NEW laws will allow authorities to collect and monitor Australians' internet

[Serial_Fool]

Originally Posted by Russ

It was in all the newspapers and on ACA and TT so it must be true

I don't watch either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law

The Cybercrime Act 2001 No. 161, Items 12 and 28 grant police with a magistrate's order the wide-ranging power to require "a specified person to provide any information or assistance that is reasonable and necessary to allow the officer to" access computer data that is "evidential material"; this is understood to include mandatory decryption. Failing to comply carries a penalty of 6 months imprisonment.

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), Part III, activated by ministerial order in October 2007,[14] requires persons to supply decrypted information and/or keys to government representatives. Failure to disclose carries a maximum penalty of two years in jail.

And now for the Yanks...

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects witnesses from being forced to incriminate themselves, and there is currently no law regarding key disclosure in the United States.

[BHDOGS]

Ah yes the American justice system what a shining example for the world to follow surley a master piece

[Serial_Fool]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

Ah yes the American justice system what a shining example for the world to follow surley a master piece

I can see you've been indoctrinated to think that whatever we have here in Australia is "freedom", so there is not much value in pointing out the value of the American system.

Sarcasm is the protest of the weak.

[MITCHAY]

Well being completely logical here the only way they would have any reason to lean on the ISPs is if they were already tracking a person (legal or otherwise) or were monitoring a particular Internet resource and working backwards.

Basic web server logs track HTTP requests and just by clicking a link you're on that list whether by misdirection or otherwise.

How could you possibly have reasonable suspicion otherwise? They don't waste time looking at what you things you have looked at just for ***** and gigs as it's a huge waste of resources.

They could mine everyone's data if they went the full hog but it's still a huge resource drain and would still be targeted to a degree to be effective.

This is the middle ground and a reasonable one at that. Like everything it won't be perfect but it's no different to what existed before computers.

[Wise]

For those who think they are logging everything you do with these new laws - you are incorrect.

That is what the heavily opposed data retention laws are. There is a difference.

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/313178...ily_newsletter

If you have a read you will see that only a handful of people support those laws and the vast majority support it. I don't think we are arguing that the data retention laws are an invasion of privacy, the ones in discussion here are to be used in prosecution of cyber criminals and pedophiles and the like. They can't get a warrant to go through your internet traffic if they have no cause to.

[chamb0]

Originally Posted by mik

google abuse of power, i did, it comes up with this .......... About 230,000,000 results.

Off topic, but be careful of using a search engine result count to prove something, they're not necessarily a meaningful measurement.

The Google search "fluffy flying kitten insurgency" gives you 1,640,000 results for this hot topic.

The Chaser's giving some stick to Today Tonight for using google results as statistics (at 2:30):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdroRRo2Z1w

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Wise

If you have a read you will see that only a handful of people support those laws and the vast majority support it. .

Huh?

[superyob]

People who are complaining about the percieved lack of freedoms in Oz should hop into a time machine and transport themselves back to Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia and experience the real thing. We have no cause for complaint in this wonderful country.

[mik]

Originally Posted by chamb0

Off topic, but be careful of using a search engine result count to prove something, they're not necessarily a meaningful measurement.

The Google search "fluffy flying kitten insurgency" gives you 1,640,000 results for this hot topic.

The Chaser's giving some stick to Today Tonight for using google results as statistics (at 2:30):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdroRRo2Z1w

point taken mate, probably a shameless exaggeration on my part , never the less,
i think there would be no shortage to abuse of powers by different parties around the globe, and these days, information is power, those in power want more of it.

[Serial_Fool]

Originally Posted by superyob

People who are complaining about the percieved lack of freedoms in Oz should hop into a time machine and transport themselves back to Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia and experience the real thing. We have no cause for complaint in this wonderful country.

Ah yes, the wonderful "love it or leave it" comment. Maybe it is the idea that we're becoming more and more like those fascist/communistic models that we're trying to speak out?

Australia in the 30s and 40s wasn't comparable at all to those places.

Now we've lost so many of our liberties in the name of safety from ourselves or 3rd world goat herders that I truly don't know anymore.

We're in trouble when we have to point out that we have slightly more in the way of liberty than societies in which you had none and the state determined your way in life.

[Trevor 57]

NEW laws will allow authorities to collect and monitor Australians' internet

only a problem if you have something to hide

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

Ah yes, the wonderful "love it or leave it" comment. Maybe it is the idea that we're becoming more and more like those fascist/communistic models that we're trying to speak out?

Australia in the 30s and 40s wasn't comparable at all to those places.

Now we've lost so many of our liberties in the name of safety from ourselves or 3rd world goat herders that I truly don't know anymore.

We're in trouble when we have to point out that we have slightly more in the way of liberty than societies in which you had none and the state determined your way in life.

What liberties exactly? We are nothing like 'those fascist/communistic models', not even comparable.

[Wise]

Originally Posted by Ugg

Huh?

Thought I proof read that properly - I meant to say the vast majority don't support it as mentioned in the article

Sorry for confusion

[cs123]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

only a problem if you have something to hide

So the only reason people want privacy is because they are doing something illegal?

[Trevor 57]

Sounds like it, it doesn't bother me them looking over my shoulder, no different to CCTV in shopping centres / districts

[cs123]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Sounds like it, it doesn't bother me them looking over my shoulder, no different to CCTV in shopping centres / districts

I think a better analogy would be someone following you around with a camera recording your every conversation.

Teenagers live so much of their life online. Emails, websites private conversations. I don't want the government spying on my kids.

People can have an expectation of privacy without being criminals.

[superyob]

Like any area of a functional society, we have to give up some 'freedoms' so that we can all live in peace. For example, we purport to have freedom of speech but there is alot that we are not allowed to say in public because of the inflammatory implications. In order to keep the vulnerable safe, there should be a watchdog looking out for these evil bastards who prey on the innocent. The internet should not be an unrestricted free for all zone. Bad things happen...

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by superyob

Like any area of a functional society, we have to give up some 'freedoms' so that we can all live in peace. For example, we purport to have freedom of speech but there is alot that we are not allowed to say in public because of the inflammatory implications. In order to keep the vulnerable safe, there should be a watchdog looking out for these evil bastards who prey on the innocent. The internet should not be an unrestricted free for all zone. Bad things happen...

+1

I concur

[Serial_Fool]

Originally Posted by superyob

What liberties exactly? We are nothing like 'those fascist/communistic models', not even comparable.

We're closer than you think. We don't have freedom of speech. We're disarmed. We no longer have the right to peacefully assemble or the right to stay silent.

Hell, we're not too far off from state-sanctioned euthanasia.

[Serial_Fool]

Originally Posted by superyob

Like any area of a functional society, we have to give up some 'freedoms' so that we can all live in peace. For example, we purport to have freedom of speech but there is alot that we are not allowed to say in public because of the inflammatory implications. In order to keep the vulnerable safe, there should be a watchdog looking out for these evil bastards who prey on the innocent. The internet should not be an unrestricted free for all zone. Bad things happen...

Freedom of speech isn't about the vulnerable. If you legislate based on whether saying something can hurt someone's feelings then you don't have freedom of speech at all. You may claim to, but you really don't.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

[Wise]

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

We no longer have the right to peacefully assemble

We do that all the time for work - we have 45000 members in the union and have managed to hold many demonstrations outside parliament house this year with thousands of people

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

We're closer than you think. We don't have freedom of speech. We're disarmed. We no longer have the right to peacefully assemble or the right to stay silent.

Hell, we're not too far off from state-sanctioned euthanasia.

So I will disappear in the middle of the night if I criticise our government will I? I will be forced to work at a slave labour camp because my hair is not the right shade of blonde maybe? I will be beaten and economically sanctioned because I have a certain ethnicity? Maybe I will be starved along with millions of my kind simply I don’t suit the purposes of our glorious State and righteous Fuhrer!

You are not really serious are you?

‘We're disarmed’ – I could be wrong, but most people who compare our government to that of a totalitarian state are usually the people who still resent the fact that one John Howard took away their toys, like military style semi automatic assault rifles. That seems to form the sole basis for their ill informed comparisons.

[BHDOGS]

State sanctioned euthanasia is a good thing unless letting sick people suffer is your idea of freedom and liberty wouldnt the freedom to choose to die in peace and painless be right up your ally

[b2tf]

I SWEAR the porn belongs to the wife. The WIFE!

[Serial_Fool]

Originally Posted by Wise

We do that all the time for work - we have 45000 members in the union and have managed to hold many demonstrations outside parliament house this year with thousands of people

Turn your union into a motorbike club and see how far you get.

So I will disappear in the middle of the night if I criticise our government will I?

You can be put in prison for being critical of ethnicities. If you want I'll bring up news reports of prison sentences for people that haven't advocated violence, yet are put there for thought crimes.

I will be forced to work at a slave labour camp because my hair is not the right shade of blonde maybe?

Isn't profitable enough, hardcore Communism or Socialism like that is dead. They'd rather allow the market to operate but take an increasingly larger slice of your income. The illusion of choice has allowed us to be good little productive cattle. We wouldn't be so productive if we felt we didn't have the choice after all.

I will be beaten and economically sanctioned because I have a certain ethnicity?

You already are being economically sanctioned with taxation, fines and government fees on licenses and government approvals that shouldn't exist being paid to departments that are largely unproductive.

Maybe I will be starved along with millions of my kind simply I don’t suit the purposes of our glorious State and righteous Fuhrer!

Maybe you will, but you're a useful cog in the machine at the moment, paying them great levels of your wage in direct and indirect tax, why would they want to off you?

‘We're disarmed’ – I could be wrong, but most people who compare our government to that of a totalitarian state are usually the people who still resent the fact that one John Howard took away their toys, like military style semi automatic assault rifles. That seems to form the sole basis for their ill informed comparisons.

I didn't say we're on par with a Germany or Russia, I just said we're moving in that direction. Just because you're not on bread and water rations and you have a fairly decent standard of living doesn't mean you're free.

We have no rights in Australia, at least the kind that aren't revocable by an act of parliament.

Rights afforded to us by mob rule (Democracy) aren't rights at all. An act of parliament passed with the consent of the governed...like banning the modification of automobiles, conflicts with no rights given to us because we have no rights constitutionally. They could come to our doorstep and do a "buy back" (the idea being that the offending items were theirs all along) of high performance parts and cars, and there wouldn't be a legal leg to stand on in the country.

You may think it is silly now, but ACA and TT talk about hoons the same way they once talked about firearm owners. Where there is a problem, there will most certainly be a government solution.

[superyob]

I think we have strayed off the point of this thread, but I am more than happy to continue this debate in a suitably related thread if anyone is wishing to do the same. Serial Fool raises some interesting points although I can't really relate them to any domestic context...

[ltd_on20s]

Originally Posted by Wise

For those who think they are logging everything you do with these new laws - you are incorrect.

That is what the heavily opposed data retention laws are. There is a difference.

until the widen the scope of the powers.

which always ends up happening.

[Wise]

Originally Posted by ltd_on20s

until the widen the scope of the powers.

which always ends up happening.

thats what the links i posted previously are talking about. the public and a lot of parliament oppose them

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

Turn your union into a motorbike club and see how far you get.

thats not the point of the comment

anyway, ulyses club manage to do it if you want to bring bikes in to the equation

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

Turn your union into a motorbike club and see how far you get.

I reckon you'd get a fair way....Just because you're a member of a motorcycle club, doesn't mean you're in the sites of the gov't and police...

There are only a few that fall into this category, so I'd suggest stop grouping them altogether.