 10:00 · Score: 2

Correct.
You can put anything on the ballot paper you like. The requirement is that you attend a polling station and have your name recorded as having receiving the ballot papers. You don't even have to do this on election day. There are a number of pre-poll options and absent voting provisions. They make it so easy that it isn't a drama.
Election days are more like a giant picnic barbeque these days anyway. There's more live broadcasting of what food is available at the polling stations than political comment. Every local charity sets up a stall outside the boundary and it's more like a street market than a serious national plebiscite.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by bigtreeman · 2016-08-04 10:09 · Score: 1

We don't have a bill of rights down here !
We have NO rights !!
My ancestry goes back to second fleet convict,
we are still treated as convicts.

--
Go well
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by zaphodbeeblebox · 2016-08-04 10:56 · Score: 1

Yep.
You have to turn up, get your name crossed off, and both receive and hand in the papers. What you do with those papers is totally up to you....
In theory, you can:
Leave them blank, and hand them in.
Write your own selection on.
Doodle all over the forms
Write a slogan on the form.
or vote formally, it is up to you.
The only things that are illegal are not turning up, voting multiple times, and encouraging people to vote informally (hence I am not advocating any of the other options).
The government has an obligation to ensure that everyone can vote, and it is reasonable. I went to one of the voting booths the morning of the election, and I think I waited a total of 10 minutes in the line. The worst I heard of was about an hour, and that was middle of the day.
They also provide a number of non-attendance options for those who have a 'reasonable' excuse for not voting in their home area on the day. You can absentee vote at another polling booth, you can pre-vote at certain centres that are set up. You can organise a postal vote, and post the vote in, you can go into an embassy and vote, and for those who are infirm, they send officials to places like nursinng homes and hospitals.... http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/w...
They are pretty reasonable on the reasons they accept on why you can't vote on the day as well.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by spir0 · 2016-08-04 11:36 · Score: 1

Keep your fingers inside the cage inmate!

--
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by GumphMaster · 2016-08-04 12:11 · Score: 1

by writing yourself in.
There's no equivalent of that US tradition in most of the world. In Australia, writing your name on the ballot paper will, with near 100% certainty, make it an informal vote regardless of any other marks in the boxes. If that is your intent then simply placing the unmarked ballot paper in the box has the same effect and requires less effort.

--
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by Billlagr · 2016-08-04 12:42 · Score: 2

I voted early. I was asked if I had a reason for voting early, and my response was "Yes". That was a satisfactory answer.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by well_in_theory · 2016-08-04 12:52 · Score: 2

In Australia, writing your name on the ballot paper will, with near 100% certainty, make it an informal vote regardless of any other marks in the boxes.
Not this year. I'm guessing they regret this decision.
https://twitter.com/ahcayley/s...
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by GumphMaster · 2016-08-04 14:37 · Score: 1

The classic dick-n-balls sketch is not generally a unique identifier that on its own would invalidate the ballot paper: counting such ballots is not new. If you put anything on the ballot paper that can uniquely identify the voter then the vote is informal. A high proportion of voters would be the only person with that name that voted at a particular station. Initial counting will treat ballots containing names as invalid until the race turns out to be tight and the votes might make the difference. A handful of tight races end up with court rulings on whether a name is uniquely identifying or not.

--
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by bluefoxlucid · 2016-08-05 01:53 · Score: 1

My point was mostly that a non-vote is a form of vote. Some people choose to abstain. If you're forced to vote, you're being asked to give inaccurate polling data; you need a way to make your vote accurately reflect the abstain vote. I guess you found that.

--
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Re:How much is the fine for false information? by ewibble · 2016-08-07 06:16 · Score: 1

I know you can put anything you like on a ballot, I want those options printed on the form so everyone knows that they are options, and have meaning, not just invalid vote throw it in away. At the very least it would be interesting to see what the percentage was.

10 days by QuietLagoon · 2016-08-04 04:44 · Score: 2

... (now $1800 for failure to submit a form; or $180/day for late submissions)....

So if a person is more than 10 days late in submitting the form, it is cheaper not to submit it at all?

Re:10 days by Anubis+IV · 2016-08-04 04:59 · Score: 4, Informative

His skills seem fine. After all, "$180/day for late submissions" should tell anyone with decent reading comprehension that there must be a submission, because you can't have a late submission without having a submission. And in the case that there is no submission, a fee of $1800 apparently applies, just as he said.
Admittedly, it may not work that way in practice, which is what you seem to believe, but that's certainly the way that it's worded.
Re:10 days by QuietLagoon · 2016-08-04 05:00 · Score: 2

Please sharpen your reading comprehension skills.
Perhaps you should heed your own advice.
Re:10 days by quenda · 2016-08-04 13:54 · Score: 1

So if a person is more than 10 days late in submitting the form,...
No, no fine. You will get a friendly knock on the door, asking how many persons were home, or not counted elsewhere, on census night.
They will offer you a paper form, or replacement online access code, and leave a card with a help-line number.
If the person ignores multiple reminders and offers of help, they may receive a formal direction to submit. It rarely comes to that, and even more rarely to any sort of prosecution. It was around one in a 100,000 households last time.

They are asking for it by npslider · 2016-08-04 04:48 · Score: 2

"Australian government's response has been to try to calm fears by promising that it will secure the census data"

Sounds like an open invitation to 'evil hackers' everywhere to 'come and get it', waving a red flag saying - we have the mother-load here for the taking!!

Re:They are asking for it by ls671 · 2016-08-04 05:13 · Score: 2

Yep, there was a typo in the summary it should have read:
"Australian government's response has been to calm fears by promising that it will try to secure the census data"

--
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Re:They are asking for it by XxtraLarGe · 2016-08-04 05:22 · Score: 2

The other thing I'd wonder about is what kinds of questions are they asking, and why do they need all that data? In the U.S., the census is only supposed to be for one purpose, enumeration of representatives in Congress, but they ask all sorts of nosy questions that have nothing to do with that.

--
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Re:They are asking for it by bluefoxlucid · 2016-08-04 05:39 · Score: 2

U.S. Census data is hella-useful. I use it for a lot of modeling, along with public record of the Federal Government's spending and of income sources from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

--
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Re:They are asking for it by CrimsonAvenger · 2016-08-04 06:14 · Score: 3, Funny

we have the mother-load here
Mother Lode. Refers to gold & silver mines, and that sort of thing.
On the other hand, you might have been referring to triplets, which could be described as a "mother load".....

--

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Re:They are asking for it by pla · 2016-08-04 06:42 · Score: 2

You have confused "useful" with "I give a shit". I can think of a million "useful" data-points to have on every single American. That doesn't mean you have any right whatsoever to collect or access that data.

More importantly, you should keep in mind that such data has a serious sampling bias - It selects for people 1) bored enough to fill it out, 2) not at all concerned with their privacy, and 3) who have never heard of Japanese-American internment camps.
Re:They are asking for it by bluefoxlucid · 2016-08-04 06:52 · Score: 1

To be fair, a lot of people around here need medication.

--
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Re:They are asking for it by CCarrot · 2016-08-04 08:06 · Score: 1

The other thing I'd wonder about is what kinds of questions are they asking, and why do they need all that data? In the U.S., the census is only supposed to be for one purpose, enumeration of representatives in Congress, but they ask all sorts of nosy questions that have nothing to do with that.
^^ This. Why does name and address make this more 'useful' data? So they can figure out which street names tend to have the most people named 'John' living on them? How exactly could retaining and associating this particular data be used to determine anything that would actually be beneficial* to the poor slob compelled to give up their info?
Well, at least they're not pulling income information straight from the tax authority...I particularly like the claim that Stats Canada does it "to reduce the burden on Canadians". >:- /
* Note: I do not count 'targeted' advertising as beneficial to anyone besides the asshat trying to sell people as much shit they don't need as possible while spending as little as they can on advertising.

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:They are asking for it by npslider · 2016-08-04 11:00 · Score: 1

Well.. I guess to a data-miner that info would be gold, eh? ;)
Re:They are asking for it by AHuxley · 2016-08-04 12:16 · Score: 1

AC the US hacks find vast amounts of mil/gov data in plain text on wide open US infrastructure as networks have to connect with much older federal, mil, state computer networks.
Thats a problem thats unique to the way the US has to work on larger data sets and its own much older internal public and private sector networking or standards.
The hardware is too old to upgrade to allow any encrypt, decrypt standards or can only accept a limited format that has to be in plain text as submitted down a network.
Domestic law enforcement always expected data in plain text on any state or federal database when doing a national search. If a state or federal department or a local private sector gov/mil contractor had data in its own unique encrypted format, that search may not find vital results.
The US idea was that anyone doing the search could be fully trusted by default on vast networks as only trusted users got physical access to any gov/mil network to start a search. The show ID and sit down network terminal in a limited number of federal buildings or on a mil site idea was to keep such vast data sets very safe but very easy to search going back many decades.
Other nations might not need to keep such plain text access and can actually buy into very advanced software that can encrypt and decrypt for a researcher.
Just walking out or getting a readable download in full is can now be made much more tricky on a network or for any one person with physical access.
i.e. the full dataset is protected not just the very secure chair in front of an older search terminal that makes every request in plain text.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:They are asking for it by GumphMaster · 2016-08-04 13:11 · Score: 1

The standard talking point coming out of the ABS is this scenario:

The Census form is the only reliable source of information on whether an individual identifies as being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. So, after the census, if the census name, DOB, and address records are matched against new death records a better picture of indigenous Australian life expectancy can be made. That information is useful when planning programs to improve indeigenous life expectancy.
Neither birth nor death records carry this indigenous origin information. However, it strikes me that this can be achieved a number of ways without keeping the actual name, DOB or address. Hashes of the components (normalised or perhaps several allowing for variant spelling) can just as easily be compared and the sensitive data is never retained.
There are currently legislated protections forbidding the use of this data for any other purpose including law enforcement, courts, or taxation. However, these can easily be remove by an Act of parliament (and are probably already subverted for intelligence agencies). I do not trust future parliaments.

--
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Re:They are asking for it by quenda · 2016-08-04 14:03 · Score: 1

And it will fail.
Look at the hacks on US infrastructure right now - they're even breaking into presidential correspondence. If they can't protect secure communications inside the government

That was a non-secure political-party mail server, not internal government communications (which would be secured by the NSA). I think you are confused.
In the case of census results, it is much easier. When a complete form is submitted online, it is instantly encrypted using a asymmetric cipher, and forwarded to multiple processing sites.
Batches of forms are transferred across an air-gap to an offline processing system, which holds the decryption key.
The vulnerability would be in partially completed forms held on a database connected to the web server.
Re:They are asking for it by dwye · 2016-08-05 06:21 · Score: 1

If they hadn't had the census material, they would have just handled it by appealing to patriotic (or greedy) Californians to identify which of their neighbors were from the same country which had just launched a sneak attack on their own.
BTW, many German immigrants were also interned, which in practice meant most of the German Jews who had left Germany before it was too late got to visit the Great Plains at government expense, along with a lot of Bundists that were not determined to be harmless.

Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by Dr.+Manhattan · 2016-08-04 04:50 · Score: 5, Interesting

...the American Community Survey. Theoretically, answers are required by law, but no one's been prosecuted in over 40 years. In fact, the legal theory argument that the survey is constitutional has never been tested in court.

We got it a couple years back and I refused any information beyond what the regular census requires. I got a phone call where I explained I didn't trust them to secure my information. So far, I haven't been prosecuted for it, nor have I heard back from them. Came down to it, I'd be okay with being the test case.

--
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!

Re:Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by pla · 2016-08-04 05:19 · Score: 2

We got it a couple years back and I refused any information beyond what the regular census requires.

Ditto. The (US) government has the right to a count of people for apportionment of representation. They have fuck-all right to anything more than that, not my name, not my ethnicity, not my education level, not my phone number.

Now, I don't know how Australia sends these out, but in the US, the ACS gets sent to an address, not to a specific person. That would make it somewhat hard to actually fine someone (particularly in a multi-unrelated-adult household) for not filling it out.
Re:Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by ls671 · 2016-08-04 05:20 · Score: 2

In my city, they even do census for cats and dogs with somebody actually knocking at your door only for that purpose. Next; goldfish census!

--
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Re:Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by pla · 2016-08-04 07:16 · Score: 1

Where is collecting this information forbidden?

I didn't say it was forbidden, I said they have no right to it. They can ask - I (and many, many others) just won't answer.

Not at all, just make all adults liable, it's really easy.

Really? If it's that easy to identify all possible liable adults in a household... Then why do we need a formal census in the first place?
Re:Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by JeffOwl · 2016-08-04 07:35 · Score: 2

The government can make the same argument they make for every other invasion of your privacy, such as Safety checkpoints (DL & insurance check), immigration checkpoints 75 miles inside the US, etc... "The government has a compelling interest in XYZ that outweighs the minor impact to citizens' right personal privacy." And the courts will buy it.
Re:Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by chihowa · 2016-08-04 08:05 · Score: 4, Informative

Ok, why not? Why don't they have a right to your name, your age, or even your citizenship? Where is collecting this information forbidden?
The usual answer to that question is right here:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

In the US, any powers that are not explicitly delegated to the government are forbidden by default. The correct question is, "Where is collecting this information allowed?"
The answer to that question is in Article 1, Section 2:

[An] Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.
As that section is talking about taking a headcount for the purposes of representation, the intention was probably just to count the population. The exercise of the power is left up to Congress, though, so the current census is most likely constitutional. If nothing else, it would probably be defended using one of the elastic clauses.

--
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Re:Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by bigtreeman · 2016-08-04 10:20 · Score: 1

The Australian government has the right to create any bogus law they want.
If you don't like the new law, just challenge it in the high court.
If you win, good on you, but generally they will just turn around and
remake the law with a clause it can't be challenged by the high court.

--
Go well
Re:Sounds a lot like the "ACS"... by jaa101 · 2016-08-04 18:30 · Score: 1

It looks like you guys can amend your constitution. Why not throw in a Bill of Rights?
It's too late now. Those in power can see how much trouble the US Bill of Rights causes for the US government. Why would they willingly give power back to the people? We have had various rights legislated but that's essentially worthless since the government is free to override it with subsequent legislation, e.g., the "Northern Territory National Emergency Response" was explicitly exempt from our "Racial Discrimination Act".

In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by kheldan · 2016-08-04 04:58 · Score: 2, Interesting

I don't know about Australia, but here in the U.S., they shouldn't bother/insult people's intelligence with a 'census' anymore, they should just ask the NSA for access to their snooping database; don't they already know every little detail about every person, living or dead, within the U.S. now? Seriously, if they're going to treat us like some combination of convicts in a prison and animals in a zoo, they should at least use all that illegally/immorally-collected data instead of inconveniencing us with some stupid survey to fill out. Honestly, if they're going to spend my tax dollars to stick their little brown noses (and other body parts) into my business, they should at least make as much use of their ill-gotten data as possible and not bother me.

--
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!

Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by PvtVoid · 2016-08-04 05:20 · Score: 3, Informative

You're aware that the census is legally mandated in the Constitution, right?
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-08-04 05:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Fun fact: the US government doesn't even know how many people are citizens of the country.
People whine about how slow liberals are at throwing out illegals, but the fact of the matter is, unless you can positively match a person with a foreign visa or they admit it, it's impossible to prove a person is not a citizen. There is no database of citizens to reference.
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by ls671 · 2016-08-04 05:28 · Score: 2

You missed the point: The census is there to find out if you tell the truth. If you lie, you get put on a blacklist of enemies of the country.

--
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by geekmux · 2016-08-04 05:32 · Score: 3, Insightful

You're aware that the census is legally mandated in the Constitution, right?
Of all the unjustified responses that will compel me to slap someone upside the head repeatedly, "Because we've always done it this way" comes out on top every time.
The most powerful single-word question in the known universe is Why, which my example exemplifies.
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by geekmux · 2016-08-04 05:40 · Score: 2

Fun fact: the US government doesn't even know how many people are citizens of the country.
People whine about how slow liberals are at throwing out illegals, but the fact of the matter is, unless you can positively match a person with a foreign visa or they admit it, it's impossible to prove a person is not a citizen. There is no database of citizens to reference.
Impossible to prove? And the Social Security database and/or birth certificate database are somehow incapable of this?
Yes, there ARE data repositories for validating citizenship status, so enough with the excuses. I have no idea how or why you feel the burden of proof is somehow impossible to determine by our government officials.
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by penguinoid · 2016-08-04 05:46 · Score: 2

And does the Constitution say the census must be conducted door-to-door salesmen style rather than by the plethora of other ways we have to know how many citizens live in which district?

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by PvtVoid · 2016-08-04 06:15 · Score: 2

And does the Constitution say the census must be conducted door-to-door salesmen style rather than by the plethora of other ways we have to know how many citizens live in which district?
Sacre bleu! Why didn't those dolts at the Census Bureau think of this!
Oh, wait, they did: The 2020 Census Operational Plan includes a goal of "Knock on doors only when necessary".
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by mjr167 · 2016-08-04 06:33 · Score: 1

A friend of mine worked on the last census. His job was to physically visit places that people were living like under bridges, in caves, shacks, farms, etc to get them to fill out the census. There are apparently a significant number of people living in strange places without computers.
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by Martin+Blank · 2016-08-04 08:01 · Score: 1

Failure to register a foreign birth with the State Department risks the citizenship not being recognized if it's not done before the child's 18th birthday. Depending on the citizenship laws of the nation of birth and the parents, this places a risk of the child becoming stateless upon his or her 18th birthday.

--
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by jaa101 · 2016-08-04 18:34 · Score: 1

You're aware that the census is legally mandated in the Constitution, right?
Of all the unjustified responses that will compel me to slap someone upside the head repeatedly, "Because we've always done it this way" comes out on top every time.
The most powerful single-word question in the known universe is Why, which my example exemplifies.
There's a world of difference between "we've always done it this way" and "is legally mandated in the Constitution".
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by geekmux · 2016-08-05 03:56 · Score: 1

You're aware that the census is legally mandated in the Constitution, right?
Of all the unjustified responses that will compel me to slap someone upside the head repeatedly, "Because we've always done it this way" comes out on top every time.
The most powerful single-word question in the known universe is Why, which my example exemplifies.
There's a world of difference between "we've always done it this way" and "is legally mandated in the Constitution".
That "world" you speak of can now answer the same damn question; Why.
That question applies across your entire world is because we have these things called Constitutional Amendments, which came about because someone did ask that all-powerful question repeatedly until a logical answer or solution was presented instead of excuses or references to ancient texts. The world is ever-changing, which is the reason Constitutions have been amended as well.
Re:In the U.S., why isn't this obsolete by now? by ejasons · 2016-08-05 10:15 · Score: 1

The glib answer to "why" is simply "because nobody has passed an amendment to remove the legal mandate from the Constitution"...

What am I missing here? by ThatsNotPudding · 2016-08-04 05:20 · Score: 1

When I played around with Ancestry.com (the Utah-based ownership still makes me wonder about them), I was looking at the ages, names, and addresses of my families in census records going back into the 1800s. How is this different than what the Australian government is asking for? Or even just a phone book listing for that matter?

Re:What am I missing here? by ls671 · 2016-08-04 05:43 · Score: 1

Everybody knows Ancestry.com was started and is mainly staffed by Mormons although it is publicly traded so you can own part of it if you want (or at least it used to be, I can't seem to be able to find ACOM anymore on NASDAQ). Genealogy is important to the Mormons.

--
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Re:What am I missing here? by SuiteSisterMary · 2016-08-04 06:37 · Score: 1

It's very specifically Mormon, and is very specifically used for their 'Baptism of the Dead' rituals.

--
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Re:What am I missing here? by BradMajors · 2016-08-04 07:34 · Score: 1

Ancestry has no connection with the Mormons. Saying "Everyone knows" does not enhance the reliability of your false statement.
Don't make stuff up.
Re:What am I missing here? by Martin+Blank · 2016-08-04 08:04 · Score: 1

The Mormons maintain a separate project at familysearch.org.

--
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Re:What am I missing here? by ls671 · 2016-08-04 08:05 · Score: 2

Yeah right, just do your own research. Many sources available.
Start here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Hum, no mention of the Mormons on that page, so you must be right, right?
Now search what "Latter-day Saints" and "Brigham Young University" are. Search who Joseph A. Cannon and John Sittner are.
You will end up realizing that my post was entirely correct. I have never said there was direct or "official" ties between ancestry and the Mormons but as I said, everybody knows what I wrote in my first post.
Are you trying to hide something? If so why? I vouch for being straight forward and clean.

--
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Re:What am I missing here? by lgw · 2016-08-04 09:18 · Score: 1

There's a meaningful difference between "some Mormons" and "the Mormons". This doesn't seem to be a business owned by the church, so saying it's owned by "the Mormons" is misleading.

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Re:What am I missing here? by ls671 · 2016-08-04 11:29 · Score: 1

Again, I never said it was owned by the Mormons. I even said that anybody can own it. What is your problem?

--
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Re:What am I missing here? by dbIII · 2016-08-04 15:43 · Score: 1

Ancestry has no connection with the Mormons
It's run by people who are. They are interested in that sort of stuff. Nothing sinister at all and I don't get why you think the above poster meant that Church instead of just people who belong to it.

The Vatican is not running your bank even if most of the people there are Christian.

Just a matter of time now. by Dust038 · 2016-08-04 05:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

Quote from Article: Australian Minister for Small Business Michael McCormack told reporters on Wednesday that there has “never been a breach of the actual census data, [and] the ABS assures us that this won’t happen into the future. They have assured me as the minister responsible, they’ve assured the government, that they have every protocol in place, every process in place to ensure that there isn’t a breach this time.” ^ That's how you incite someone to now break into it.

Re:Just a matter of time now. by dwywit · 2016-08-04 09:43 · Score: 1

It's certainly painting a target on the system/s. Someone, somewhere will try.
OTOH, they seem to take security seriously. Recently introduced two-factor authentication via user ID, password (mine's > 12 characters), plus another code sent via SMS, all to get into my own accounts for taxation, family benefits, etc.
People are upset that they're keeping personal information this time - previously it was discarded. The personal info is supposedly going to be kept on separate systems from the rest of it, so I believe it will be of lesser interest to third parties such as advertisers.

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom

The same Census. . . by Salgak1 · 2016-08-04 05:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

. . . told people not to list their religion as "Jedi"

Oz, you KNOW what you must do: make the Census FEEL the Power of the Force. Or at least that of the Farce. . . .

Re:What? by EvilSS · 2016-08-04 05:29 · Score: 4, Informative

Who the heck actually participates in a census? And it is mandatory? You get fined? Is this common? You guys need to move to a civilized country like America.

It's mandatory in the US as well, although it hasn't been prosecuted since 1970. It's mandatory in virtually every country that has a census, including Canada, UK, France, Spain, and Ireland (where fines can go up to 44K euros).

13 U.S. Code 221 - Refusal or neglect to answer questions; false answers

(a) Whoever, being over eighteen years of age, refuses or willfully neglects, when requested by the Secretary, or by any other authorized officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof acting under the instructions of the Secretary or authorized officer, to answer, to the best of his knowledge, any of the questions on any schedule submitted to him in connection with any census or survey provided for by subchapters I, II, IV, and V of chapter 5 of this title, applying to himself or to the family to which he belongs or is related, or to the farm or farms of which he or his family is the occupant, shall be fined not more than $100.

(b) Whoever, when answering questions described in subsection (a) of this section, and under the conditions or circumstances described in such subsection, willfully gives any answer that is false, shall be fined not more than $500.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no person shall be compelled to disclose information relative to his religious beliefs or to membership in a religious body.

(Aug. 31, 1954, ch. 1158, 68 Stat. 1023; Pub. L. 85–207, 15, Aug. 28, 1957, 71 Stat. 484; Pub. L. 94–521, 13, Oct. 17, 1976, 90 Stat. 2465.)

--
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.

Re:JEWS. Need I say more? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-08-04 05:54 · Score: 2, Funny

Donald? Is that you?

Re:What? by PPH · 2016-08-04 06:48 · Score: 1

shall be fined not more than $100

So, a privacy tax. Here's your $100. Now leave me alone.

"I nicked the census man."

--
Have gnu, will travel.

Elsewhere in the world.... by cycler · 2016-08-04 08:21 · Score: 1

We don't see the problem.....

http://www.scb.se/en_/

http://www.birthday.se/ (In Swedish)

If you have rights (and benefits) given by the government they also have right know who you are.

/C

Re:What? by EvilSS · 2016-08-04 09:15 · Score: 1

More like pay us $100, oh, and we need all that info anyway for the citation so if you could ahead and fill this form out....

--
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.

Re:It's a trap. by Hashi+Lebwohl · 2016-08-04 09:45 · Score: 1

Okay, here's how it works. You receive a letter from the ABS which has a unique code to enable you to log on. The code is tied to either your address (I think this is the case) or your name. Probably not number two. If there is no logon from the code you have, you haven't completed the census, and someone will come knocking on your door, I guess. Begs the question of how can they know your letter wasn't stolen from your mailbox, or lost, or eaten by your dog, but this *is* the government, so it's not surprising.

--
I'm in to sadism, bestiality and necrophilia. Am I flogging a dead horse?

Re:What? by PPH · 2016-08-04 12:05 · Score: 1

charge you another $100

The receipt.

--
Have gnu, will travel.

The ABS can't even keep its telephones working by The_Revelation · 2016-08-04 13:07 · Score: 1

The technological prowess of the ABS is equivalent to that of a small rock or pebble. Australian's can't even request paper forms because EVERY SINGLE NUMBER for the ABS is jammed. Also, they don't provide an online form to request this. My faith is strong that this data will never be hacked.

Re:The ABS can't even keep its telephones working by dbIII · 2016-08-04 15:49 · Score: 1

I suspect next Wednesday (Tuesday US time) there will be a story here about how millions of people tried to log onto the Census web portal at once and it all came to a halt.
I hope I'm wrong but doubt I will be. There have been three years of serious staff and other cutbacks at the ABS so I doubt they have the resources to cope.

Re:This is Australia, not the USA by Anonymous Coward · 2016-08-04 13:25 · Score: 1

When census night rolls around, you are supposed to fill it in for all those who are at the residence at that time. The information gathered is stripped of all personally identifying information and released for purposes such as population statistics, short term and long term planning of residential and government services.

Your information is way out of date. Despite assurances they did not strip personal information at all from the last census. They will be connecting your response last census to your response this census and every census after. They will also be pulling in data from other government and third party sources to build a rich personal profile (their words). They will then make this data available for research and commercial uses.

All this has been confirmed by the ABS in recent months. All of this is a change to how the census has been carried out in the past. It no longer is a census, it surveillance with a regular mandatory self-reporting component.

Re:Apparently census takers can use personal table by quenda · 2016-08-04 14:10 · Score: 1

> Re:Apparently census takers can use personal tablets

OMG, calm down - the ABS is not stupid! There will be no sensitive data on those personal tablets.

It has: list of properties to visit with reminder cards, notes on hazards such as dogs or abusive nutters, ...

Do not secure the data by houghi · 2016-08-05 00:40 · Score: 1

You can not secure the data. You can keep it secure for a while. Even for a long time, but not for always. At some point the data will become available. Be it by a hack or a change in the law or some other rando, reason.

So what they should do is make the data available right away in such a way that identification is not possible.

--
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.

Re:What? by Raenex · 2016-08-05 03:45 · Score: 1

refuses or willfully neglects, when requested by the Secretary, or by any other authorized officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof acting under the instructions of the Secretary or authorized officer, to answer, to the best of his knowledge, any of the questions on any schedule submitted to him in connection with any census or survey provided for by subchapters I, II, IV, and V of chapter 5 of this title

Constitutional overreach, but what else is new? Last time I filled out the US census I only provided answers to questions to allow them to perform their constitutional duty. A rather aggressive census busybody kept coming to the door, which I did not answer, and he even went so far as to poke around the property and look in the windows, but eventually he gave up.

Re:It's a trap. by dwye · 2016-08-05 07:22 · Score: 1

Why should they care if "your letter wasn't stolen from your mailbox, or lost, or eaten by your dog" or you could not log on to their server to respond, or their server went done before it was able to store your response, or a meteor fell from space and destroyed the server and all the backups? It is sufficient that previous methods failed, by whoever's fault,and so they move to the fallback method.

OK, obviously they should care about stolen or lost mail, bad servers, or meteor strikes, but that is not on the census department.

Re:What? by dwye · 2016-08-05 07:51 · Score: 1

Wrong. There is no double jeopardy rule allowing you to repeatedly break the law after being punished for the first violation.

They will love cash cows like you.

Congratulations are in order by frrrp · 2016-08-07 14:40 · Score: 1

This has been a long project by Australian Labor and the Liberal/Nationals - and let's not kid ourselves, especially the Attorney-General's Department who have been pulling the puppet strings of both for decades. Unelected bureaucrats, perpetually drunk on the hubris of the power they wield, that even the government in power can't get rid of.

Once census and data retention scheme information are merged, all of our individual dossiers will be complete. Even the Stasi would cream their pants at the mere thought of what they have achieved. Bravo. They very least all concerned can do is thank the Australian public who have been asleep at the wheel for the last 30 years.

--
smilies are for reetards

Win 10 security risk by BlindBear · 2016-08-10 10:42 · Score: 1

Will Win 10, 8.1, 8 and 7 give up all the census data entered by unsuspecting aussies to Microsoft and all their partners and three letter agencies ?

--
I prefer Classic Slashdot.

Slashdot Mirror

Australian Census Stirs Up Storm of Privacy Concerns (buzzfeed.com)

88 of 129 comments (clear)