15 ms·
>Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull of Australia said in July, “The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law
by murph-almighty 8y ago
>Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull of Australia said in July, “The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia.”
Does math not apply in Australia? Is this where "new math" comes from?
- i_am_proteus 8y agoFinally, somewhere I can go without being bound by the law of gravity.
- endymi0n 8y agoBetter respect gravity. It‘s the law.
- quicklime 8y agoWe will decide whether things should fall in this country, and the direction in which they fall!
- bori5 8y ago“I know this defies the law of gravity, but I never studied law!” Bugs Bunny
- nixpulvis 8y agoHa, gravity exists with or without the need for math.
- lvs 8y agoIf John Clarke were still alive, this would make for one hell of an interview.
- yesenadam 8y ago'Math' is indeed not allowed in Australia. Here, outside the walls of the USA, we have 'maths' instead - although it's fairly similar.
- tomjakubowski 8y agoIt's very slightly annoying to me that people stopped properly abbreviating "mathematics" as "math's".
- pretendscholar 8y agoHow does it make sense to tack on the last letter?
- ggm 8y agoBecause the plural of lego is lego, does not mean the plural of math is math..
- pretendscholar 8y agoThe word mathematics is singular not plural. People say mathematics is hard not mathematics are hard.
- ggggtez 8y agoThe linguistic way to say that is to note that mathematics is an "uncountable noun", just like "water". It's plural, just you can't have just "one mathematic".
- brandonjm 8y agoMeanwhile the same guy wanted Australia to become an "innovation nation" [1]. You can not innovate technology without mathematics and when you can not export due to fear of it being compromised. [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-17/innovation-nation-taking-shape-as-ideas-fly/8698044 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-17/innovation-nation-tak...
- BLKNSLVR 8y agoDuring the same tenure as he and his party were promoting innovation, they were also talking down renewable and talking up the future of coal whilst also stopping the rollout of fiber infrastructure, opting to maintain the existing infrastructure which was primarily copper plus some coax. Australians ran out of faces for the palming.
- NamTaf 8y agoIt's worth noting that he also rode into power on the back of a reputation of being a 'progressive conservative', partly due to his business ties wherein he invested in an ISP in the 90s and early 2000s and made a large sum of money. Supporters paraded it as evidence for why he'd do the innovation and tech 'right', but any more than a cursory glance at his credentials for this revealed that it was purely a business decision not one of interest in the industry.
- dwd 8y agoTurned out the progressives were very wrong and he basically sold his soul to the big coal/climate change denying/religious right faction of the Liberals to become PM. In saying that Peter Garrett in Labor was not the Midnight Oil firebrand everyone expected. Turnbull's replacement of FTTP with FTTN in deference to Telstra was shameful and showed how much weight he gave innovation. One year on NBN and I've already had a week offline (and no landline phone) due to faulty copper. His appearance in the Panama Papers and alleged ties to Russian oligarchs bear out the reality of his world view: Malcolm is in it for Malcolm. I'd even question his Republican stance as being nothing more than posturing.
- 8y ago
- _bxg1 8y ago"Alternative Math"
- dwd 8y agoI can imagine Dutton saying that totally straightfaced.(Kellyanne Conway would be proud) At the same time it reminds me of Tim Minchin talking about alternative medicine.
- clouddrover 8y agoWhat Turnbull means is that the technical measures don't matter when you can compel people with threats of fines and jail time. And he's right.
- nixpulvis 8y agoWell there's a difference between holding a gun to someone's head to force them to tell you their secret, and baking secret selling backdoors into the secrets themselves.
- hnzix 8y agoMaths is dangerous, and Australia is a nanny state. We must put a curfew on maths. Once the clock strikes 3am you may only continue a maths problem, no new maths can be commenced until 11am the next day. You see, both terrorists and sex offenders are known to use maths. We must control maths for your own good. If you oppose us, you are supporting terrorism. (This is just the latest episode of anti-science politicians nerfing the Australian knowledge economy. See also their mishandling of the national broadband network, the latest cybersec laws destroying remote work, and the gutting of the CSIRO.)
- gerdesj 8y agoThere is no need to be rude. "See also their " - if you are not from AU then I'll call you out as a complete nob end as a Brit, 10,000 miles away from AU. It isn't as though AU actually needs a hand but you really need calling out as a complete twat.
- rbg246 8y agoI don't think he is being rude, he is just ridiculing the stupidity of it all - whereas in your short comment you made 2 ad hominem comments
- hlurhhh 8y agoThey're not being rude, that's how it is - speaking as someone from AU. We have lockout laws preventing us from entering drinking establishments after 1am (no shots after midnight!) because we cannot handle our booze, so do you think we can handle Math?? AND ENCRYPTION??? It's a nanny state. OP is correct. Don't call people nob ends, no need to be rude.
- tokyodude 8y agoSan Francisco and NYC have these too. SF (California) no drinks after 2am. NYC is 4am.
- icanhackit 8y agoI'm not arguing with your point that Australia is a nanny state, but for clarification... > We have lockout laws preventing us from entering drinking establishments after 1am Currently for a large section of the Sydney CBD and inner suburbs encompassing Kings Cross new entrants to venues are blocked after 1:30am and last drinks are 3am. This does not apply to areas of the City of Sydney like Surry Hills or Newtown, which can remain open all night. I believe the trading hours for licensed premises have been recently relaxed by City of Sydney to areas including Glebe, however I'm not 100% on that. Still, it's pretty sad as Sydney's nightlife, particularly in Kings Cross, was a big draw-card for younger visitors and residents alike.
- balabaster 8y ago"Is this where new math comes from?" Hahaha brilliant! Thanks for making me laugh, that's the sharpest quip I've heard all day! :D
- HenryBemis 8y agoEVERY time I hear/read of some country wanted to make encryption illegal, the lyrics of Radiohead's Karma Police come to mind: Karma police, arrest this man He talks in maths He buzzes like a fridge He's like a detuned radio
- gerdesj 8y agoI went to school with the chaps that became Radiohead (Abingdon school aka Royce's). As it turns out posh blokes can strum a bit and come up with some decent lyrics. Fancy that.
- dwd 8y agoI also have No Surprises in my current rotation. "Bring down the government. They don't, they don't speak for us."
- harry8 8y agoI think the policy is wrong but this is ridiculous. Physics laws exist and are fairly insurmountable. You throw an animal in a sack into a river and the law will get you arrested for it. This for not make the physics "fail to apply." And so it is with math, which software does. What are good laws to have with respect software? I'm wildly pro strong encryption myself. Software is not a law free zone, never has been, never will be. Saying otherwise is a little silly, just like the proposed (enacted) encryption laws are (imho) silly... In the US, Britain, Australia.
- toufiqbarhamov 8y agoI’m totally against the Australian approach and goal here, but come off it, you know that isn’t what was meant. Three lines of argument are especially noteworthy: “It is impossible to regulate cryptography.” or “Banning cryptography is like banning math.” This argument misses the point in confusing the knowledge about cryptography with the wide-spread use of cryptography - or more specifically the use of cryptography to protect confidentiality. While it would be beyond the reach of governments to remove the knowledge about cryptography from the public sphere, it is certainly not impossible to threaten those that employ “illegal” cryptography with sanction. This is exactly what happens with most regulation: Speed limits do not prevent the thought about driving fast, instead they address actually driving fast. It is behavior that is regulated, not thought. So, similar arguments about the futility of regulation or the impossibility of enforcement aim a bit too high. Regulation does not require perfect adherence. Often it is enough if some people adhere to the specific law, and others can be punished in case of being caught. Again, speed limits are not perfectly enforceable, but they limit the number of drivers that drive recklessly, and it allows taking action against some drivers and thus nudging other drivers into compliance. https://opaque.link/post/fog_of_cryptowar/ https://opaque.link/post/fog_of_cryptowar/ Shallow arguments don’t help anyone, they just marginalize the speaker beyond a narrow audience that already agrees with them.
- lokopodium 8y agoAustralia requires companies to provide backdoors. It does not (and can't) require that non-companies do the same. This means every Jihadi with half a brain will be using XMPP with OTR or something like that. At the same time, it provides a requirement for EMPLOYEES to make backdoors when asked without letting their employers know.
- baroffoos 8y ago>This means every Jihadi with half a brain will be using XMPP with OTR or something like that. Or they could just use SMS and still be fine because the government has no idea how to actually identify problem data in the sea of data they have.
- cmroanirgo 8y agoAs someone living down under, we refuse to fall off the face of the earth and to end up in space. Clearly maths isn't working here. ;-)