5 ms·

“It’s not government overreach, you have a choice of ‘temporary’ in-home facial recognition and GPS surveillance or staying at a quarantine hotel.” Not only is

“It’s not government overreach, you have a choice of ‘temporary’ in-home facial recognition and GPS surveillance or staying at a quarantine hotel.” Not only is this a laughable “choice”, the kind of manipulative choice you’d expect a tech manager to pretend to offer you when all his projects suck but he wants you to feel like you “picked” a project, it’s also naive to present it as a choice. You don’t wait until it’s mandatory for everyone to say something. You say it now when the machine is rearing its ugly head and you can see the writing on the wall. Keep in mind you are writing this in defense of a gov that presumes itself to be in charge of how many people you can have over. Source: https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to-australia-how-will-they-work-and-what-will-you-need-them-for-167531 https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to-... “NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian yesterday announced freedoms for fully vaccinated people once 70% of the state’s eligible population are double dosed. These include being able to go to hospitality venues, hairdressers and gyms, and have five people to your home.” Seems more than NECESSARY to cry wolf right now. The slope is slippery. We all know they will push these systems as far as they can if they are allowed to. Cry wolf when the wolf is coming, not when it has eaten your chickens already.

jrobe234 5y ago
> Keep in mind you are writing this in defense of a gov that presumes itself to be in charge of how many people you can have over. Source: https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to- https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to-... “NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian yesterday announced freedoms for fully vaccinated people once 70% of the state’s eligible population are double dosed. These include being able to go to hospitality venues, hairdressers and gyms, and have five people to your home.” That's not the same government at all. You've quoted a decision by the NSW government, and this article is about South Australia.
- throwawayfear 5y ago
  My mistake. Are they not unified into a single Australian government? I'm not Australian, I'm observing from across the pond. More importantly though, that distinction does little to make it feel more right. What controls exist to keep the idiocy contained to only one part of Australia? How do you know they won't make that the policy everywhere? Could that happen?
  - FridgeSeal 5y ago
    There is a federal government, but these articles (OP and above link) are talking about the South Australian and New South Wales state governments respectively. > How do you know they won't make that the policy everywhere? Could that happen? This would require the state governments to collectively agree on something (unlikely) or for Scott Morrison (the Prime Minister) to get his act together and actually do something for once in his ineffectual life, so equally unlikely.
shkkmo 5y ago
> Keep in mind you are writing this in defense of a gov that presumes itself to be in charge of how many people you can have over. I'm not defending any government here. I am pointing out that people are getting outraged without even understanding what they are being outraged about. When you do that, you undermine your own credibility and potential impact and make it easier for people in power to brush aside your outrage when you do know what you are talking about. If you really care about these issues it behooves you to inform yourself as well as possible and be as accurate as possible so that you don't do more harm than good for your cause.

jrobe234 5y ago

> Keep in mind you are writing this in defense of a gov that presumes itself to be in charge of how many people you can have over. Source: https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to- https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to-... “NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian yesterday announced freedoms for fully vaccinated people once 70% of the state’s eligible population are double dosed. These include being able to go to hospitality venues, hairdressers and gyms, and have five people to your home.” That's not the same government at all. You've quoted a decision by the NSW government, and this article is about South Australia.

throwawayfear 5y ago
My mistake. Are they not unified into a single Australian government? I'm not Australian, I'm observing from across the pond. More importantly though, that distinction does little to make it feel more right. What controls exist to keep the idiocy contained to only one part of Australia? How do you know they won't make that the policy everywhere? Could that happen?
- FridgeSeal 5y ago
  There is a federal government, but these articles (OP and above link) are talking about the South Australian and New South Wales state governments respectively. > How do you know they won't make that the policy everywhere? Could that happen? This would require the state governments to collectively agree on something (unlikely) or for Scott Morrison (the Prime Minister) to get his act together and actually do something for once in his ineffectual life, so equally unlikely.

shkkmo 5y ago

> Keep in mind you are writing this in defense of a gov that presumes itself to be in charge of how many people you can have over. I'm not defending any government here. I am pointing out that people are getting outraged without even understanding what they are being outraged about. When you do that, you undermine your own credibility and potential impact and make it easier for people in power to brush aside your outrage when you do know what you are talking about. If you really care about these issues it behooves you to inform yourself as well as possible and be as accurate as possible so that you don't do more harm than good for your cause.