HT's Techdirt Profile


About HT

HT's Comments comment rss

  • Apr 24, 2015 @ 10:43pm

    They should design laws...

    ... So that while unauthorised access to a system is illegal, it should also be legal for the equivalent of "Whistleblowers" to be entitled to disclose the nature of these vulnerabilities. Further more, it should be illegal to not fix it within a certain time period depending on the severity.

  • Mar 31, 2015 @ 04:48am

    As someone from Australia

    I can assure you our Government doesn't care about the welfare of its citizens.

  • Mar 03, 2015 @ 09:01am

    Advance Australia Fair

    As an Australian, I take great pride in knowing that Senator Ludlam represents us in the Senate. The problem of course is that all of these other turkeys are the ones who are members of the executive and legislature that vote on key pieces of legislation. This particular incident is just the latest in a long string of crap from the people who "run" our country.

    This isn't new stuff for Australia, in fact many of our senior ministers have professed to know nothing about what metadata collection means but will continue to toe the party line instead of abstaining. Unfortunately, the other major party in Australia (the Labor Party) seem to agree on most of these policies and have caved to political pressure. It surely isn't pressure from the public because there really is only two camps: the camp that realises what an erosion of basic liberty these laws are and those that approach them with a melancholy attitude.

    "Terrorism" is our Eurasia and Eastasia. The Government uses these faux wars to pass legislation that impedes on our right to privacy (which is very near being legitimised under Common Law if a case makes it to the High Court). Our Government is doing its best to make sure that everyone except them have to pay the price for the rhetoric and ideologies. I say the Government, but I mean almost every single member of the legislative branch and the executive.

    The Australian Government thinks that "Terrorism" is a nail that can be combated with a hammer. Unfortunately, they're wrong; is all that will be left after their proposed changes is a general state of paranoia, criminals using secure services to bypass spying, further negligence from intelligence agencies in their roles to protect the nation, and an erosion of civil rights for citizens. Unfortunately, it is highly unlikely any of this will change: our political landscape is so that our centre-left parties are actually on the right and our left parties are so far on the left that swing voters and conservatives will never vote for them.

    I love being Australian, I just hate the bullshit that happens to come along with it.

  • Aug 23, 2014 @ 05:14pm

    While I disagree with the investigation methods

    I can actually agree with the sentence here. This is counterfeiting and should be dealt with in this manner. I can understand the idea of "sharing" where you - in reality - obtain no benefit from sharing your stuff. However, in this instance he was making money off of another's work.

    Totally reasonable.

  • Jul 24, 2014 @ 04:02am

    What the hell are they talking about? Do they really think that a terrorist is going to go to the local DMV and get a licence? No.. They'll forge one. The only thing you'd really need an officially confirmable ID for is stuff a terrorist wouldn't want/need to do anyway.

    These guys are complete idiots. Encroaching on rights, just cause!

  • Jul 15, 2014 @ 04:40am

    Authoritarianism is bad, not Socialism

    You seem to imply that Socialism is a bad thing.

    It is not - when economic socialism is paired with democracy countries flourish. For example, America of the late '50s and '60s was the best it has ever been. Right up until deregulation and "Capitalism" took hold it was a great place.

    Many other countries follow this trend. You make out that capitalism provides some kind of substantial benefit. The only reason Capitalism seems good is that democratic countries are capitalist - socialism is far better in terms of keeping a healthy population, equality and individual wealth. Yes, a capitalist country may have an extra XX% wealth but if that is just given to the rich people anyway then what material difference does it make?

    tl;dr - countries that lean towards economic socialism tend to be fairer, more equitable and generally better places to live. They also fared a lot better than purely capitalist countries during the GFC due to tighter regulations.

  • Jul 10, 2014 @ 05:13am

    Yeah but...

    Australia doesn't really have these kinds of rights enshrined in our constitution. All of our "Freedoms" are only granted via Common Law, with an understanding between everyone that they're important. If the government want, they can simply allow whatever to happen.

    Our constitution literally sets up the Government to do whatever they want. The only rights that are absolutely unchangeable without Citizen intervention are Religious Freedom, Right to Vote (which is forced on us anyway, so it isn't a real "right" because I can't actually choose) and Trial by Jury. That's it in terms of Criminal-related laws.

    Australia: the lucky country, except for the Laws - they're a bit shit.

  • Jun 21, 2014 @ 04:41pm

    Re: breaking down borders

    Well, maybe you haven't lived in a country that has benefited from regulation by not having our economy completely fucked by the GFC. Deregulation is okay if you can trust the target industry: time and time again it has been proven that most of these industries that whine about rules are most likely to break them (hence their situation in the first place).

    America is fucking retarded in the sense that Enron collapsed due to dodgy business structure and accounting; then, only 7 years later Lehmann Brothers basically did the same thing and fucked the world. These pricks are not trustworthy and in no way deserve nor require these changes - they just want to add another billion or two to their bottom lines by taking advantage of grey areas.

  • Jun 17, 2014 @ 04:07am

    Re: credibility

    I think what you may have missed the subtle subtext.

    Wheeler didn't respond AT ALL. He said people are more informed, but he didn't say whether he was happy, angry, sad, annoyed, etc. about it. By blatantly dismissing the impact that the video has had and subverting the conversation away from the serious issues he is failing to do his job. Oliver was calling out a ridiculous response for what it was - a well paid public official chuckles at the public being informed and then seems to misunderstand what a metaphorical comparison is.

    Wheeler - while not an idiot - is definitely not treating this subject with the respect it deserves. He deserves to be ridiculed about dumb shit until he can't say any more dumb shit and has to focus on the real issue.