Crypto-Bashing Prime Minister Argues The Laws Of Mathematics Don't Apply In Australia (independent.co.uk)

Idiots everywhere... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 11:41 · Score: 4, Informative

Can't take this anymore...

Re:Idiots everywhere... by flopsquad · 2017-07-16 14:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

Can't take this anymore...
Hard realization: If there was a brief blip on humanity's timeline where science and rationality held the tiniest advantage in our collective esteem over base tribalism, fearmongering, and ignorance-as-a-worldview, it came and went while we were busy mistaking it for a new era of reason.

--
Nothing posted to /. has ever been legal advice, including this.
Re: Idiots everywhere... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 14:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

It shall soon be illegal to speak in person without government authorities present to ensure nothing illegal is being discussed.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by gweihir · 2017-07-16 16:50 · Score: 3, Insightful

Unfortunately, for most of humanity, including basically all politicians and their fans, that is completely true. Only a small part of the human race qualifies as rational and these people do not seek power.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re: Idiots everywhere... by Tangential · 2017-07-16 16:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

It shall soon be illegal to speak in person without government authorities present to ensure nothing illegal is being discussed.
The government rep wouldn't have to be present if they could just convince people to carry small, wirelessly connected computing devices in their pockets that contain cameras and microphones. If people were to start doing that, then the government would be pretty much be able to monitor anything it wants anytime it wants.

Luckily, I doubt there's much chance of getting folks to carry such a device around with them at all times....

--
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
Re: Idiots everywhere... by ChunderDownunder · 2017-07-16 17:45 · Score: 1

Unfortunately the government's plans were ultimately thwarted when Russian hackers substituted rogue firmware for the audo-visual inputs.
Live stream
Re:Idiots everywhere... by Plus1Entropy · 2017-07-16 17:58 · Score: 5, Funny

This is great news actually, because it means that this moron is not the PM of Australia. After all, to become PM you must be the leader of the party with the largest representation in parliament. If the laws of Mathematics don't apply, well... how can you say that one number is larger than another?

--
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Re: Idiots everywhere... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 19:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

Just imagine how absurd this debate would have been during WW2. All that effort cracking engima is far too much like hardwork. How about just ordering the Germans to provide a backdoor ... oh wait
Re:Idiots everywhere... by Geeky · 2017-07-16 22:18 · Score: 3, Interesting

I think that's about right, sadly.
Future historians may look on the last few hundred years in the same way as the first Greek/Mycenaean civilisation prior to the Greek dark ages, or Rome prior to the fall of the empire.
There have been blips before. They never last. We're just unlucky that we're living through the end of one and can remember the high water mark.

--
Sigs are so 1990s. No way would I be seen dead with one.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AmiMoJo · 2017-07-16 23:37 · Score: 1, Insightful

Everyone except for the US signed up to the Paris agreement on climate change. Science denial is pretty much only a major problem in the US, in other developed nations it's just some fringe idiots.
Even in Australia, this one moron is now being mocked for his ridiculous comments. Don't mistake being PM for some kind of endorsement of his sanity or IQ, such things are rarely factors in any election.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Idiots everywhere... by hazardPPP · 2017-07-17 00:17 · Score: 2

Can't take this anymore...
Most politicians (in Western countries) are lawyers by training. Lawyers tend to think that 1) anything can be defined by a law or regulation; that 2) any law or regulation can be changed and that 3) you can argue your away around anything. Turnbull, by the way, was a barrister who had his own law firm. Hence such stupid comments. Lawyers who become politicians are even worse than the average lawyer, since the above three principles are magnified even more in politics - especially when you are the one with the power to define or change laws.
Wait, you're saying, but shouldn't accomplished professionals, be they lawyers or whatever, be smart? They may be smart but they also may be what the Germans call a fachidiot: great at their profession but completely oblivious to anything outside of it, and blinkered by their professional knowledge and outlook when looking at other fields. The "I've got a hammer so everything is a nail" type of approach. I'm the leader of the majority in Parliament, so I can define laws any way that I choose, objective reality be damned.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by TheRaven64 · 2017-07-17 01:14 · Score: 1

Forcing the companies to provide the means to unencrypt all the data passing through it's services provides very little benefit
It provides no benefit, because the bad people will not use the backdoor'd encryption, they will use something else (if they buy a copy of Applied Cryptography second hand then they can just type in the cost listings for some secure algorithms and use their own version). On the other hand, the existence of a backdoor intrinsically makes a system insecure, so everyone else suffers from making it easier for criminals to gain access to their messages.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:Idiots everywhere... by fred6666 · 2017-07-17 01:23 · Score: 1

If the US exited the Paris agreement because it didn't do enough for the environment you might have had a point.
But it's the opposite. Trump removed the US signature because it was too much pro-environment.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by Ol+Olsoc · 2017-07-17 02:26 · Score: 5, Funny

Unfortunately, for most of humanity, including basically all politicians and their fans, that is completely true. Only a small part of the human race qualifies as rational and these people do not seek power.
Next up? We need to have a vote on Ohm's law! All resistance must be eliminated!

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-17 02:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

So. Not wanting to give away billions of dollars of taxpayer money to China, India, Pakistan, Turkey and elsewhere is what makes Trump and his supporters anti-science?

But you give the gender studies, intersectionalist a$$holes a pass?

Complaining about tribalism - look to the universities humanities departments.first.

Chances are high the US will continue to meet the Paris Treaty standards without giving away billions in tax payer dollars.

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AmiMoJo · 2017-07-17 02:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

How much will climate change cost to deal with? Is it less than the cost of the Paris agreement?

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-17 03:20 · Score: 1

That's not the point. Income transfer is not the way to do it. It will not solve the problem. All it will do is enrich a politically connected few and impoverish millions of tax payers.

You want to do something. Waste less. Invest in companies that are working on the solution. Have college free for STEM studies but "Baskweaving as an Anti-Imperialist TransGender Affirmation" classes must be paid in full by the student.

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AmiMoJo · 2017-07-17 04:13 · Score: 1

I was going to make a reasoned argument that it's not wealth transfer in the way you describe it, but then I read
"Have college free for STEM studies but "Baskweaving as an Anti-Imperialist TransGender Affirmation" classes must be paid in full by the student."
and just realized I was wasting my time.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Idiots everywhere... by jeff4747 · 2017-07-17 04:31 · Score: 1

Have college free for STEM studies
We already graduate more people with STEM degrees than we have entry-level STEM job openings. Someone who was so upset by tribalism overtaking facts might want to know that, and realize that incentivizing more STEM degrees is not helpful.
Re: Idiots everywhere... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-17 04:41 · Score: 3, Funny

Whooooosh
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-17 05:35 · Score: 2

True.

STEM is more than STEM degrees. A business person would be better off learning how to write macros than taking another literature course.
Having some idea about chemistry (not saying becoming a chemist) is a good thing. For instance we still need coal to make steel and it has nothing to do with generating heat.
In days gone by people needed to be able to read the weather, know different trees and plants. That is less important for daily survival - but math and tech skills. Now, that's more important than it used to be.

Knowing that 10^9*10^5 = 10^14 shouldn't be considered "brainy". It should be "duhh."

And yet there are attorneys and other reasonably educated people out there for whom that is "advanced" math.
And that's not to mention something as simple as logs.

Is knowing history important? Yes it is. Is Shakespeare important? Yes. But so are "basic" math skills - especially in a day and age when digital privacy is of great importance.

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AutodidactLabrat · 2017-07-17 05:56 · Score: 1

So. Not wanting to give away billions of dollars of taxpayer money to China, India, Pakistan, Turkey and elsewhere is what makes Trump and his supporters anti-science?
Chances are highest that only idiots think that paying for carbon is "Giving away taxpayer money"
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AutodidactLabrat · 2017-07-17 05:58 · Score: 1

...Waste less. Invest in companies that are working on the solution.
Those companies don't take Pentagon money and thus cannot compete.
For there is no greater waste than planning for European Global Thermonuclear War in the age of smart rifles.\

Income transfer is not the way to do it. It will not solve the problem.
So Taxing and Incentives solve nothing
Good to know. Now we can dismantle the Military Industrial Complex
Re:Idiots everywhere... by Krishnoid · 2017-07-17 06:02 · Score: 1

Hard realization: blah blah blah humanity blah blah blah base tribalism, fearmongering, and ignorance-as-a-worldview, [...] we were busy mistaking [science and rationality] for witchcraft.
Thank goodness for humanity's immune system that quickly rejects such demonic concepts of science and rationality, and lets us quickly get back to those first three core values you mentioned.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-17 06:09 · Score: 1

Yeah. Well then I'm an idiot. Because giving money to India and China is not what I would call a good investment for anything but the politically connected few.

But then. I'm an idiot so what do I know.

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-17 06:12 · Score: 1

It's difficult enough to prevent corruption with incentives in one country (The military Industrial Complex) but now we're supposed to competently manage it in India, Pakistan, China, Turkey and other places as well? Nah. Don't think so.

And, as a Libertarian - no I don't think that government incentives help in the long run; not unless you're a fan of crony capitalism in which case it works just fine.

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by TechyImmigrant · 2017-07-17 06:33 · Score: 1

Forcing the companies to provide the means to unencrypt all the data passing through it's services provides very little benefit
It provides no benefit, because the bad people will not use the backdoor'd encryption, they will use something else (if they buy a copy of Applied Cryptography second hand then they can just type in the cost listings for some secure algorithms and use their own version). On the other hand, the existence of a backdoor intrinsically makes a system insecure, so everyone else suffers from making it easier for criminals to gain access to their messages.
Yes. This. There has already been a few rounds of criminals adapting to the new security landscape. As soon as something is shown insecure, the criminals move on. The stupid ones might post their successes on Facebook, but the smartest ones obviously haven't been caught yet because they are cautious and they can read a book and write software.
My job involves designing and implementing crypto systems. If I was motivated to engage in a criminal pursuit needing comms (I'm not, the day job pays fine) I don't think it would be a challenge to put together a secure system that meets the needs of the task. I don't see why it would be a problem for an effective criminal enterprise to pay for development of their own non-backdoored comms system.

--
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Re: Idiots everywhere... by Sparowl · 2017-07-17 06:36 · Score: 1

Exactly. I mean, the Germans had massive communication networks spread over the world, using several competing systems of encryption that virtually everyone was using....oh wait..
Re:Idiots everywhere... by suutar · 2017-07-17 07:13 · Score: 1

Complaining about tribalism - look to the universities humanities departments.first.
Well of course. Where else would you put anthropology, sociology, and political science?
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-17 07:24 · Score: 1

:)

Nice, (In case it matters I'm a big fan of the humanities but I don't think others ought to pay for one's joy of learning. Not to mention that it's gone off the rails in the last few years. We're seeing a (fairly) violent-free reenactment of the Red Guard / French Revolution. It's starting to eat itself from the inside.

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by gweihir · 2017-07-17 07:34 · Score: 1

"Usually", yes, but not exclusively. Relevant research is for example Dunning, Kruger: "Unskilled and Unaware of It". The short of it is that really competent people usually know they are really competent, but are still more careful than really dumb people in assuming that they can do things.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by Man+On+Pink+Corner · 2017-07-17 08:47 · Score: 1

Well, let's not get too reactionary here.
Re: Idiots everywhere... by david_thornley · 2017-07-17 10:32 · Score: 1

The Allied Type-X system was very similar to Enigma, FWIW, but the British weren't going to announce it as such and pay royalties.

--
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Re:Idiots everywhere... by david_thornley · 2017-07-17 10:34 · Score: 1

Who cares about the encryption? There's far too much data to monitor, and too few terrorists. We've known that some terrorists were likely to commit terror crimes, and have often been unable to stop them.

--
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Re: Idiots everywhere... by ale2011 · 2017-07-17 19:50 · Score: 1

Luckily, I doubt there's much chance of getting folks to carry such a device around with them at all times....
such-a-device = smartphone, everyone carries one already.
I don't think it's beyond feasibility to get 90% coverage. It will be enough to place G-men in other key places, e.g. hamam, to reach almost 100% coverage.
Difficulties, if any, are going to arise with analysis and transcription of all that footage. Even with the aid of AI, the number of operators is going to be so huge that governments will need means to surveil them in turn.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by ras · 2017-07-17 22:20 · Score: 1

to become PM you must be the leader of the party with the largest representation in parliament.

You under estimate the man. He is _very_ conversant with arithmetic:

Quoting: https://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/transcript-interview-with-alan-jones-and-the-budget-and-relations-with-cliv:
But the fact of the matter is, this business, as John Howard said, is governed by the iron laws of arithmetic.
He also very conversant with the memory of your average Australian voter, apparently. After 300 comments, no one remembered him saying this. You've gotta admire the hubris.
His position apparently is while he, only he apparently, is governed only by the laws of arithmetic, the rest of us have to obey the laws he makes up - those of Australia. Oh, and don't forget while he is telling us we can't use crypto so he can spy on us, just a year ago he was enthusiastic user of Whatsapp, presumably so the people who elected him could not see what he was preparing to do - like springing this on us.
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AutodidactLabrat · 2017-07-21 07:01 · Score: 1

Is there some how you think you paying a carbon tax is going to India?
Other than some Alt-right spew site that is?
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AutodidactLabrat · 2017-07-21 07:02 · Score: 1

As a Libertarian, you're supposed to be in favor of market based solutions
A carbon tax IS the market place at work
The only kind of Captialism that exists IS crony Capitalism, that's why 75% of the 1% inherited more than 5 million at least once, said the IRS in 2007
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-24 01:09 · Score: 1

Part of the Paris Treaty was for developed countries to send money to developing countries.

Did you really miss that?

Article 9
1. Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist
developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in
continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.

Commissions were to be established which would dictate the allocation of funds. Guess who pay? (US Taxpayers)

The above quote comes from the alt-right spew site known as the United Nations https://unfccc.int/files/essen...

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by GLMDesigns · 2017-07-24 01:10 · Score: 1

I am in favor of market based solutions. The Paris Treaty is not a market based solution.

--
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AutodidactLabrat · 2017-07-26 11:42 · Score: 1

I repeat, WHERE does it say YOU give money to foreign nations?
It says that developed nations will spend some of their tax income (note: FROM POLLUTERS for instance) for the single purpose of upgrading infrastructure for pollution reduction
THAT IS NOT A GIFT, it is an investment in a survivable world and just who will build these improvements?
YOU or your first world states, and thus the money will go....do the math
Re:Idiots everywhere... by AutodidactLabrat · 2017-07-27 09:10 · Score: 1

A Carbon tax IS a market based solution
The Paris accords are how the costs are spread down into the low-wage nations.

obey gravity...it's the law by turkeydance · 2017-07-16 11:47 · Score: 4, Funny

old old joke. couldn't top Turnbull's though.

Re:obey gravity...it's the law by sheramil · 2017-07-16 12:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

"I know dis defies da law of gravity... but I never studied law!" - Bugs Bunny
Mr Turnbull has. What is with politicians today making nonsensical statements like this? I would have thought to get to the position of Prime Minister - or President - you'd at least have to have had some experience in thinking before opening your yap.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 12:25 · Score: 2, Funny

The law of mahtematic always apply in sicilicon valley I know I live there making 55K + sideline bisiness.
The laws of spelling... not so much.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by blindseer · 2017-07-16 12:47 · Score: 3

What is with politicians today making nonsensical statements like this?
This is far from a recent development.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 12:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

Douglas Adams might have something to share on the topic:
“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 12:53 · Score: 1

And to think this asshole used to be the federal communications minister. No wonder why hes made the NBN a even bigger farce than Abbott did. It wasn't Abbott messing up the NBN, it was Turnbull all along. Throw this asshole out!!!
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by dwywit · 2017-07-16 13:16 · Score: 1

Sadly, Turnbull is one of the smarter ones.
It makes me uncomfortable to say it, but he's prefereable to 99% of the others. I suspect that statement, made in the UK to a UK paper, was made to impress politicians in the UK that he's being tough and standing up to the cyber-terrorists.
Why, oh, why don't the vested interests here - banks in particular - step in and tell the politicians that they should stop making stupid statements about encryption. If politicians decide that encryption should be weakened to enable interception by law enforcement, they should know that their own secret operations (e.g. offshore bank accounts) will become vulnerable to exploitation.

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by arglebargle_xiv · 2017-07-16 13:47 · Score: 3, Funny

Maybe Australia could legislate that pi = 3.0 exactly, since their laws obviously trump mathematics. That'd make calculations so much easier for everyone. Even Australian politicians could now do it on their fingers, at least until they got to ten.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by msauve · 2017-07-16 13:54 · Score: 2

As long as they're ignoring reality, why not just pass a law requiring all criminals to turn themselves in to the nearest constabulary?

--
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by sg_oneill · 2017-07-16 14:44 · Score: 5, Interesting

It makes me uncomfortable to say it, but he's prefereable to 99% of the others. I suspect that statement, made in the UK to a UK paper, was made to impress politicians in the UK that he's being tough and standing up to the cyber-terrorists.
Whatever Turnbull may be as a person, is pretty much redundant as he's completely incapable of standing up to the regressives in his party. He's so frightened of being rolled by the catholic far right in the party (Tony abbot, etc) he's sold everything he stood for down the river and just does whatever the ultra conservartives tell him to do, even s that behavior further sinks his reputation down the toilet of public opinion.
And the stupefying thing is, he's still getting knived by the far right anyway. He gains nothing by continuing to inflict unpopular and authoritarian far right nonsense on the population.

--
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Re: obey gravity...it's the law by xQx · 2017-07-16 14:50 · Score: 1

He promised he would do that. Remember? Australia voted the LNP in, fair and square, on the policy platform: we're not labor. We will kill the NBN.
Don't blame him for following through on a pre-election promise.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by stabiesoft · 2017-07-16 14:58 · Score: 1

You mean like Indiana almost did in 1897. They at least were going to round to 1 decimal place, 3.2
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Roger+W+Moore · 2017-07-16 15:03 · Score: 1

Mr Turnbull has. What is with politicians today making nonsensical statements like this?
Well as someone who has studied the law I would expect him to have some knowledge of tax law. Usually, those laws rely on the laws of mathematics - at least I've no idea how you can calculate taxes without mathematics. If the laws of Australia are quite literally built on top of the laws of mathematics I'd be very careful about undermining the importance of those laws otherwise there might be interesting tax consequences.
Re: obey gravity...it's the law by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 15:20 · Score: 1

He didn't kill the NBN though, just set it up as a funnel to send all his friends money.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by denzacar · 2017-07-16 16:00 · Score: 4, Funny

Oh come on... Think bigger.
Why not just order that the criminals are no longer protected by the law of gravity?
So they'll just float away, up into space. Or down, them being in Australia and all.
Then, they could get rid of those pesky laws of thermodynamics and finally allow Australia to harness the power of all those perpetual motion machines people keep inventing.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by sheramil · 2017-07-16 16:07 · Score: 1

One of the most important attributes of most Australian politicians is to be a technological creten.
*tiny voice* I believe it's spelled "Cretin".
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Drishmung · 2017-07-16 16:11 · Score: 2

Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia
So, apparently he's not done a very good study of law either.

--
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by dwywit · 2017-07-16 18:19 · Score: 2

Kryten?

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Anne+Thwacks · 2017-07-16 18:43 · Score: 4, Insightful

I've no idea how you can calculate taxes without mathematics
Then I guarantee you will never get to be a tax advisor to a politician.

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by sd4f · 2017-07-16 19:00 · Score: 2

I don't feel sorry for him at all. Turnbull only stands for his own ego. Anyone who believes that a goldman-sachs lawyer like turnbull has ever stood for anything honourable, well I have a harbour bridge to sell them...
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by buchner.johannes · 2017-07-16 19:11 · Score: 1

What is with politicians today making nonsensical statements like this?
This article, "No encryption was harmed in the making of this intercept", may be clearer in what the Australian politicians meant: https://risky.biz/bannedmath/ There are solutions for companies outside breaking/weakening the crypto while still allowing law enforcement to follow through with warrants.

--
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by gnasher719 · 2017-07-16 20:01 · Score: 3, Interesting

Just saying: His statement wasn't about cybercriminals. It was about serious criminals and terrorists who make use of the easy-to-use encryption just like all small time crooks, politicians, and law abiding citizens do. When you consider cybercriminals, you want the exact opposite: Uncrackable encryption.

That's the problem that these politicians have. For encryption, there are two totally contradictory things that we want: Uncrackable crypto for everyone, easily crackable crypto for serious criminals and terrorists. Yes, I myself would love if communications of terrorists could be made readable. I just know that you can't have that without endangering everything.

The NSA has always said that crackable crypto is all in all bad for US national security. And they have provided us with proof that backdoors will not be kept secret (because their stash of zero day exploits ended up in the hands of criminals). And just recently the former boss of GCHQ has said exactly the same thing
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by infolation · 2017-07-16 21:04 · Score: 1

But the article says:

But George Brandis, the Australian Attorney General, said the UK security agency GCHQ has assured him it was possible to unlock encrypted systems.
Note that he's not claiming 'weakened' encrypted systems. And if that's true, I am questioning whether mathematics applies here in the UK too.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by dwywit · 2017-07-16 21:40 · Score: 1

Not enough politicians are prepared to hold the security services to account, and I mean prison time for executives who fail.
"You assured me that this backdoor wouldn't get into the hands of criminals.'
1. "Well, yes, but we didn't take into account that the russians would pay one of our trusted staff to sell them the secrets."
OR
2. "Well, yes, but we thought that the NSA would take better precautions to safeguard the information."
"Ok, well, it's prison for you, then. And forget about your pension. We'll put it to use trying to clean up this mess"
Tell me again, how did Philby, Burgess, and MacLean manage for so long?

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 22:41 · Score: 1

Or how about finally making a law that benefits people? Next time the flood's about to hit Brisbane, simply make a law that disallows it and be done with it.
Oh why didn't we have that genius in office back in 2011? Think of the damage he could have avoided!

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by GameboyRMH · 2017-07-16 23:38 · Score: 1

Maybe he meant using an ASIC-based brute-forcing supercomputer like WindsorGreen.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by retchdog · 2017-07-17 00:15 · Score: 1

uh, the people to whom they don't apply are making way more than $55k.

--
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by hazardPPP · 2017-07-17 00:23 · Score: 1

And the stupefying thing is, he's still getting knived by the far right anyway. He gains nothing by continuing to inflict unpopular and authoritarian far right nonsense on the population.
I'm a bit perplexed by Australian politics...granted I live very far away and do not follow it closely, just whatever article pops up on the BBC now and then, so I my knowledge of the scene is minuscule at best. However it does seem there's a lot of party coups going on down under, prime ministers being toppled by their own parties instead of an election. Why does this happen? Has it always been a thing, or is it a recent occurrence?
In Canada, where we have a similar UK-derived political system, party leaders changing in between elections is relatively rare, and it usually happens when a long-standing leader is retiring or something like that.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Kjella · 2017-07-17 00:27 · Score: 4, Informative
I think you're setting up a false impression that "uncrackable" is the standard most people have had or are looking for.
Most people consider:
- their home private, even though it can be invaded and searched by the police.
- a safe private, even though it can be seized and drilled open by the police.
- letters private, even though they can be opened and read by the police.
- packages private, even though they can be opened and inspected by the police.
- phone calls private, even though they can be wiretapped by the police.
That the general public has access to truly unbreakable encryption (except for the $5 wrench) is a new situation that's fundamentally different from the past few centuries. Did people really ask for it? Or did it more or less just happen, robbing law enforcement, military intelligence etc. of powerful tools to fight crime, terror and enemy states? Look at all the people who saw Snowden and more or less said "duh, that's what the NSA should be doing you traitor". There are a lot of people that want to revive the Clipper chip and backdoor everyone's phones.
That said, I think globalism will throw a monkey wrench in their efforts. Would Americans trust a backdoor made by Apple? Maybe. Would Russia, China, Germany or the rest of the world? Hell no, not as long as all the keys are on US soil, one NSL or NSA black ops job and it's all compromised. And no handing the keys directly to the government, that's too open for abuse. It would have to be to my local ISP or telco, with the government asking permission through a warrant. But as long as I could use some inner crypto without repercussions, what's the point? They decrypt it, find my PGP message and... nothing. They'd also have to outlaw everything else.
That could be one route though, say that if you use these law enforcement compliant devices there is a system and a process for retrieving the key. Everything else, you either hand over the key or go to jail. I think you're kinda missing the point of what he said, if you've built a system relying on some form of "willful ignorance" of what the key is, they can always make a law to force you to change the way the system works. Like, either comply or shut down - those are your options, like they did with Lavabit. They can't compel you to the impossible, but they can compel you to cease doing whatever they don't like.
--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by TheRaven64 · 2017-07-17 01:16 · Score: 1

{ from memory, sorry for errors }:
To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by wbr1 · 2017-07-17 01:26 · Score: 1

"The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
This explains it all, no need to dig deeper.

--
Silence is a state of mime.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by jbengt · 2017-07-17 01:48 · Score: 1

Maybe Australia could legislate that pi = 3.0 exactly . . .

That's bonkers. Everyone knows that pi is exactly 22/7. Otherwise how would a cylinder 7 inches in diameter and 6 inches tall define exactly one gallon?
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Immerman · 2017-07-17 01:59 · Score: 3, Informative

One of the big differences is that it takes a warrant and some non-negligble effort and expense to raid your house, crack your safe, etc.
Back-doored encryption takes essentially zero effort to break, and we already know that most of the major governments around the world are sweeping up all the commnications they can get their hands on with absolutely no regard for the letter of the law, much less the spirit (i.e. information exchange between intelligence agencies that are prohibited from spying on their own populace, but are more than happy to spy on each other's populace and then trade the results).
Individual people can't hope to read even a tiny fraction of the information collected - but computer analysis can sift through mountains in moments, and is getting better at "understanding" and condensing the information at an incredible rate.
There's a world of difference between law enforcement invading your privacy when they have a warrant-worthy reason to suspect wrong-doing, and shady intelligence agencies constantly invading *everybody's* privacy.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by Immerman · 2017-07-17 02:01 · Score: 1

I've got to say I've never noticed much mathematics in tax law. Lots of arithmetic, but arithmetic is to mathematics what spelling is to literature.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by tendrousbeastie · 2017-07-17 06:09 · Score: 1

"no immigrants, resurrection of the British empire, no gay rights, and all that kind of nonsense"
I'll grant you that lots of the Tory right want to drastically reduce immigration, but can yo ushow me any evidence at all for the other claims in this statement.
"A sane Conservative leader right now would be one that that told the hard liners to fuck off, and instead worked with the majority of moderates in their party to form consensus with other parties in the UK to solve pressing issues"
It only takes around 10 of the Tory right to rebel for the Tory government to be unable to get its agenda through parliament. You have claimed that the Tory right is 120 strong. If the Conservative leader to them to fuck off it would take about 5 minutes for them to make government impossible. If you think they haven't made this clear to May and the other cabinet members then you're mental.
This is why the current government is behaving the way they are. They know that Tory centrists are very unlikely to rebel and threaten the parties position, and they also know that the Tory right know exactly how strong they are and that they will exploit their position.
I agree with you that it would be morally better if the government were in a position to work with the centrists and Labour and the Lid Dems more closely, and find a better compromise position, but it is simple not in a position to do so - it has to look to its own survival first.
Re:obey gravity...it's the law by tendrousbeastie · 2017-07-17 06:21 · Score: 1

Smug mode on.

Why do the tech companies by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 11:48 · Score: 1

don't tell the government to go fuck themselves.
I hate their subservience

Re:Why do the tech companies by Gorobei · 2017-07-16 13:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

don't tell the government to go fuck themselves.
I hate their subservience
I think they did: "[we, Facebook] appreciate the important work law enforcement does, and we understand the need to carry out investigations. That's why we already have a protocol in place to respond to any requests we can." That's lawyer talk for "you look butt-hurt and stupid. Please fuck off."
Re:Why do the tech companies by AHuxley · 2017-07-16 15:17 · Score: 1

The gov granted code to have their products connect in that nation are not network activated. Their software or hardware is then just reduced to desktop or wifi sales.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"

Ancestor found for Malcolm Turnbull by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2017-07-16 11:50 · Score: 5, Funny

A quick search shows that Malcolm Turnbull has Royal Blood and he is a direct descendant, all the way through male heirs, of King Canute.

What? Want citation? Just give me 30 minutes and then check Wikipedia.

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact

Wants a piece of the pi by burtosis · 2017-07-16 11:52 · Score: 1

Maybe while he is at it he can use his irrational fears to make pi legally equal to three and save us all a lot of work.

It might be too late to stop this process by stikves · 2017-07-16 11:52 · Score: 3, Interesting

There is already sufficient mass of people who believe encryption can have proper backdoors for police enforcement, or even worse that only criminals have something to hide. We have seen this discourse in recent political cycles, and given tendency to mark any expert opinion as "fake news" do not help either.

The "geek" image given on media always helps portray fake ability to overcome anything. Even Star Trek had this: "10 hours, you have 2". I would assume people are thinking "the experts are just lazy, they say it cannot be done, but in fact they are just avoiding the work".

I'm not sure it will be solved in a short while, once people understand why proper encryption is necessary (i.e: loss of online commerce, or even bank account contents) the sentiment might start to change.

Re:It might be too late to stop this process by Grishnakh · 2017-07-16 12:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

Even Star Trek had this: "10 hours, you have 2".
I don't think that's fair. TFA is talking about encryption, a mathematical process. The laws of math are fundamental; you can't get around them. What was portrayed in Star Trek wasn't fundamental math, it was some kind of problem, usually something broken that needed repairing, and they had limited time because the Klingons were chasing them or somesuch. The captain didn't give them 2 hours just because, he was informing them how much time they realistically had based on the environment (i.e. angry aliens bearing down on them). So the idea was to get the engineers (who are really technicians and troubleshooters in the show; the real engineers are back at Mars designing the next-generation starships) to cut corners to come up with something workable even if it's very risky, or to come up with some new approach that takes less time (again, risky). It's not that different from regular engineering work: if the boss wants me to design something, I can estimate how much time it'll take, but my estimate is a worst-case estimate because I don't want to be rushed, I don't want to stay at work late, I want time to use the bathroom and take breaks, I want time to have unnecessary conversations with coworkers, etc. I could do something in a fraction of the time, but it'll be hurried and half-assed and I might not even get that working in time. But I don't have angry Romulans about to drop their cloaking device and shoot at me either; in that circumstance, I'd take a faster route.
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by Zaelath · 2017-07-16 12:24 · Score: 2

So the idea was to get the engineers (who are really technicians and troubleshooters in the show; the real engineers are back at Mars designing the next-generation starships)
This is so off-topic, but astronauts are often engineers. Do you think you're too valuable to strap to a rocket?
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by blindseer · 2017-07-16 13:04 · Score: 2

I understood "engineer" on the Enterprise to be equivalent to the engineer on a locomotive, as in people concerned with the propulsion of a vehicle. Calling them technicians would not be inaccurate either, they are people well trained and skilled in all kinds of technology. Saying that they are not "real engineers" is in my mind simply not understanding that the word has two common meanings for occupations.
Telling a person that operates a train for a living is not a "real engineer" to his/her face could run the risk of getting a shovel to the side of the head.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by AHuxley · 2017-07-16 15:21 · Score: 1

Privacy and anonymity are gone on any domestic network.
Want it back? Pay for a quality VPN at the desktop router level every year.
All the government ISP collection then knows is that person moved data around 24/7 to a VPN.
No network anonymity but privacy is recovered and no browser, app, software, malware should be able to get a real isp ip past the ethernet connected VPN router...

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by TapeCutter · 2017-07-16 15:42 · Score: 1

Neil Armstrong was proud to be a nerd, long before it was popular to be one.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by gweihir · 2017-07-16 16:54 · Score: 2

Will be interesting to see what happens in the first mass-hack because of backdoored encryption. May take a while, but even the NSA has had their secrets stolen. If they cannot keep backdoor information secure, then nobody can. I can assure you however that no large financial institution will ever use backdoored encryption. They may be willing to hand over a disk with all the transaction willingly, but they will not allow themselves to be hacked that way by just anybody that tries. The risk that it would kill them is just far, far too big.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 22:47 · Score: 1

It's less about what they could do, it's more about what they are going to do. An engineer sitting on top of a rocket will more likely have to figure out a solution for an emergency situation ("technician" work) than spending his time designing the next iteration of capsules (which would be "engineer" work).
At least while he's sitting in the capsule.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by Grishnakh · 2017-07-17 02:11 · Score: 1

It's all a lot of confusion over terminology, namely the word "engineer" which obviously evolved from "engine" and has a history with train engineers. But to conflate a train-driving engineer with a modern engineer who designs logic circuits or bridges or car engines is simply false; they're two entirely different occupations and skill-sets.
A 23rd-century starship engineer like Scotty of course is no idiot; they have to have extreme skills and knowledge across a large range of technologies and sciences (esp. warp physics), and the ability to work fast and solve unforeseen problems very quickly. But it's not the same job as design engineering, which is generally much more specialized but slower-paced. It's more of a "technician" job, but the knowledge they'd need is probably greater than that possessed by most modern design engineers, but there are lots of engineers today who'd work well in that role if it were available to them (and they got the education needed).
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by omnichad · 2017-07-17 02:56 · Score: 1

A modern train-driving engineer may not be required to know much. I'd bet a steam engine engineer would have to know an awful lot about field repair if he didn't want to be stranded hundreds of miles from anywhere any time a problem came up.
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by Grishnakh · 2017-07-17 11:22 · Score: 1

Well yes, but the steam engine engineer wouldn't have to know about relativistic physics, electronics, computers, and a bunch of other fields the way a Starfleet engineer probably would.
A modern automotive technician is probably the closest modern parallel to your steam engine engineer, because they have to be able to diagnose problems and understand most of the systems of the car to a decent degree, and a modern car is very complicated with state-of-the-art internal-combustion engines (far more complicated than those old steam engines), computers, many different electronic control modules, plus suspensions, brakes, and more. Some of the work is simplified by electronic diagnostic tools, but that only does so much (usually just telling you some sensor is giving bad readings, which could be a bad sensor or indicative of a larger problem), plus many mechanics, especially independents, have to be able to work on all kinds of different vehicles from different manufacturers.
Re:It might be too late to stop this process by Zaelath · 2017-07-17 13:34 · Score: 1

Replacing Part A with a spare Part A is technician work.
Replacing Part A with a series of objects cobbled together to perform the task of Part A is engineering.
Engineering a solution to a problem you have /now/ is still engineering, there's no requirement at all for it to be something in the future.

The PM is an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 11:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

Malcolm Turnball (or Chairman Mal as we call him) is an ex lawyer from a privileged background who lucked into dropping a few bucks into some 1990's "computer thingy that my financial advisor assures me is a good investment" and riding in the wave of the first tech boom, to the tune of about 300 million dollars.

He honestly considers himself the smartest person in the room.

He's a fucking lawyer who won life's big lottery.

I'm sure you guys have similar stories about your politicians.

The sooner this imbecile is gone from politics, the better.

Re:The PM is an idiot. by _merlin · 2017-07-16 12:59 · Score: 1

What? He made money with investment banking and arguably won the lottery with his investments, but he didn't come from a privileged background. He grew up with a single dad below the poverty line.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by dwywit · 2017-07-16 13:22 · Score: 2

He was also the winning lawyer in the "Spycatcher" case. He's not stupid, and if we get rid of him, who's the next most likely candidate to step up?
Yup, Abbott.
And don't try to convince anyone that the labor party has better talent, or even the ability to pick better talent - remember Stephen Conroy? Neither party has a stellar record of picking talent over popularity.

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
Re:The PM is an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 13:58 · Score: 1

This is a fanciful story that doesn't stand up to scrutiny, but was pushed heavily by the media in Australia about a year ago.
Bruce was hardly poor, and Coral was relatively well off. She left for NZ when Malcolm was around 10 years old, sure, but Malcolm was never poor, attended the most expensive schools in Sydney, etc, etc.
He didn't have a perfect atomic family life but that's a far cry from being poor.
Re: The PM is an idiot. by xQx · 2017-07-16 14:53 · Score: 3, Informative

I remember Stephen Conroy. He gave us an all-fiber NBN.
So what did we do? We voted him out, and we piss and moan that the LNP is killing our NBN (making good on their pre-election promise).
Who's the real idiot here?
Re:The PM is an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 15:32 · Score: 1

He grew up with a single dad below the poverty line.
That statement is somewhat false. His single dad sent him to the best private schools in Sydney (St. Ives and Sydney Grammar School).
Re:The PM is an idiot. by sr180 · 2017-07-16 15:45 · Score: 2

He was a boarder at Sydney Grammar. One of Australia's most privileged and expensive schools. I wouldnt call this growing up below the poverty line.

--
In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
Re:The PM is an idiot. by jonwil · 2017-07-16 15:57 · Score: 1

Considering all the other idiots in his party that could potentially replace him are worse, I think the best hope is that we get a change of government at the next election.
Re: The PM is an idiot. by dwywit · 2017-07-16 16:32 · Score: 1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
He was just as stupid. And it wasn't Turnbull who KO'd the all-fibre NBN, but he hasn't got a hope of funding it now (and neither does labor).

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
Re:The PM is an idiot. by shilly · 2017-07-16 20:13 · Score: 2

If tech companies ensure the government has full access, then any attempt to "keep their users as secure as possible" is useless window-dressing. So what he's actually asking for, in practice, is for tech companies to remove security for all users, all the time. What he and others just *fail to believe* is that tech companies can't break encryption for the government only. They genuinely think that a secret back door is possible. They are stupid evil fuckwits whose behaviour is made worse by the fact that they think they are on the side of the angels. Moralising litle pricks.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by thegarbz · 2017-07-16 22:03 · Score: 1

He honestly considers himself the smartest person in the room.
When parliament is sitting, he is right. When he's talking to a journalist, he's trumped by homeless guy sleeping next to the highschool dropout holding the microphone.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 22:50 · Score: 1

He honestly considers himself the smartest person in the room.
For a small enough room this may even be the case. Provided everyone else and their dog leaves.
You might want to spray for bugs, too, to be sure.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re: The PM is an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 22:50 · Score: 1

You missed the minor detail that the current approach is going to be a more expensive than the original fibre to the premises. A triumph of ideology over common sense.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 22:54 · Score: 2

This is a surefire way to sink any and all businesses that even remotely deal with any kind of data in Australia. Because why the FUCK would I entrust any company in AUS with my data if everyone and their grandma has access to that data?
And no, "government only" key only means "every government on the planet and whoever else has enough bucks". There is no "feds only" backdoor. Never has been, never will be.
If you are stupid enough to implement this, any and all IT businesses will not leave but flee your country and move elsewhere. Welcome to the digital world where moving abroad is a matter of bandwidth, not carrying capacity.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 22:56 · Score: 1

Try them all, eliminate them all. At some point, someone sane has to come along or the party is gone. Either way is fine by me.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by sd4f · 2017-07-17 10:52 · Score: 1

We don't need a change of government as such, we need complete removal of our political 'class'. The problem we're facing is that the 'talent pool' is so shallow, all you see are career politicians with law degrees, who only know how to keep their respective snouts in the trough. They do not reflect general society, the system no longer serves its intended purpose. I'm not saying we need revolution, we need a change to get the right people in parliament.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by jonwil · 2017-07-17 12:10 · Score: 1

What this country needs is another Bob Hawke. He wasn't a career politician (although I believe he did have a law degree alongside his economics qualifications). He came to politics via the union movement but he wasn't a died-in-the-wool unionist either (in the sense that he didn't blindly support everything the unions wanted).
Bob Hawke was able to convince the electorate that all sorts of major reforms were a good idea even when the vested interests were arguing against them, something people like Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard were never really able to do.
Re:The PM is an idiot. by sd4f · 2017-07-17 13:45 · Score: 1

And the problem is currently that the backroom collusion from within the parties means you have factions and faceless men in control, putting in their guys. Anyone who has talent for the role, in my mind won't be the backstabbing, conniving type of operator, unfortunately, it appears that the contest of party candidate selection essentially is a contest of who can be the biggest scoundrel of them all.
It has become so evident with parties whose core identity and values have been forgotten that they're filled with politicians who just don't care about the common good. They join their specific party because it's the politically expedient thing to do, not because of what it might stand for. Unfortunately a big part of the problem is also rusted on voters who still believe in party idealism.

'Law'? by yndrd1984 · 2017-07-16 11:57 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's disappointing to me that we still use the word 'law' to refer to entirely different things:

1. Things humans make up that they then want other human beings to follow.
2. Things humans make up after observing something in order to describe it.

Descriptive laws and prescriptive laws are exact opposites, both chronologically and causally.

Re:'Law'? by blindseer · 2017-07-16 13:10 · Score: 1

Much like how so many things in science are "just a theory"? The prime minister needs an introductory course in information theory.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:'Law'? by gweihir · 2017-07-16 16:56 · Score: 1

I don't think he has the mental capacity for it. We, as in "the human race", select the most dumb loudmouths to lead us. I do not see that changing, unfortunately.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re:'Law'? by houghi · 2017-07-16 22:03 · Score: 4, Interesting

That is language for you. Language between humans is always unpricise. Some attempts have been done to correct this and all have failed.
Context is everything and words will have different meaning at different moments. e.g. hacker or 'bad'.
Think of it as the computer language Perl, but more confusing.

--
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Re:'Law'? by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:02 · Score: 1

Well, everyone who has some kind of marketable skill is busy working, so who's left for grandstanding and talking bullshit?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:'Law'? by yndrd1984 · 2017-07-17 20:44 · Score: 1

Well, we do make up the axioms, but the conclusions that are derived from them seem to be discovered - e.g. human beings invented numbers and operations relating them, but given those definitions it's a fact that there's no largest prime.

sacrifices without actually addressing problem by z3alot · 2017-07-16 12:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

Aside from eliminating privacy for everyone, can measures like this be expected to actually fight terror or crime at all? Encryption is essentially a solved problem; a coordinated terror group needs only do a little work to make its own app using strong end to end encryption in the backend. Insisting that popular messaging apps be insecure simply robs the common citizen from privacy protection tools without addressing the problem which is claimed to be tackled.

Re:sacrifices without actually addressing problem by sit1963nz · 2017-07-16 12:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

Terrorism is the excuse, not the reason
The reason is so those in power can snoop on the population and control the population.

A quick read about "numbers stations" shows how information can be broadcast but the recipients can not be traced.

A conversation with the Brits about how the IRA were able to operate for decades without computers and encryption would also be enlightening.

And of course people have something to hide, a high flying lawyer who like to dress in women clothes at night, a gay footballer who is not "out", a politician who visits prostitutes, a bored housewife on Tinder, a family whose children may have different fathers, an abused wife who has a secret bank account, there are thousands of legitimate reasons for privacy and security.
If any of these people became an activist, the dirt the government gathers will allow them control.
Re:sacrifices without actually addressing problem by nightfire-unique · 2017-07-16 14:22 · Score: 2

And of course people have something to hide
I think this is the point that is lost on many people. The phrase "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" is patently obvious. The problem is that some people do have something to hide, and therein lies the problem with anti-privacy laws.

--
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Re:sacrifices without actually addressing problem by shilly · 2017-07-16 20:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's a terrible phrase. It purposely obscures the fact that there are legitimate reasons to hide things. It is a perfect encapsulation of everything that is wrong with authoritarian populist politics.
Re:sacrifices without actually addressing problem by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:04 · Score: 1

Not really, they're actually boring as fuck. One-time pads are unbreakable, at least if used correctly.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:sacrifices without actually addressing problem by gnasher719 · 2017-07-17 04:45 · Score: 1

I think this is the point that is lost on many people. The phrase "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" is patently obvious. The problem is that some people do have something to hide, and therein lies the problem with anti-privacy laws.
The counter argument: I have nothing to hide, but what I do is none of your fucking business. In the UK, you could add "if they have nothing to hide, why do MPs don't publish their expenses? And can we hear how many hours highly paid MEPs spent actually doing their job? "

Joke by manu0601 · 2017-07-16 12:05 · Score: 1

I hope this is a kind of joke. If it is not, then he should pass a law to trump gravity, so that Australian can quickly become a world-class leader as flying cars supplier.

Re:Joke by Nkwe · 2017-07-16 12:18 · Score: 1

I hope this is a kind of joke. If it is not, then he should pass a law to trump gravity, so that Australian can quickly become a world-class leader as flying cars supplier.
I don't think we want to legally allow Trump mess with gravity, he might try.
Re:Joke by Highdude702 · 2017-07-16 21:31 · Score: 1

Why do so many of you wish harm on others? I was raised in a life of violence, I have been on both sides of the shit. It's not fun, it's not funny, the comments like yours show how bad of people you really are. Yet you are the tolerant understanding type right? Or did you just get bullied in school and now you want to take it out on others? Please have some decency about yourself.

If, by his own admission, he is not.... by mark-t · 2017-07-16 12:05 · Score: 1

.... a cryptologist, then why would he believe that his own views are more correct than those of people who actually are experts?

Either he believes that he knows more than experts, or he believes that experts are liars. Which is it?

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'

Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by robinsonne · 2017-07-16 12:10 · Score: 1

It could very easily be both, if his ego is as big as I've heard.
Re: If, by his own admission, he is not.... by lightbox32 · 2017-07-16 12:47 · Score: 3, Funny

He is the Prime Minister after all, so he should know about cryptography... I'll show myself out.

--
A camel is a horse created by a committee
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by gravewax · 2017-07-16 13:15 · Score: 1

The more interesting point to ponder is that Turnbull actually has a pretty good tech advisor in Alastair Macgibbon, so either he has received really bad advise from him or he isn't listening to him for some reason.
Re: If, by his own admission, he is not.... by acceleriter · 2017-07-16 13:31 · Score: 1

I appreciated it.

--
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by dwywit · 2017-07-16 13:32 · Score: 1

The state police forces, the feds, and various other agencies want this, and they have effective lobbying. State police want it, they lobby their minister, he/she takes that to the table when they all present their cases to the federal government (along with vague threats to cause trouble if they don't get their way), and it all begins to sound like that's what the *people* want, unfortunately the *people* only get to have their say every 3-4 years. I suspect MacGibbon's voice is being drowned out by the sheer volume of lobbying from other side.
Turnbull *should* understand that weakened encryption in popular messaging apps will only drive the problem underground, as another poster put it, terrorists only have to develop their own software, and you're worse off than before.

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by mark-t · 2017-07-16 13:46 · Score: 4, Informative

If he didn't disagree with the math, then he would know that there is no possible way to do that without compromising the security of things that *should* legitimately be encrypted, such as electronic bank transactions, for example. If back doors exist, they will be just as usable by people with nefarious intentions as they would be by those who may mean, however sincerely, to protect us from such people.
If law enforcement has an encryption back door, then that exact same back door can and most certainly would be used by criminals. Laws against it wouldn't actually stop anyone who was already intent on breaking the law anyways, so all one is accomplishing by adding such backdoors is endangering everybody so that law enforcement is more readily able to catch people that may have otherwise used it for nefarious purposes.... except now law enforcement has exponentially *MORE* work to do, because now they also have to catch all of the bad guys who are using these back doors with nefarious intentions to harm people... people they wouldn't even have to *TRY* to catch if private individuals were allowed to use truly secure encryption.
To be fair, it is certainly regrettable that criminals can get away with their actions by using externally undecipherable encryption to conceal any evidence of their misdoings, but in the end, it is simply outside of the realm of the principles of reality by which this world seems to operate that one can ever really prevent this without seriously endangering those that could have had an entirely legitimate use for encryption.
There is no agent in this world, or for that matter in all of the entire knowable universe, that could hope to actually enforce the notion of "X can do this math, but Y cannot", so that is why what he is asking for defies the laws of math.... and unlike laws of a nation, the laws of math are not simply constraints by which people or things are expected or obligated to conform to, they are observations that have been rigorously proven to be universally true within the domain that any given such law governs.

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by gweihir · 2017-07-16 16:58 · Score: 3, Interesting

Likely both. Dumb people always think they know and understand everything. And when they are proven to be wrong in a non-ignorable fashion, then that is just a fluke to them. Ever tried to somebody really dumb that they do not get it? It is completely hopeless.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by gweihir · 2017-07-16 17:00 · Score: 1

I think this moron just has absolutely no idea what "mathematical law" means and that there is no way around it. Means he failed his basic education.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by mark-t · 2017-07-16 17:33 · Score: 1

I'm inclined to agree... but generally, people who are truly uneducated are too ignorant to realize how ignorant they actually are, but here he goes and frankly says that he's not a cryptologist or any kind of expert.
The only possibility I can conclude from it is that he thinks that the mathematicians are deliberately lying to him for some reason.

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by gweihir · 2017-07-16 21:52 · Score: 1

Possibly. But that would also mean he has not really tried to find things out and is just assuming things.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re: If, by his own admission, he is not.... by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:06 · Score: 1

Maybe you found something to impeach him on, for he is clearly unfit to bear that title.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:07 · Score: 1

No. Put them out of their (and your) misery and go on with your life. It's better for everyone.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by gweihir · 2017-07-17 07:31 · Score: 1

Whenever I can ignore them. That is what I usually do. Although the sheer extremity of the displayed stupidity still gets to me sometimes.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re:If, by his own admission, he is not.... by BlueStrat · 2017-07-17 07:54 · Score: 1

...terrorists only have to develop their own software, and you're worse off than before.
The politicians all know this, the point is that after that fact is "officially" discovered, it sets up their rationale for rolling out 'Trusted Computing" and requiring all internet providers only allow "trusted" devices running government-approved and locked-down software onto the internet.
Strat

--
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.

I for one by DivineKnight · 2017-07-16 12:07 · Score: 5, Funny

I for one look forward to Australia's War on Mathematics.

Re:I for one by blindseer · 2017-07-16 13:14 · Score: 1

Does it look something like this?
https://xkcd.com/1856/

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:I for one by mdhoover · 2017-07-16 13:31 · Score: 2

Yeah, would go about as well for us as our war on the emus...
Re:I for one by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 13:56 · Score: 1

I for one look forward to Australia's War on Mathematics.
It is possible that with cooperation with industry everything could be backdoor-ed but require cooperation from multiple parties to unlock, including per device and possibly per device per program keys, such that court procedures would have to be in place to release the escrowed key to the particular device.
That does not address two issues.
1) First I can make a unique encryption program with just a day of boredom, and while it may have holes and be weak in the general sense, it would still take a lot of resources to hack. My skills aren't all that special. There are countless others would could do it. Math isn't a force that can be stopped, nor should we try.
2) People in power tend to be lazy. A well designed system requiring a court order to unlock one key to one device, likely won't be considered easy enough, and if they make it easier, then the master key will get out, and likely to all the wrong people. Add in the financial mess when nothing is secure, and well the damage is incalculable.
3) As mentioned creating encryption software isn't difficult. The real bad guys are going to have it. Sure you could make it illegal to run any unsigned program, and then keep people from buying any hardware that runs anything but blessed software, but really is doing so wise? People in the US argue about the ultimate right to bear arms and how it is important to democracy. I'd argue that encryption is way way more important. People need to be able to communicate freely without government snooping.
Re:I for one by CRC'99 · 2017-07-16 18:28 · Score: 3, Funny

I for one look forward to Australia's War on Mathematics.
We took on the emus once... It didn't go well....

--
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
Re:I for one by Chrisq · 2017-07-16 21:35 · Score: 2

I for one look forward to Australia's War on Mathematics.
They are allocating a billion dollars to it. 50% will be on publicity, 50% on enforcement when a law of mathematics conflicts with policy and another 50% on education, so that mathematicians learn the real Australian laws. A further 50% is contingency and will be returned to the treasury if not required.
Re:I for one by thegarbz · 2017-07-16 22:05 · Score: 2

Don't joke about serious matters. Australia has a long history of proudly fighting ineffective wars

Law of maths my ass by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 12:09 · Score: 1

You know damn well, they'll simply reduce the crypto till it can be broken. It's not a law of maths that says bad crypto cannot be forced on products by incompetent politicians!

He needs to think: What would Putin do to my country if I undermined my countries security.

Because these people always think in terms of themselves as the good guys reading the bad guys communications, but its more likely to be a rogue nation attacking a more successful good nation.

If USA had all these hacks, and it could not protect it's elections from Putin, then how would Australia protect itself with weakened crypto?

Re:Law of maths my ass by sheramil · 2017-07-16 12:26 · Score: 1

You know damn well, they'll simply reduce the crypto till it can be broken.
Right around then, politicians world-wide will start to regret all those "teach the kids how to code" initiatives, because the kids will write their OWN crypto. Sure, most of it will contain newbie mistakes and will be breakable.. and some of it will work.
Re:Law of maths my ass by SharpFang · 2017-07-16 12:27 · Score: 1

Except - even if they enforce that with built-in crypto, they won't be able to prevent people sending pre-encrypted data over plaintext / weak crypto media. The only adversely affected will be people with legit interest in encryption.

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Re:Law of maths my ass by SharpFang · 2017-07-16 13:21 · Score: 1

Yeah, I wonder what if someone sent mr. Prime Minister an encrypted message - printed on paper, by snail mail. With an unencrypted hint that the contents are an info about upcoming terrorist attack, or his assassination attempt or such. And suggest he makes the post office deal with decrypting the message for him.

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2

It was a metaphor by rsilvergun · 2017-07-16 12:14 · Score: 1

or a simile, I can't remember which is which. It was also meant to distract from the issue. While we're all busy laughing at him and going ha-ha he's busy convincing the rest of his country to go along with his scheme.

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/

Is Australia becoming the Alabama/Indiana of the P by ad454 · 2017-07-16 12:15 · Score: 1

This reminds me of a satirical piece by Mark Boslough about the Alabama state legislature wanting to change the value of Pi from the irational value of 3.14159... to the simplier biblical value of 3.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

And of course, not to mention back in 1897, when the Indiana state legislature seriously considered defining Pi to 3.2.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

This is especially interesting considering that the seeds for the Brainpool elliptic curve domain parameters, used for crypto especially in European passports and government ID cards, were defined over values from "Pi" & "e".

http://www.ecc-brainpool.org/d...
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf...

Maybe Australia will ban Europeans with their unbreakable crypto in their passports from visiting?

transcript of Turnbull's press conference by caviare · 2017-07-16 12:19 · Score: 5, Informative

https://www.malcolmturnbull.co...

Re:transcript of Turnbull's press conference by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:30 · Score: 1

And a very, very shitty implementation of javax.net.ssl. Almost like the honorable prime minister wants to be a prime candidate for a defacement...

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:It's Austrailian for truth, mate! by sheramil · 2017-07-16 12:20 · Score: 2

Liberty thru marksmanship never caught-hold downunder ...

Y'might wanna tell that to Ned Kelly, mate. He found out all about marksmanship, the hard way.

Wot? Oh, look it up, for Christ's sake, ya dopey seppo. I'm not ya mum.

Are you sure he's Australian? by Snotnose · 2017-07-16 12:30 · Score: 1

This sounds like the crap coming out of the USA's congress nowdays. Yeah, I used a lower case c. When congress decides to be great again I'll capitalize it, but for now they're a bunch of kids arguing over their sippy cups.

need to make a collect call to him and ask toilet by Joe_Dragon · 2017-07-16 12:35 · Score: 1

need to make a collect call to him and ask about what way the water runs in his toilet

Ladies and gentlemen by thegarbz · 2017-07-16 12:35 · Score: 2

The man who tech companies hailed as a boon to the entire tech industry as a former chairman of Ozemail during the rise of the internet. Here's a man who should "get it.".

Ozemail went under during the dot.com crash, but hey I'm sure he had nothing to do with that. Maybe they tried to use some of that that strange mathematical thing.

2 + 2 = 5 by stormboy · 2017-07-16 12:36 · Score: 1

Come on! We are beyond 1984 now. Try something new.

Re:2 + 2 = 5 by volodymyrbiryuk · 2017-07-16 21:26 · Score: 1

Well you know how it goes: "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." Politicians of his kind fear and hate freedom if it is freedom of others.

--
sudo rm -r -f --no-preserve-root /

oh for... by johnjones · 2017-07-16 12:38 · Score: 2

the "technology" companies first excuse when a government asks for lawful intercepts is "we can't do that its encrypted" when they can tell exactly how long you watched a cat video or what posts you have been looking at because they track that...
(facebook et al is after all a website/platform)

what the australian government was saying very, very badly is that they want access to the platform and didnt want to be burdened by cryptology on the stream.

The information stream might be encrypted but the end points and server certainly not... the problem is who do you give access to ?

The endpoints are in the hands of consumers however the platform is not...

good luck

John Jones

Re: oh for... by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-07-16 17:02 · Score: 1

The endpoint users by and large are not mathematicians. So a lot of the sporting around that people in this forum are engaging is is really irrelevant. The proposed law does not outlaw math, any more than a law outlawing guns outlaws metallurgy. It outlaws certain specialized pieces of software that less than 1% of the population could even begin to create. That makes it a law much easier to enforce than a law "outlawing math."
Common sense is dull, though. Sorry if I have at all interrupted the nerd fest. Carry on everyone!

Whoomp, there it is! Proof positive of stupidity! by Rick+Schumann · 2017-07-16 13:15 · Score: 1, Insightful

Finally, the incontrovertible proof that politicians are not only completely IGNORANT of technical issues, but that they ARE NOT LISTENING TO THEIR OWN GODS-BE-DAMNED EXPERT TECHNICAL ADVISORS! This shit has got to STOP. Idiots like this need to be removed from office before they doom us all!

The same PM by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 13:30 · Score: 1

who butchered the Australia's future of would be "fast internet speed" but ended fucking everyone up because we're still stuck the same old crappy phone line connection. Seriously though, he's an idiot,

Re:The same PM by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:40 · Score: 1

Lemme guess. He simply redefined the meaning of "fast"?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:It's Austrailian for truth, mate! by twosat · 2017-07-16 13:42 · Score: 1

I am in New Zealand, but there are books in the library that I work at about the "Battle of the Eureka Stockade" more formally known as the Eureka Rebellion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

English speaking nations by jmccue · 2017-07-16 13:49 · Score: 1

What is wrong with the major majority English speaking nations ? It is like a virus that makes people stupid is focusing on people who's first language is English. All that seems to be left is Canada, and about half that country speaks French. Maybe I should learn French :)

Re:English speaking nations by jezwel · 2017-07-16 14:28 · Score: 1

Sorry mate, Canada is having some golden years right now, but you'll be back in the fold soon enough:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Re:English speaking nations by AHuxley · 2017-07-16 16:10 · Score: 1

Re "What is wrong with the major majority English speaking nations ? "
Its just UK and Commonwealth laws going back to WW1.
Defence of the Realm Act 1914 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Then ENIGMA, collection of all calls to and from Ireland in the 1960-1990's
All part of winning. The police or mil gets the message, all the content, context, both sides to the conversation and can then act in secret.
Different aspects of Commonwealth law and UK law got considered over decades and collection was legal.
The internet was something different for a few years given 100 years of collection.

What to do about the internet? Record a modem in use and play the session back in open court?
Network encryption is now more common.
A US style sneak and peek search warrant with gov hardware into every interesting computer? Risk gov malware been detected by some advanced AV, very well written OS or outgoing software firewall or undercover police been detected on site? Find the gov staging server?
Just go for the device when sold. Make the products wiretap friendly or they don't get sold. Every device is gov ready.
No risk of one device been any different from any other and a smart person finding the gov alteration to that one device and sharing a guide on how to find gov malware/collection settings.
Any service now activated will be gov malware ready. No sale, support or connection if the device or service is nor ready to collect on its user as and when sold.

What will interesting people do? They will meet at their places of worship and talk face to face.
Go on holiday to their own nations and return with plans discussed face to face. No photographs, no gps in a file, no voice calls, no IM.
They don't have to worry about privacy or anonymity online or per device. They don't need online. A round trip takes a week to get a face to face reply, thats fine.
Every device sold is now stuck with junk encryption, gov malware to access every message a user can read or typed in.
All ex staff, former staff, gov and mil officials walk to the private sector with that key? Or look up their friends? Or go fishing for a word or term over nation wide databases?
Sell information to the media? Or criminals for a price? Or to protect their faith or cult?
Once a nation has junk encryption per device everyone with access can go looking for any reason they can select from a GUI.
Cults and faith groups, criminals, police and the media will all make offers for access. Or just get their very interesting people jobs as contractors to do city and national counter surveillance on a govs own systems
Track any task force members in real time thanks to their own smart phones been on. Any cult member, faith, criminally connected person in gov would be happy to look up a few 100 devices and start counter tracking police/mil/gov workers. Too many totally untrusted people will have the gov crypto keys and will sell or offer their services to anyone for many different reasons.
Did the gov even think to consider a new SISMI-Telecom scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
In the most simple terms, political leaders see the telco system as a new Enigma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and they want it all collected on in real time and get an easy win just like past generations.
The really stupid part is telling the world you have that ability and will use it in open court.
Keep that gov malware secret for 3 decades and then tell the world would have been a better idea.
Interesting people change back to face to face meetings. Really interesting people start to buy into the gov own crypto systems.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re: English speaking nations by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-07-16 17:08 · Score: 1

We can just conceal the important secret message in a HUGE WALL OF TEXT!
Nobody will find it there!

Shovels on locomotives by Latent+Heat · 2017-07-16 14:11 · Score: 3, Interesting

Scotty knew enough to start with an archaic computer he had never seen before (Ach! The keyboard, yes!) and sketch out the process for generating transparent aluminum, so I would consider him considerably further skilled than a technician.

Maybe we should think of this fictional character as the 23rd century counterpart to a naval officer (Scotty had officer rank, we wasn't a Chief Warrant Officer or such rank) in charge of Engineering on a nuclear aircraft carrier? Who probably has at least an undergrad degree in Nuclear Engineering?

As to getting battered by a shovel, didn't locomotives lose their shovels decades ago when they switched from coal-fired steam to oil-fired Diesel?

Re:Shovels on locomotives by blindseer · 2017-07-16 15:39 · Score: 2

Maybe we should think of this fictional character as the 23rd century counterpart to a naval officer (Scotty had officer rank, we wasn't a Chief Warrant Officer or such rank) in charge of Engineering on a nuclear aircraft carrier? Who probably has at least an undergrad degree in Nuclear Engineering?

Sure, Commander Scott likely did have training, in this fictional world, that would equate to an engineering degree that one would expect someone from a person leading the team managing the propulsion systems on a modern day real world aircraft carrier. His position was chief of engineering, or something similar, because he was in charge of the engines. The people under his command should be accurately considered "engineers" because they are members of the engineering department, and maintained the engines.
Another definition of "engineer" is "crafty schemer", which fits Commander Scott, and his team, as well.

As to getting battered by a shovel, didn't locomotives lose their shovels decades ago when they switched from coal-fired steam to oil-fired Diesel?
I was thinking more of a shovel for corn or soybeans, because that's what I see on trains a lot around here, or for sand and snow, because it snows around here and sand is used to deal with it. I thought that might seem an odd statement to some after I posted it, but whatever. If shovel seems odd then insert some other long handled tool you might think a train engineer might have in reach.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:Shovels on locomotives by h4ck7h3p14n37 · 2017-07-17 05:17 · Score: 1

So why did Scotty try talking into the mouse first? And he didn't really notice the keyboard until it was pointed out to him. "A keyboard? How quaint!"

Maybe he's got a quick way to solve discrete logs by eric31415927 · 2017-07-16 14:17 · Score: 1

The Aussie PM claim that Australian laws are stronger than commendable mathematics make perfect sense if he's got a way to crack encryption.
Math has not shown that solving discrete logarithms need be difficult. Simply nobody has come public with a solution yet. But then why would they?

Not related to Canute, but his advisors by Roger+W+Moore · 2017-07-16 14:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

A quick search shows that Malcolm Turnbull has Royal Blood and he is a direct descendant, all the way through male heirs, of King Canute.

Canute tried to command the tide knowing full well that it would not work to show his idiot advisors that there were limits to the power of the crown. So Turnbull must have been related to Canute's advisors which makes sense since Prime Minister is the modern equivalent to an advisor in a Royal Court even if the power dynamics are now very different.

Perhaps the Queen could step in to re-educate this twit since it worked before for his distant ancestor? I'd suggest having him stand in the middle of the outback in the full sun on a hot summer's day while she signs a law to make the sun to stop shining or 8pm to follow 10am if you want a more mathematical flavour.

Re:Not related to Canute, but his advisors by just+another+AC · 2017-07-16 16:38 · Score: 2

Perhaps the Queen could step in to re-educate this twit ... while she signs a law to make the sun to stop shining or 8pm to follow 10am

Umm... 8pm does follow 10am. It follows it 10 hours later.
Maybe try 8pm to happen within 5 minutes of 10am or something.
Re:Not related to Canute, but his advisors by Roger+W+Moore · 2017-07-16 17:00 · Score: 1

That was the idea - I should clearly just stick to physics though!
Re:Not related to Canute, but his advisors by stealth_finger · 2017-07-16 21:15 · Score: 1

Perhaps the Queen could step in to re-educate this twit since it worked before for his distant ancestor?
The Queen? She's shown that she's more than happy to just let train wrecks happen.

--
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Re:Not related to Canute, but his advisors by mjwx · 2017-07-17 00:34 · Score: 2

A quick search shows that Malcolm Turnbull has Royal Blood and he is a direct descendant, all the way through male heirs, of King Canute.
Canute tried to command the tide knowing full well that it would not work to show his idiot advisors that there were limits to the power of the crown. So Turnbull must have been related to Canute's advisors which makes sense since Prime Minister is the modern equivalent to an advisor in a Royal Court even if the power dynamics are now very different.
I think that Malcolm Turnbull has more in common with the traditional Norwegian spelling of Canute, that's what we meant when we said "Turnbull is an utter Cnut".

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:Not related to Canute, but his advisors by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2017-07-17 00:35 · Score: 1

All these measurements are by government fiats. Julius and Augustus commanded the seventh month (SEPTember) to be the eighth and ninth month respectively. So Elizabeth Regina can actually command the clock and the calendar to be whatever arbitrarily.

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact

John Clarke must be spinning in his grave by sandbagger · 2017-07-16 14:41 · Score: 2

I suspect Oz politicians bumped him off so they could get away with such idiotic statements.

--
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.

Reversificationism by Tablizer · 2017-07-16 15:19 · Score: 1

You have to add a negative sign to everything down under because it's upside down.

--
Table-ized A.I.

Nothing New by JimSadler · 2017-07-16 15:25 · Score: 1

When the US was created we had mad bombers, political terror nuts as well as common criminals plotting among themselves against governments, political groups or businesses. That has not changed one bit. Yet the founders had a grip on certain realities including limiting governments and police from running riot over privacy of the public. When such people acted out we hunted them down. So just how do we justify the total invasion of all communications by governments i this era?

Re:Nothing New by hyades1 · 2017-07-16 18:26 · Score: 1

I suspect the argument you'd get back is that the potential to commit mass mayhem is much higher now, which justifies giving governments the power to put anybody under a microscope whenever they like.
As far as it goes, it's a good argument. What's ignored...always...is that when governments get that kind of power, they inevitably misuse it.
Sooner or later, citizens living in democratic countries will have to suck it up and choose between security and a certain irreducible level of terrorism.

--
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Re:Nothing New by JesseMcDonald · 2017-07-17 07:42 · Score: 1

I suspect the argument you'd get back is that the potential to commit mass mayhem is much higher now, which justifies giving governments the power to put anybody under a microscope whenever they like. ... As far as it goes, it's a good argument.
No, it is not a good argument. You are talking about placing constraints on every innocent individuals' behavior—with non-compliance punishable by loss of property, loss of freedom, and ultimately loss of life depending on how much the individual resists this violation of their natural rights—on the basis of something no more palpable than a generic, unsubstantiated fear of what someone might do. No amount of "potential to commit mass mayhem" could possibly justify that kind of response.

--
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat

Man am I embarressed by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 15:28 · Score: 1

I'm sorry everyone that our prime minister is such an idiot. We already knew, now you do to.

What about Newton's law by ilotgov · 2017-07-16 16:49 · Score: 1

Why does he not suspend Newton's law of universal gravitation, locally. Surely that does not apply to him in Australia?
Don't we wish him success...

Re: Whoomp, there it is! Proof positive of stupidi by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-07-16 17:04 · Score: 1

They certainly aren't nerdy enough for Slashdot!

Let's pedant them some more, here on our forum!

that was almost a good post by Texmaize · 2017-07-16 17:36 · Score: 1

The above post would actually warrant insightful if it either stopped before personal name calling, or at least defended it. If you feel he is an imbecile, then explain it in detail. Many of us are not form Australia and have no idea about him. Some more information would be useful.

Somehow, he got elected PM of your country. So, many people don't find him to be a moron. This leaves me to wonder, does Australia just like morons or does he merely happen to disagree with you and you are name calling. If the later, the imbecile in the conversation may not be who you think...

--
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.

Re:that was almost a good post by dwywit · 2017-07-16 19:03 · Score: 2

Much like other jurisdictions, some Australians of certain political faiths *hate* the opposition and its leaders with a passion approaching that of, well, conservatives' hate for liberals, and find it difficult to engage in civil debate, preferring to lash out in personal attacks. I admit I held Rudd and Swan in contempt for their smug, "we know best" attitude, and I think Gillard was a breath of fresh air. I despaired when the LNP put Abbott into the leadership, knowing it would set us back many years.
For your info, and because you asked nicely, here's a slightly biased nutshell description:
The currently-in-power LNP (Liberal-National Party consisting of centrists or liberals in the true meaning, moderate conservatives, and some far-right conservatives) are a coalition of right-of-centre blue-bloods and farmers. The blue-bloods believe they are born to rule and get all puzzled when they lose elections - "Why aren't we in power? We're the ruling class!" That's the attitude that upsets those who belong to the opposition, and generates the vitriol. Generally sound economic policies, but lousy social and environment policies. Australians, being anti-authoritarian larrikins (convicts) at heart, eventually get upset with increasingly out-of-touch blue bloods and squatters (the farmers) and vote them out.
The opposition (Labor, factions from moderate left-of-centre to quasi-communist, supposedly representing the workers, or the common man/woman) can't seem to govern the nation without raising taxes and/or borrowing large sums to fund their policies, and they just keep borrowing, and we end up in the shitter economically, and people eventually get sick of the debt and high interest rates, and vote them out. Usually *much* more enlightened social and environmental policies than the LNP, but sadly those policies tend to rely on borrowed funds, and they collapse when the remaining dollars have to go to pay off debt.
Outliers are the greens (mostly left of Labor) who would raise taxes to Swedish levels, but also provide social services and environmental support to match. Otherwise, it's fair to say that the greens do not understand economics. I can't hate them, they're so earnest, and they do manage to swing some nice deals when they hold balance of power in the senate.
Other outliers are far-right christians, firearm owners, real communists, and so on. Fortunately most Australians have excellent bullshit detectors, so these small outliers tend to stay that way. Some of them have figured out that they'll have more influence by working their way into the major parties, which is why we have people like Abbott, and Cory Bernardi, who's just broken ranks and formed his own ultra-conservative group. Hopefully he'll be flushed down the bowl at the next election.

--
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom

social hacks.. by gl4ss · 2017-07-16 18:04 · Score: 1

are what was used in the elections mostly.

not any interesting computer hacks. the biggest hack was just the revelation that people will believe fake news if it suits them and if not then not so if you flooded the market with fake news of ALL KINDS then people who wanted to believe in trumps views being true and clinton being a kidnapper then then those people could just pick and choose the right news to believe. it's a shotgun approach of fake news and a social hack, like trumps promises - look, all of his promises simply couldn't be true because they conflicted with each other and same with the fake news, but that doesnt matter if you flood stupid people with enough to choose from. it's even easier if those stupid people think they're smart.

i say news but I really mean twitter and fb posts like pizzagate.

it's not like trump would even needed russia for that or that it would have helped either.. but who knows.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

LOL by someone1234 · 2017-07-16 18:19 · Score: 1

I wonder what would that guy say while falling out of a window.
"I protest! Gravity is illegal!"

--
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry

language can be a bitch... by Tom · 2017-07-16 18:51 · Score: 1

Look, we call it "laws of nature", but they are nothing like the laws that are written into law books. It's just an unfortunate choice of words that causes confusion in some minds that take things too literal.

But have fun compensating for that silly law of gravity with a new Â in your countries law books...

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org

RSA and PI by gnasher719 · 2017-07-16 19:53 · Score: 1

RSA relies on multiplication of large numbers. Fast multiplication of large numbers is usually done using fast fourier transforms. FFT relies on the value of the number Pi.

I'm sure that if you redefine Pi = 3, then you can crack RSA.

Storm in a tea-cup by jandersen · 2017-07-16 20:35 · Score: 1

So, a politician uses a glib answer to shut up an annoying reporter - is that really news? And he is right, to some degree: in a nation ruled by law, it is of course the law of the land that applies; mathematics may or may not have informed the legislation, but nobody is going to argue in court that the "Laws of Mathematics" overrule the laws of the country, so let's not go overboard.

A lot of legislation consists of guiding principles or declarations of intent; one might even say that the introduction of new laws is a part of the ongoing debate about how to adjust to the ever changing reality of society. The big internet companies have been extremely reluctant to engage with governments around the world in adressing the issues of terrorism, organised crime and other harmful activities that large, social media enable; the media companies always come up with these excuses, like "it is impossible" (meaning, it might hurt our profits), but even govermments employ people who have expert insight and are able to think. I don't think they are demanding the impossible - they are forcing the media companies to come to the table and make serious efforts to solve the problems in a realistic way, which they are quite capable of.

Re:Storm in a tea-cup by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

The laws of nature limit what laws humans may implement. You cannot make a law that falling out of windows is illegal on grounds that gravity must not apply. I mean, of course you can make such a law, it's just impossible to enforce it and you look like a complete idiot for even proposing one.
Like this goofball here.
And yes, it IS impossible to give governments a backdoor while at the same time having sensible encryption that allows your economy to make sensible business deals. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. You can either have an economy that works or you can have broken encryption with backdoors. Pick your poison. Because one thing is certain: As soon as you must not use sensible encryption anymore in a country, it becomes really, really, REALLY difficult to convince a foreign actor to deal with you in any sort of deal that requires even the least kind of confidentiality.
And you better don't expect me to do any kind of business online in such a country.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Storm in a tea-cup by jandersen · 2017-07-17 02:06 · Score: 1

I do understand the issues, and in general I'd agree with you, but I don't agree with the alarmists that wnat to tell us that it is impossible to find a sensible, workable and above all fair solution. I don't know what form that would take, and it is quite possible that it will have to allow secure encryption, for many practical reasons. I think all parties will have to think outside the box and be willing to accept compromises. But to take encryption as an example - is it really the case that we either allow encryption without restriction, or otherwise have to give up on it altogether? Now, I can at least imagine that it would be possible to find a way to allow encryption on some types of data communication - eg. financial transactions - while disallowing it on, say, emails (not that I am advocating this in particular, it is just an example), and to do it in such a way that we can distinguish between legitimate, encrypted traffic and illegitimately encrypted traffic - without having to decrypt it. Is this challenge beyond the abilities of our civilisation?
Re:Storm in a tea-cup by Opportunist · 2017-07-17 03:48 · Score: 1

Encryption is or is not. If you outlaw encrypting email, then I will encrypt the attachment and leave you guessing whether I actually encrypted it or whether you just don't know the format I am sending. And if we outlaw attachments... well, good luck for that endeavor considering that 99% of the people who actually use the internet know no other way to get their grandkids' pictures delivered.
What is legitimate encrypted traffic and what is illegitimate one? From and to banks only? Can or cannot I have a SSL encrypted webserver? And if it can be, do I have to hand over the keys to the government? Why bother encrypting at all if the keys have to be compromised by design? And why do business with a company whose keys have to be compromised by design? Why should I trust such a transaction to be valid and not intercepted and altered by some actor?
Realize that there is no such thing as a "government only" backdoor. Such a backdoor constitutes the philosopher's stone of hacking. This is a high profile target, something that everyone wants, including but by no means limited to other governments, multinational actors and, well, pretty much anyone with deep pockets and/or a lot of criminal energy. At some point, some human will have to have access to such keys, and humans are by their very nature open to bribery, blackmail and extortion. One of the three works on pretty much every human. If everything fails, we kidnap your family and in exchange for a few bytes of data, i.e. the key, they can be back with you unharmed.
You think that's beyond states like North Korea?
And you think NKor wouldn't sell that info for a few hard Dollars to, well, whoever wants that info?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Storm in a tea-cup by jandersen · 2017-07-17 20:21 · Score: 1

So, basically, you are saying that you are not even willing to contemplate the possibility of entering into a dialog and try to see if a compromise is possible? I am sure something is coming, and I don't think it is a good idea to simply leave it to governments and big business as usual.
I agree that backdoors are stupid - they will be found and a way to exploit them constructed. As for outlawing email encryption - you misunderstood what I said. I'm not talking about outlawing encryption on specific types of communication, but outlawing it on all but a number of well defined types of communication, which is much more doable. I imagine it would be possible to construct a protocol for allowed, encrypted traffic, which it would be possible to identify as legitimate - perhaps something like a public key attached to the unencrypted part of the packet? Something that would be very difficult to fake, but easy to check. And then filter out anything that looks encrypted and doesn't have such a key.
As for what kinds of communications should be allowed to encrypt - if we don't make our voices heard in a sensible manner, then our views will simply be discarded, and it will be decided mostly by big business and a little bit by government.
Re:Storm in a tea-cup by Opportunist · 2017-07-17 21:35 · Score: 1

IT security is my business. I have had that dialogue. Numerous times. What you want is the security equivalent of the perpetuum mobile. Many have said they have one, only to fail if examined carefully. Pardon if I don't want to see your perpetuum mobile suggestion, I have seen enough to last a lifetime.
It already starts with "what is encryption?" Is using a file format you cannot read because you don't know the format encryption? Then you outlaw competition between companies because nobody may create a new file format. If not, well, how do you want to know whether the "picture" I just sent to a friend is just a graphics format you don't know or encrypted data? Or how about me sending a stream from /dev/urandom to fuck with your deep packet inspection for shits and giggles, is that outlawed too because it looks like encrypted data?
What you propose is that only "entitled" entities may communicate encrypted. Why? What makes their traffic more important than mine? Who may, anyway? Banks? Ok. What about companies? Maybe, they should, right? What is a company? Is that the mom'n'pop shop, too? Well, they should, shouldn't they? Else it would really kill competition if only big corporations may use encrypted communication. What keeps the terrorist from setting up a fake shop to be allowed encryption? What keeps me from doing the same for the sake of finally being in the "entitled to encrypt" group?
May I access https pages abroad where such insane laws do not exist? Because that traffic would certainly be encrypted with a key you do not have. Google for example is using HSTS, making unencrypted communication with their servers virtually impossible. The same is true for a lot of other pages. What about them?
And that's just what I come up in 5 minutes, if you need more, there's plenty of headaches left where this comes from.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Will Quantum encryption be legal? by Chrisq · 2017-07-16 21:38 · Score: 1

Will Quantum encryption be legal, or do Australian laws come above the laws of physics too?

Re:Ahh politicians by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 22:58 · Score: 1

So now instead he looks like a dimwitted loudmouth who yaks about shit he doesn't have the foggiest clue about. Is that better?

If anything, it's now time to use this and highlight what a complete dolt this moron is, trying to pretend his delusions of grandeur trump reality.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

"Real engineer" don't just sit in the office by sjbe · 2017-07-16 23:04 · Score: 3, Informative

So the idea was to get the engineers (who are really technicians and troubleshooters in the show; ; the real engineers are back at Mars designing the next-generation starships) to cut corners to come up with something workable even if it's very risky, or to come up with some new approach that takes less time (again, risky).

I'm wondering if you haven't actually worked as an engineer by that statement or if you do you have an exceptionally rare ivory tower job. I've got nearly three decades experience as a working engineer and I can assure you that a good portion of nearly every real world engineer's time is spent troubleshooting and fixing technical problems. Exactly the sort of stuff you are describing on the show. Very few engineers worthy of the title manage to stay back at the home office designing product without getting their hands dirty fixing the inevitable problems that result when their design breaks or is asked to do what it wasn't designed for. Engineers are asked all the time to come up with stop gap solutions as well as ways to same money, time, or other resources. Think Apollo 13. You seriously want to claim those guys were just "technicians and troubleshooters" just because they were coming up with workable-but-risky solutions? The "real engineers" aren't just drawing stuff on a white board in the office - the job is actually much more diverse than that and the good news is that it's much more interesting as a result.

Another part of the engineer's job they don't tell you about in school is how much time you'll spend writing and revising documentation. And it's been my experience that a large portion of the engineers out there are rather bad at this mundane but very important task. They tend to overlook details rather routinely and they forget that they aren't writing primarily for themselves. The point of engineering documentation is to describe something so OTHER PEOPLE can understand what needs to be done efficiently and to the smallest relevant detail. That's something they could teach in colleges but do not for some reason.

Re:I look forward to Mr Turnbull's arguements... by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:08 · Score: 1

I still want to see him discuss gravity with a cliff.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

The law of gravity does not apply in Australia. by Ihlosi · 2017-07-16 23:15 · Score: 1

The law of gravity does not apply in Australia - this should be obvious. If it did, everyone and everything there would be falling down, off the Earth and into space.

It's a good thing the laws of physics don't apply universally!

Another example of his maths knowedge! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 23:19 · Score: 1

This is the "gentleman" who killed the plan to run fiber to every premises for high speed internet!
Instead, to "save money" he changed it to Fiber To The Node, using the old copper for the last part.
This has blown out to cost more than the Fiber To The Premises, and can maybe max out at 25Mbits, whereas the fiber could be expanded in the future to really huge bandwidths.
In his mind, the plebs do not need or deserve the best.
(We are lucky to be included in the Fiber To The Premises at our place)
Oz had the chance to be world best in internet and he tossed it away! Now he is demonstrating his continued misunderstanding of the net.
Another maths miscalculation???
Just what we need for a leader, NOT!

Re:need to make a collect call to him and ask toil by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:32 · Score: 1

There's nothing wrong with the bidet, is there?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Leave encryption to plugins by kardamili · 2017-07-16 23:37 · Score: 1

It seems to me that if lawmakers enforce the requirement that messaging apps/systems allow access to the original messages submitted by users, and refuse to understand that the laws of mathematics cannot be subverted by mere humans, except by simply disallowing those features ... then the appropriate response by messaging apps is to leave the presentation, user input, and encryption layers to plugins. Those plugins would submit messages already encoded/encrypted and would be compiled/installed by end users as add-ons, from source, on an individual basis, thus pushing the legal responsibility "to the edge." I.e., onto individual users of the system.

What would lawmakers do then? Disallow the transmission of unintelligible encrypted messages? Would the response to that be to embed encrypted messages inside intelligible messages? Would they disallow the very coding and distribution of encryption schemes and source code?

Clearly, this is not a battle that can be won by fiat; which is the same reason that cryptocurrencies will eventually usurp fiat currencies; and the reason that battle lines will be drawn in the sphere of influence of knowledge and code.

The stance of these legislators, to me, is akin to "Burn the books!" and "Burn the witches (i.e., cryptographers)!"

Law enforcement would be better served by funding development of side-channel attacks and unmasking methodologies that do not rely on the content of messages.

Re: Whoomp, there it is! Proof positive of stupidi by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:39 · Score: 1

This is not about him not understanding the difference between symmetric and asymmetric encryption. This is him not only not understanding the difference between a natural law (i.e. one that simply applies whether he likes it or not) and a human made law (i.e. the bullshit he usually creates and deals with). Mathematics isn't up for negotiation. It's nothing you can implement or not, it is something that simply is the way it is. You also can't argue with gravity whether you want to fall off a cliff. This ain't no Bugs Bunny cartoon where you don't fall until you look down and do a double take. Gravity simply applies.

But that's only half the problem. And because he is already too dimwitted to understand this particularly mundane fact that any child older than 8 can grasp without a problem (i.e. that there are rules you can't break because you break your leg if you try and there are rules you can break as long as your parents don't catch you), he of course cannot understand the ramifications his blunder would have on the Australian economy. Because outside his little crayon-drawn world, in reality, people do understand the implications of a broken and hence worthless encryption, and certainly will not want to do business in a country where it is MANDATORY to not be able to sensibly keep your data from being spied upon.

The longer Australia has to deal with this prime idiot, the worse it will be to rebuild afterwards.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:ADMIRABLE, consider Austria is land of CRIMINAL by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:41 · Score: 1

Australia. Austria is a much smaller country on pretty much the opposite end of the globe.

The politicians aren't much more intelligent, though.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:What you need to understand about Australia tho by Opportunist · 2017-07-16 23:45 · Score: 1

Just to make it clear: Does that mean I get a reward or is that still illegal?

Just checking...

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:Look at the positives by hord · 2017-07-17 00:09 · Score: 1

Does this also mean they can get you for infinite speed on a road with no length? I don't know if having math on your side really helps.

The mathematics of irrationality. by mjwx · 2017-07-17 00:32 · Score: 1

This is great news actually, because it means that this moron is not the PM of Australia. After all, to become PM you must be the leader of the party with the largest representation in parliament. If the laws of Mathematics don't apply, well... how can you say that one number is larger than another?

The problem is, Malcolm Turnbull was not elected through solid campaigning and rational thinking. He was elected through fear mongering and backrooom preference deals.

When the election was over, it took two weeks to count the votes before we even knew who won, it came down to preference from the minor parties. The laws of mathematics do not necessarily apply in politics.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.

Re:The mathematics of irrationality. by Plus1Entropy · 2017-07-17 01:18 · Score: 1

Again, how can you even count votes if the laws of Mathematics don't apply?

--
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Re:The mathematics of irrationality. by omnichad · 2017-07-17 02:36 · Score: 1

not elected through solid campaigning and rational thinking. He was elected through fear mongering and backrooom preference deals.
So....a public election.

In this world... by The123king · 2017-07-17 01:31 · Score: 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

--
If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat

And so it begins by unixcorn · 2017-07-17 01:46 · Score: 1

Australia, often lauded by the US gun control movement, is a country where the populace no longer has a say. That's right, they willingly gave up their weapons 20 years ago in the name of "safety", but now they are no longer safe from the tyranny of their own government. How can Australians protect themselves from a rogue leader who is hell-bent on usurping any sort of privacy the common citizen holds on to?

Re:And so it begins by hyades1 · 2017-07-17 02:52 · Score: 1

"How can Australians protect themselves from a rogue leader who is hell-bent on usurping any sort of privacy the common citizen holds on to?"
If guns actually helped citizens protect their sovereignty, we wouldn't need to ask exactly that question of Americans. It does need to be asked, though, since the United States has blatantly surrendered its sovereignty to a Russian dictator...and without a shot being fired.

--
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.

Lets use this strong Australian law system by einyen · 2017-07-17 04:44 · Score: 1

Quick Australia make a law saying that the Riemann hypothesis, P vs NP and the other math Millennium Prize Problems are solved. Then we will at least get some answers out of this crazy law system.

Re: Whoomp, there it is! Proof positive of stupid by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-07-17 10:05 · Score: 1

You need metalurgy to create a gun. You need mathematics to create a cryptographic messaging system. What is being proposed is a ban of cryptographic message systems. Not a revocation of mathematical laws. It would not necessarily mean wholesale implementation of mandatory back doors, it could simply mean being imprisoned for not surrendering a cryptograhic key when a warranted, with judicial review, demand is made to surrender said key.

I am not a full throated advocate for this. I am just trying to point out that hurr-durr carrying on in forums like this, acting like "they are trying to repeal the law of gravity" is dorky and non-productive.

Re: Whoomp, there it is! Proof positive of stupid by Opportunist · 2017-07-17 21:25 · Score: 1

You needn't know the ins and outs of metallurgy to make gun laws, but knowing that hot chocolate is probably not a great idea to pour down a barrel for maintenance should be required before you create laws that deal with rules that dictate what "in good repair" means when it comes to handgun conditions.

I don't expect him to know the ins and outs of encryption, not even that he can tell the difference between elliptic curve ciphers and block ciphers. I don't want him to implement one. But I do require him to understand the ramifications of laws that he proposes, which he very blatantly does not do.

In some cases it is impossible to surrender such a key. If I store data that is already encrypted, you can threaten to hang me and I cannot provide the key. You can of course make it illegal to store data I have no key for, but that is the death spell to any and all cloud services your country would offer, because why the fuck would I store my data in your country? Even (or rather, especially) if I live in that country I would not want your service and go to one that honors my privacy.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

See, a better post by Texmaize · 2017-07-18 02:58 · Score: 1

Nice post thanks! This is what slashdot should be in the ideal. The forums should not ask to agree with every viewpoint being laid out. However, they should demand that things that are being modded up be like the above post: thoughtful, detailed, and minimized name calling. I would argue for highest ratings, a link or two for fact checking an argument would be great.

With this type of post one could have an honest discussion and learn something, which is what a real Nerd would do.

--
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.

Math(s) laws will outlive Australian Law by eionmac · 2017-07-19 21:44 · Score: 1

The physical laws of mathematics will long outlive any 'Australian Law'. Even those mathematical laws we do not know yet (say in Quantun Theory) will be discovered , and found to have worked since in our knowledge the known universe existed.

--
Regards Eion MacDonald

As long as the law of the land is truly righteous. by martinfb · 2017-07-24 08:08 · Score: 1

As long as the law of the land is truly righteous!

However, in light of the prevalence of corrupt governments - including in the USA - I am much more pro-people's rights.

Until we the people can set in stone what constitutes a true crime, then I reserve ALL the rights to personal privacy.

Blame this rift on corrupt law enforcement and political entities, as well as totally untrust-able corporate entities (that deserve NO rights).

As long as I am not hurting anyone, then I reserve ALL of my rights - especially privacy. I suggest you do nothing to cause me to seek harm on you!!!

--

Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.

Slashdot Mirror

Crypto-Bashing Prime Minister Argues The Laws Of Mathematics Don't Apply In Australia (independent.co.uk)

228 of 330 comments (clear)