This piece now has a story: the piece of art is what Banksy intended it to be, a dynamic object that changed its state upon be acquired (but without the acquirer knowing about the state change in advance).
The pretentious were shocked, which was the joke, and ordinary people think it's hilarious. A punchline that keeps giving, that's art.
The initial mission was for two years, In practice most people expected it to last a decade or more.
Thanks for the article. It looks like a case of setting expectations very low. If it is one fifth of practice that doesn't look like a lot of confidence on the part of people running the project.
The biggest problem with this claim is that it is a gross oversimplification even with some pretty straight forward reasoning. To understand the deaths by certain industrial causes you have to consider direct and indirect mechanisms. Direct mechanisms contribute historical data, however indirect mechanisms do not create obvious historical data.
For us to consider deaths by Solar and Wind direct causes maybe someone falling off a roof or a tower. The duration of such incidents are hours. An indirect cause maybe a chemical byproduct of the production process or perhaps going crazy from infra sound. These are somewhat avoidable and correctable issues with a duration of months to years. Propagation over area can be tens to hundreds of metres.
To consider Coal direct causes maybe someone getting black lung from mining, being burnt to death, falling, crushed or fire. The duration of such incidents are days to weeks. Indirect causes maybe asthma or other lung diseases. You may breathe in a natural radio-isotope causing lung cancer. These are difficult to avoid and correct with a duration of years to decades. Propagation over area can be tens to hundreds of Kilometres.
These are easy to understand because the means that creates the deaths are obvious. However with Nuclear the causes of death are not so obvious.
To consider Nuclear direct causes maybe Industrial accidents similar to a coal plant or a severe exposure to radiation. The duration of such incidents are years to indefinite considering that Chernobyl has only just been bought under control with New Safe Confinement and Fukushima is barely controlled. Indirect causes for Nuclear are ignored in the forbes article because it ignores the externalities of the Nuclear industry whilst focusing on the one for other industries. These are so varied because the vectors are cancer from absorbing radio-isotopes, transgenic disease from DNA damage received in a previous generation, pregnancies that failed to come to term and fatal birth defects from those who did all occur over a long time. You may breathe in an enriched radio-isotope causing lung cancer. You may drink or eat it and you could not detect it was there as it organically binds inside your body. These are impossible to correct with a duration of decades to unknown amount of years. You can't tell if you do or do not avoid them. Propagation of radio-isotopes from Fukushima has spread all over the world, with much of it landing on the west coast of the US. We know this because the MOX fuel elements in Unit three can be tracked using data from the Nuclear test ban treaty monitoring stations. Bio-accumulation in the environment is also a complex subject that takes a long time to manifest as something that can be measured. This is all relative to the rates at which the radio-isotopes decay through their daughter products.
When I get a chance I subscribe to statistica to have a look at the underlying data however it is clear to see the flaw in the reasoning is that we are still at the beginning of the nuclear accidents, there is no historical data to compare. Considerable obfuscation of data has been performed to keep the truth vague and ambiguous. To truly understand it you have to model the propagation of these elements in the body and the environment. However I think H. L. Mencken summed it up nicely when he said:
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
Completely incorrect. You have to mine uranium. That involves crushing a lot of rock. That is all carbon power from diesel and coal in remote areas. Coal powers the enrichment cycle (or did at Paducah). The actual estimates in joules is roughly one third of the lifetime output of an AP-1000 is consumed in carbon energy to produce the fuel. Of course you are also ignoring the carbon output from the third most abundant source after electricity production and transport, which is concrete. Concrete consumption for Nuclear power is huge.
I know, you're probably going to refer me to the IPCC comparison on Nuclear carbon consumption, to which I'll respond by pointing out that it was based on Vattenfal paper, which was not peer reviewed. Then you'll ask me to explain and then I'll point out that mining methods that attempt to avoid doing the carbon consumption use in situ-acid leach mining which involves pumping a toxic combination of sulfuric acid and hydrogen peroxide to dissolve the rock which then leaves megalitres of radioactive sufuric acid lying around.
The mine tailing from Nuclear power are extremely toxic and huge radon emitters, which ends up in water tables.
Any opposition against nuclear is 100% political.
What you are doing is projecting your ignorance of the facts onto people with an opposing viewpoint without making an attempt to understand it.
For example, can you tell me how soluble Plutonium Chloride is and which micro nutrient it analogues?
This is the kind of technique often used with nuclear idealists making an assumption based in dogmatic skepticism and social proof. The more you educate yourself about Nuclear power the more pragmatic your opposition to it becomes.
People may not understand the complexities of why they should oppose Nuclear power however it is always 100% pragmatic.
And yet the fact is, the per-terawatt-hour death rate from nuclear is...
Unknown.
If we were rationally having this discussion we would be discussing transgenic disease and the role of bio-accumulation in propagating radio-isotopes through the food chain. If we were having a realistic discussion we wouldn't just talk about deaths of people, we would talk about the genomic damage done to all species, including human beings, from the abundance of radioactive effluents released into the environment by the nuclear industry.
The deaths of the communities that surround nuclear power and the mental health issues.
The statistical reduction of the birth rate of the human race and plethora of other health issues that are starting to emerge as a result of weakened immune systems from internal radio-isotope absorption that don't include death are also valid things to talk about if nuclear lobbyists are going to refer to solar installers who don't wear proper safety gear and fall off roofs.
Now wouldn't this be the pinnacle of irony if industries started fleeing to China to escape industrial espionage?
Exactly. These laws are the Stasi's wet dream. At best they had the ability to tap 40 phone lines. These laws makes anything communist countries pass look like a joke in comparison. No foreign power would ever have to have operatives stationed overseas ever again, just look it up. There isn't a single piece of infrastructure excluded, from the server to the phone. This is politicians attempting to install themselves as the elite.
Imagine what happens when all of this intelligence is being conducted with A.I enabled systems. This certainly is possible with these laws.
Well you entirely misstated the goal. They don't give a shit about the miniscule percent of criminals smart enough to evade, they care about mass surveillance of the general public.
Which is exactly what they *don't* listen to.
Demonstrate to them, in a respectful way, how it will effect business and economic outcomes and you get their attention. Besides, the bill is 176 pages, I have only so much time.
he use of the term "super-Earth" prompted a non-technical friend of mine [who was reading the article over my shoulder] to ask, "So there's, like, an amazing Earth, way out in space, right on the edge of our solar system?"
Should have told him it is the home of all the Super people, like Super Man and really fantastically dressed.
Now, it's quite possible that they meant to write (and didn't, because they were idiots who didn't know what the words meant) that perihelion was 80 AU, and aphelion was 2300 AU
I wonder if this object is big enough to be the object that influences the variations in the earth precession?
Welcome to the blacklist. I hope you won't need to apply for any job in the foreseeable future.
I've been on the blacklist for my entire career. Govt know's exactly who I am. I have a four page letter from the AG arguing my position and letters from politicians thanking me for raising awareness and bringing the issues to their attention.
If I didn't have a job, I'd be a bigger pain in the ass than I am now. Frankly most of the time advising the government means diverting them from doing something stupid that will cause economic damage to the country. This and prevention of fraud is a completely valid criticism of the Bill, even after all free speech issues have been considered.
Once this bill is passed Mr AC you will cease to exist.
In simple terms, so even politicians can grasp it: Pass this bill and kiss R&D, finance and IT good bye.
I asserted those points in my critique of the bill I sent to the government. However you should keep in mind that Australia's Attorney General is currently in negations with all Five Eyes, Echelon, SIGINT countries to implement the same laws in those countries.
All these countries ministers were invited to the Gold Coast last month to discuss implementation in their respective countries.
Either that, or the tech heavyweights know perfectly well that if they can bypass someone's encryption, so can the bad guys. Which means no more online purchases, or bill payment, or anything like that.
I think they can see this will collapse the online purchases paradigm. If the govt can get in, black hats can too. Everyone knows this except the general public and government.
The Bill intentionally says "No backdoors" however what it means is that govt wants front door access to be designed into what-ever software and infrastructure is produced which allowed prescribed agencies to trample all existing efforts to secure infrastructure.
TAN's "Technical Assistance Notices" are disruptive under 317MA. If business doesn't drop what they are doing and assist the government before the expiry period, you are assessed as non compliant and exposed to civil liability from the govts activities.
Under clause 317G, if you are a coder or a sysadmin and you refuse to help with a "TCN" or Technical Capabilities Notice, you are labeled as "un-cooperative" and exposed to any civil liability arising from the govts activities.
To put the cherry on the cake, under 317R, they tell *you* what is technically feasible on your infrastructure. More so 317T allows govt to install software and infrastructure which business must maintain to remain compliant. 317X govt can vary scope, specification and responsibilities connected with "eligible activities". 317ZF make individuals personally responsible for any unauthorised disclosure and makes it a criminal offense for IT professionals to disclose anything even to their colleagues. Even on you're own infrastructure, it's a diabolical double bind, psychologically.
I could go on, I'm just picking random notes from the exposure draft I have beside me. There just isn't anything good anywhere in this bill if you are in IT. You either spy on your users or they have the option to destroy your entire business. Everything I've pointed to here is in the first 50 pages of a 176 page bill.
I've been analysing these Bills for over 20 years, this is the worst Bill I've ever seen. If you can, please help raise awareness, politely write to your representatives and tell them you object to this incursion to your free speech rights. Consider that this Bill imposes criminal liability for pretty much the entire audience of slashdot if you do not co-operate. Tell your friends, social media - whatever you think is appropriate, just do something. My critique of the Bill is elsewhere in this thread - feel free to copy it and use it.
Have no doubt, this is heading to the UK/US/Canada and NZ. Australia's Attorney General is in international consultations *right now* about implementing this in all five eyes countries.
I submitted the following critique of the proposed Bill during the feedback period:
Greetings Honourable Members,
I am a active professional in the Information Technology industry for 30 years, I offer a critique of the The Assistance and Access Bill 2018 herein "this Bill".
The first and most obvious contradiction is that this bill cannot achieve its intended objection of monitoring paedophiles and terrorists because there is nothing to stop these parties from writing their own software. There is nothing extra-ordinary about exchanging media and messages and this is not difficult software to create. This would also apply to organised crime, there is very little from stopping them from developing their own software to exchange messages. Attempting to police this act is effectively a limitation on the innovative engines of our economy that drives business, the creation of software.
So whilst it is clear the Bill is attempting to enable access to communications for law enforcement and intelligence agencies, there is questionable benefit if it is unenforceable or ineffective for its legislative purpose.
The premise for not introducing "backdoors" and vectors for attacking systems is very shallow. Instead it is clear from 317C and 317D that any and all computer infrastructure deployed in Australia will have to have governmental monitoring subsystems installed in them, possibly by multiple government agencies. None of these clauses will stop, capture or decode messages by anyone determined enough to send them.
Consequently, criminal actors will now have a well defined target that they know exists and only has to be found for it to be used, making their task of covertly capturing data on average Australian citizens much easier. Criminals certainly won't be concerned about breaking laws if they already are. For those reasons once the infrastructure this Bill implies is established and deployed it will put the honest person and businesses at a disadvantage when they comply because the governmental monitoring subsystems will be a known target within their infrastructure.
Cyber crime, identity theft and other fraud against Australians are more likely to succeed with the taxation dollars from ordinary Australians used to build the means to defraud them of assets and income. I am very concerned that passing this Bill will lead to increased fraud against the average everyday Australia who is trying to use the internet to do everyday tasks and save time. No one will be spared, the Honourable Members themselves still have to interact in our society and will be exposed at some level.
There are much better ways for achieving law enforcement's objectives than with obtuse and overt access clauses as the main issue with deploying any kind of technology is unexpected side effects. The obvious unexpected side-effect of the government's proposed initiative is how they will be used against those companies who co-operate. If deployed world wide, which I see is something our government is championing, I cannot help but seeing it lead the world to some sort of digital feudalism broken down into virtual fifedoms.
I urge the government and all honourable members not to hand organised crime a weapon against our citizenry as powerful as this one. The intention of these laws is clearly for gathering data, which is exactly the goal of cyber-criminals. Instead the government could seek to protect its citizens by implementing technology laws that protect us from cyber-crime and fraud, in ways that lead to intelligence outcomes. Laws that use encryption technology to reduce opportunities for fraud against Australians as opposed to increasing them.
Any additional income paid to people will simply be spent. I think this was researched in Texas where they found pay rises generate a lot of economic activity.
Paying people more money is a way to get more money into circulation instead of it sitting inside a bank account doing nothing.
New Zealand joins Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and of course the United States, forming The Paranoid Five.
All of us in these countries have a situation where what remains of our implicit freedom is being destroyed. Don't be surprised if this law is passed in all of these countries sometime in the near future. This is a pattern I've observed with all the so called anti-terrorism laws that convert our freedom into capital.
Australia is working on doing this from the The Assistance and Access Bill 2018 except they don't need customs, they can issue this on anyone with a phone or if you run a website, basically anyone.
Of course Australia is leading the charge to export this legislation to the US, UK, NZ and Canada. It's still not to late to stop it right now, if enough people write to politicians. That's how we stop laws like this being passed.
Slashdot Mirror
That look had to be fucking priceless.....
The pretentious punchline.
This piece now has a story: the piece of art is what Banksy intended it to be, a dynamic object that changed its state upon be acquired (but without the acquirer knowing about the state change in advance).
The pretentious were shocked, which was the joke, and ordinary people think it's hilarious. A punchline that keeps giving, that's art.
The initial mission was for two years, In practice most people expected it to last a decade or more.
Thanks for the article. It looks like a case of setting expectations very low. If it is one fifth of practice that doesn't look like a lot of confidence on the part of people running the project.
Only a fraction of the 2 KW energy is converted to electricity.
Some of the thermal energy is used to keep the rovers computers at operating temperature the way Voyager does. It's a common technique that they use to keep space craft functioning.
The MMRTG looks interesting.
I Google'd "deaths per terawatt" and found this: https://www.statista.com/stati...
Non-paywalled data is at https://www.forbes.com/sites/j...
The biggest problem with this claim is that it is a gross oversimplification even with some pretty straight forward reasoning. To understand the deaths by certain industrial causes you have to consider direct and indirect mechanisms. Direct mechanisms contribute historical data, however indirect mechanisms do not create obvious historical data.
For us to consider deaths by Solar and Wind direct causes maybe someone falling off a roof or a tower. The duration of such incidents are hours. An indirect cause maybe a chemical byproduct of the production process or perhaps going crazy from infra sound. These are somewhat avoidable and correctable issues with a duration of months to years. Propagation over area can be tens to hundreds of metres.
To consider Coal direct causes maybe someone getting black lung from mining, being burnt to death, falling, crushed or fire. The duration of such incidents are days to weeks. Indirect causes maybe asthma or other lung diseases. You may breathe in a natural radio-isotope causing lung cancer. These are difficult to avoid and correct with a duration of years to decades. Propagation over area can be tens to hundreds of Kilometres.
These are easy to understand because the means that creates the deaths are obvious. However with Nuclear the causes of death are not so obvious.
To consider Nuclear direct causes maybe Industrial accidents similar to a coal plant or a severe exposure to radiation. The duration of such incidents are years to indefinite considering that Chernobyl has only just been bought under control with New Safe Confinement and Fukushima is barely controlled. Indirect causes for Nuclear are ignored in the forbes article because it ignores the externalities of the Nuclear industry whilst focusing on the one for other industries. These are so varied because the vectors are cancer from absorbing radio-isotopes, transgenic disease from DNA damage received in a previous generation, pregnancies that failed to come to term and fatal birth defects from those who did all occur over a long time. You may breathe in an enriched radio-isotope causing lung cancer. You may drink or eat it and you could not detect it was there as it organically binds inside your body. These are impossible to correct with a duration of decades to unknown amount of years. You can't tell if you do or do not avoid them. Propagation of radio-isotopes from Fukushima has spread all over the world, with much of it landing on the west coast of the US. We know this because the MOX fuel elements in Unit three can be tracked using data from the Nuclear test ban treaty monitoring stations. Bio-accumulation in the environment is also a complex subject that takes a long time to manifest as something that can be measured. This is all relative to the rates at which the radio-isotopes decay through their daughter products.
When I get a chance I subscribe to statistica to have a look at the underlying data however it is clear to see the flaw in the reasoning is that we are still at the beginning of the nuclear accidents, there is no historical data to compare. Considerable obfuscation of data has been performed to keep the truth vague and ambiguous. To truly understand it you have to model the propagation of these elements in the body and the environment. However I think H. L. Mencken summed it up nicely when he said:
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
How do these compare to nuclear?
Nuclear: no carbon pollution at all.
Completely incorrect. You have to mine uranium. That involves crushing a lot of rock. That is all carbon power from diesel and coal in remote areas. Coal powers the enrichment cycle (or did at Paducah). The actual estimates in joules is roughly one third of the lifetime output of an AP-1000 is consumed in carbon energy to produce the fuel. Of course you are also ignoring the carbon output from the third most abundant source after electricity production and transport, which is concrete. Concrete consumption for Nuclear power is huge.
I know, you're probably going to refer me to the IPCC comparison on Nuclear carbon consumption, to which I'll respond by pointing out that it was based on Vattenfal paper, which was not peer reviewed. Then you'll ask me to explain and then I'll point out that mining methods that attempt to avoid doing the carbon consumption use in situ-acid leach mining which involves pumping a toxic combination of sulfuric acid and hydrogen peroxide to dissolve the rock which then leaves megalitres of radioactive sufuric acid lying around.
The mine tailing from Nuclear power are extremely toxic and huge radon emitters, which ends up in water tables.
Any opposition against nuclear is 100% political.
What you are doing is projecting your ignorance of the facts onto people with an opposing viewpoint without making an attempt to understand it. For example, can you tell me how soluble Plutonium Chloride is and which micro nutrient it analogues?
This is the kind of technique often used with nuclear idealists making an assumption based in dogmatic skepticism and social proof. The more you educate yourself about Nuclear power the more pragmatic your opposition to it becomes.
People may not understand the complexities of why they should oppose Nuclear power however it is always 100% pragmatic.
the long history of nuclear safety issues
And yet the fact is, the per-terawatt-hour death rate from nuclear is...
Unknown.
If we were rationally having this discussion we would be discussing transgenic disease and the role of bio-accumulation in propagating radio-isotopes through the food chain. If we were having a realistic discussion we wouldn't just talk about deaths of people, we would talk about the genomic damage done to all species, including human beings, from the abundance of radioactive effluents released into the environment by the nuclear industry.
The deaths of the communities that surround nuclear power and the mental health issues.
The statistical reduction of the birth rate of the human race and plethora of other health issues that are starting to emerge as a result of weakened immune systems from internal radio-isotope absorption that don't include death are also valid things to talk about if nuclear lobbyists are going to refer to solar installers who don't wear proper safety gear and fall off roofs.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I've often looked at your sig and though how true that is.
Great, another industry moving to China...
Now wouldn't this be the pinnacle of irony if industries started fleeing to China to escape industrial espionage?
Exactly. These laws are the Stasi's wet dream. At best they had the ability to tap 40 phone lines. These laws makes anything communist countries pass look like a joke in comparison. No foreign power would ever have to have operatives stationed overseas ever again, just look it up. There isn't a single piece of infrastructure excluded, from the server to the phone. This is politicians attempting to install themselves as the elite.
Imagine what happens when all of this intelligence is being conducted with A.I enabled systems. This certainly is possible with these laws.
Sounds like what a paedophile would say in order to protect himself!
Stop projecting. I don't need the benefit of your experience. What you are doing is wrong.
Well you entirely misstated the goal. They don't give a shit about the miniscule percent of criminals smart enough to evade, they care about mass surveillance of the general public.
Which is exactly what they *don't* listen to.
Demonstrate to them, in a respectful way, how it will effect business and economic outcomes and you get their attention. Besides, the bill is 176 pages, I have only so much time.
he use of the term "super-Earth" prompted a non-technical friend of mine [who was reading the article over my shoulder] to ask, "So there's, like, an amazing Earth, way out in space, right on the edge of our solar system?"
Should have told him it is the home of all the Super people, like Super Man and really fantastically dressed.
Now, it's quite possible that they meant to write (and didn't, because they were idiots who didn't know what the words meant) that perihelion was 80 AU, and aphelion was 2300 AU
I wonder if this object is big enough to be the object that influences the variations in the earth precession?
"is a lol" - chortle
"are lols" - chuckle
"are a lol" - incoherent.
lol'd that for you!
they can't even choose the right name for their group...
not
"Alliance for a Safe and Secure Internet"
but it should have been
"Alliance United for a Safe and Secure Internet for Everyone"
Here is their membership page join, bring a motion for them to have a more aussie sounding name.
Welcome to the blacklist. I hope you won't need to apply for any job in the foreseeable future.
I've been on the blacklist for my entire career. Govt know's exactly who I am. I have a four page letter from the AG arguing my position and letters from politicians thanking me for raising awareness and bringing the issues to their attention.
If I didn't have a job, I'd be a bigger pain in the ass than I am now. Frankly most of the time advising the government means diverting them from doing something stupid that will cause economic damage to the country. This and prevention of fraud is a completely valid criticism of the Bill, even after all free speech issues have been considered.
Once this bill is passed Mr AC you will cease to exist.
In simple terms, so even politicians can grasp it: Pass this bill and kiss R&D, finance and IT good bye.
I asserted those points in my critique of the bill I sent to the government. However you should keep in mind that Australia's Attorney General is currently in negations with all Five Eyes, Echelon, SIGINT countries to implement the same laws in those countries.
All these countries ministers were invited to the Gold Coast last month to discuss implementation in their respective countries.
Either that, or the tech heavyweights know perfectly well that if they can bypass someone's encryption, so can the bad guys. Which means no more online purchases, or bill payment, or anything like that.
I think they can see this will collapse the online purchases paradigm. If the govt can get in, black hats can too. Everyone knows this except the general public and government.
The Bill intentionally says "No backdoors" however what it means is that govt wants front door access to be designed into what-ever software and infrastructure is produced which allowed prescribed agencies to trample all existing efforts to secure infrastructure.
TAN's "Technical Assistance Notices" are disruptive under 317MA. If business doesn't drop what they are doing and assist the government before the expiry period, you are assessed as non compliant and exposed to civil liability from the govts activities. Under clause 317G, if you are a coder or a sysadmin and you refuse to help with a "TCN" or Technical Capabilities Notice, you are labeled as "un-cooperative" and exposed to any civil liability arising from the govts activities.
To put the cherry on the cake, under 317R, they tell *you* what is technically feasible on your infrastructure. More so 317T allows govt to install software and infrastructure which business must maintain to remain compliant. 317X govt can vary scope, specification and responsibilities connected with "eligible activities". 317ZF make individuals personally responsible for any unauthorised disclosure and makes it a criminal offense for IT professionals to disclose anything even to their colleagues. Even on you're own infrastructure, it's a diabolical double bind, psychologically.
I could go on, I'm just picking random notes from the exposure draft I have beside me. There just isn't anything good anywhere in this bill if you are in IT. You either spy on your users or they have the option to destroy your entire business. Everything I've pointed to here is in the first 50 pages of a 176 page bill.
I've been analysing these Bills for over 20 years, this is the worst Bill I've ever seen. If you can, please help raise awareness, politely write to your representatives and tell them you object to this incursion to your free speech rights. Consider that this Bill imposes criminal liability for pretty much the entire audience of slashdot if you do not co-operate. Tell your friends, social media - whatever you think is appropriate, just do something. My critique of the Bill is elsewhere in this thread - feel free to copy it and use it.
Have no doubt, this is heading to the UK/US/Canada and NZ. Australia's Attorney General is in international consultations *right now* about implementing this in all five eyes countries.
So this is heading your way.
I submitted the following critique of the proposed Bill during the feedback period:
Greetings Honourable Members,
I am a active professional in the Information Technology industry for 30 years, I offer a critique of the The Assistance and Access Bill 2018 herein "this Bill".
The first and most obvious contradiction is that this bill cannot achieve its intended objection of monitoring paedophiles and terrorists because there is nothing to stop these parties from writing their own software. There is nothing extra-ordinary about exchanging media and messages and this is not difficult software to create. This would also apply to organised crime, there is very little from stopping them from developing their own software to exchange messages. Attempting to police this act is effectively a limitation on the innovative engines of our economy that drives business, the creation of software.
So whilst it is clear the Bill is attempting to enable access to communications for law enforcement and intelligence agencies, there is questionable benefit if it is unenforceable or ineffective for its legislative purpose.
The premise for not introducing "backdoors" and vectors for attacking systems is very shallow. Instead it is clear from 317C and 317D that any and all computer infrastructure deployed in Australia will have to have governmental monitoring subsystems installed in them, possibly by multiple government agencies. None of these clauses will stop, capture or decode messages by anyone determined enough to send them.
Consequently, criminal actors will now have a well defined target that they know exists and only has to be found for it to be used, making their task of covertly capturing data on average Australian citizens much easier. Criminals certainly won't be concerned about breaking laws if they already are. For those reasons once the infrastructure this Bill implies is established and deployed it will put the honest person and businesses at a disadvantage when they comply because the governmental monitoring subsystems will be a known target within their infrastructure.
Cyber crime, identity theft and other fraud against Australians are more likely to succeed with the taxation dollars from ordinary Australians used to build the means to defraud them of assets and income. I am very concerned that passing this Bill will lead to increased fraud against the average everyday Australia who is trying to use the internet to do everyday tasks and save time. No one will be spared, the Honourable Members themselves still have to interact in our society and will be exposed at some level.
There are much better ways for achieving law enforcement's objectives than with obtuse and overt access clauses as the main issue with deploying any kind of technology is unexpected side effects. The obvious unexpected side-effect of the government's proposed initiative is how they will be used against those companies who co-operate. If deployed world wide, which I see is something our government is championing, I cannot help but seeing it lead the world to some sort of digital feudalism broken down into virtual fifedoms.
I urge the government and all honourable members not to hand organised crime a weapon against our citizenry as powerful as this one. The intention of these laws is clearly for gathering data, which is exactly the goal of cyber-criminals. Instead the government could seek to protect its citizens by implementing technology laws that protect us from cyber-crime and fraud, in ways that lead to intelligence outcomes. Laws that use encryption technology to reduce opportunities for fraud against Australians as opposed to increasing them.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Regards
I want a jet engine that just works.
I think this every time I am in a jet aircraft.
if you live anywhere interesting (in this case, near Mendocino)
That's a pretty part of the world you live in. Are they surfable beaches or do people swim there?
Same thing that happens when you lower taxes.. The additional money is spent and generates may times its value in economic activity.
However that only applies if the money is spent. If the money is horded into investments then it does not get circulated in the economy.
trickle up and trickle down
Any additional income paid to people will simply be spent. I think this was researched in Texas where they found pay rises generate a lot of economic activity.
Paying people more money is a way to get more money into circulation instead of it sitting inside a bank account doing nothing.
New Zealand joins Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and of course the United States, forming The Paranoid Five.
All of us in these countries have a situation where what remains of our implicit freedom is being destroyed. Don't be surprised if this law is passed in all of these countries sometime in the near future. This is a pattern I've observed with all the so called anti-terrorism laws that convert our freedom into capital.
Australia is working on doing this from the The Assistance and Access Bill 2018 except they don't need customs, they can issue this on anyone with a phone or if you run a website, basically anyone.
Of course Australia is leading the charge to export this legislation to the US, UK, NZ and Canada. It's still not to late to stop it right now, if enough people write to politicians. That's how we stop laws like this being passed.
People who ask "what do you have to hide" generally ignore....
what they have to loose.