4 ms·

Read out loud what you are saying. You are saying that government ordering you to quarantine in your house, with facial recognition and GPS tracking in your own

Read out loud what you are saying. You are saying that government ordering you to quarantine in your house, with facial recognition and GPS tracking in your own home, is less oppressive than being forced to stay in one of their quarantine hotels. And you're saying that in response to all the "freaking out" about this. Keep in mind that when quarantined this way, if you fail to respond to their random, RANDOM, pings...they will send police officers to your house to do an in-person quarantine check. And not only that, but these so-called leaders of Australia are celebrating it and rubbing it in Australian faces. Source: Returning travelers quarantining at home will be forced to download an app that combines facial recognition and geolocation. The state will text them at random times, and thereafter they will have 15 minutes to take a picture of their face in the location where they are supposed to be. Should they fail, the local police department will be sent to follow up in person. “We don’t tell them how often or when, on a random basis they have to reply within 15 minutes,” Premier Steven Marshall explained. “I think every South Australian should feel pretty proud that we are the national pilot for the home-based quarantine app.” https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/pandemic-australia-still-liberal-democracy/619940/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/pandemic-a... You see that? South Australians should feel pretty proud that they're the national pilot for this. What an honor.

bigiain 5y ago
> Read out loud what you are saying. You are saying that government ordering you to quarantine in your house, with facial recognition and GPS tracking in your own home, is less oppressive than being forced to stay in one of their quarantine hotels. And you're saying that in response to all the "freaking out" about this. A slightly different reading of what they're saying is: "The government ifs offering to allow you to quarantine in your home instead of the otherwise mandatory 2 week stay in a sealed room in quarantine hotel, if you agree to download and use this app." And given that, rightly or wrongly, many Australian states are charging several thousand dollars for hotel quarantine, it's clearly a choice many people might choose to make.
- throwawayfear 5y ago
  It is not a choice no matter how often the people defending it insist it's a choice. It's no more a choice than someone holding a gun to your head and asking you which poison you'd like to drink. On what planet do we live, where all of a sudden that statement even in your version of the reading is in ANY way more palatable or reassuring? The government is offering you these choices: 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarantine hotel for two weeks in a sealed room or 2) Quarantine in your home with facial recognition and GPS tracking and random pings that send the police to your home if you do not respond within 15 minutes This is not a choice. This is the government giving you a false dilemma because it's tricking people into tolerating its massively expanded surveillance systems that it wants to build, and the normalization thereof. These things will not go away, just like the narrative until now has constantly shifted to keep the situation ongoing while power continues to consolidate. These systems will be used for worse once they exist.
  - bigiain 5y ago
    > On what planet do we live, where all of a sudden that statement even in your version of the reading is in ANY way more palatable or reassuring? The government is offering you these choices: > 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarantine hotel for two weeks in a sealed room Where I am (Australia, the place where this is happening), right now that is current reality on the planet we live on, and is the _only_ choice offered. I cannot leave Sydney for any reason, without being required to spend two weeks in a sealed room at my own expense. It's not just state or federal borders, it's travel within the state of NSW - I cannot go further than maybe 30-40km in any direction from my house without a "permissible reason" which pretty much means "essential work". Bereavement, family visits, or wanting to stab all my household and neighbours in the face do not count as "permissible reasons". That is, as you rightly allude to, in now way palatable or reassuring. But is is in fact the ground truth where I live. As much as I despise option #2, I would seriously consider making that choice for myself - in spite of the acknowledged normalisation of massive surveillance overreach it would represent.
  - ryandrake 5y ago
    > 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarantine hotel for two weeks in a sealed room or > 2) Quarantine in your home with facial recognition and GPS tracking and random pings that send the police to your home if you do not respond within 15 minutes > This is not a choice. What's your alternative? Just let sick people loose into the country, exponentially infecting everyone? I'm in the US, and that strategy did not work out very well. 660K deaths and counting. Quarantine has historically been a sensible, effective way to deal with deadly communicable diseases. I wish the US took it as seriously as Australia and NZ did. EDIT: Crap, I just realized I responded to the article's submitter, someone who's already posted the same ax-grind 30 times to the article's threads. Guess I've been had.
notatoad 5y ago
i read out loud what i said. it still sounds reasonable to me, and given the choice between quarantining at home with app-based check ups and quaranting in a quarantine facility, i'd choose to stay at home. when you disagree with somebody, please make an attempt to believe that the person you disagree with has actually thought about what they said. assuming that the only reason somebody might disagree with you is becauase they don't understand an issue as well as you do is a really insulting way to attempt to join a conversation.
plugger 5y ago
Do you understand that Western Australia hasn't opted for the 'let rip deaths be damned' strategy that the US has and has instead had zero community transmission for the vast majority of the pandemic? Your comments read like you've got little understanding of the situation here full stop.

bigiain 5y ago

> Read out loud what you are saying. You are saying that government ordering you to quarantine in your house, with facial recognition and GPS tracking in your own home, is less oppressive than being forced to stay in one of their quarantine hotels. And you're saying that in response to all the "freaking out" about this. A slightly different reading of what they're saying is: "The government ifs offering to allow you to quarantine in your home instead of the otherwise mandatory 2 week stay in a sealed room in quarantine hotel, if you agree to download and use this app." And given that, rightly or wrongly, many Australian states are charging several thousand dollars for hotel quarantine, it's clearly a choice many people might choose to make.

throwawayfear 5y ago
It is not a choice no matter how often the people defending it insist it's a choice. It's no more a choice than someone holding a gun to your head and asking you which poison you'd like to drink. On what planet do we live, where all of a sudden that statement even in your version of the reading is in ANY way more palatable or reassuring? The government is offering you these choices: 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarantine hotel for two weeks in a sealed room or 2) Quarantine in your home with facial recognition and GPS tracking and random pings that send the police to your home if you do not respond within 15 minutes This is not a choice. This is the government giving you a false dilemma because it's tricking people into tolerating its massively expanded surveillance systems that it wants to build, and the normalization thereof. These things will not go away, just like the narrative until now has constantly shifted to keep the situation ongoing while power continues to consolidate. These systems will be used for worse once they exist.
- bigiain 5y ago
  > On what planet do we live, where all of a sudden that statement even in your version of the reading is in ANY way more palatable or reassuring? The government is offering you these choices: > 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarantine hotel for two weeks in a sealed room Where I am (Australia, the place where this is happening), right now that is current reality on the planet we live on, and is the _only_ choice offered. I cannot leave Sydney for any reason, without being required to spend two weeks in a sealed room at my own expense. It's not just state or federal borders, it's travel within the state of NSW - I cannot go further than maybe 30-40km in any direction from my house without a "permissible reason" which pretty much means "essential work". Bereavement, family visits, or wanting to stab all my household and neighbours in the face do not count as "permissible reasons". That is, as you rightly allude to, in now way palatable or reassuring. But is is in fact the ground truth where I live. As much as I despise option #2, I would seriously consider making that choice for myself - in spite of the acknowledged normalisation of massive surveillance overreach it would represent.
- ryandrake 5y ago
  > 1) Quarantine in a guarded quarantine hotel for two weeks in a sealed room or > 2) Quarantine in your home with facial recognition and GPS tracking and random pings that send the police to your home if you do not respond within 15 minutes > This is not a choice. What's your alternative? Just let sick people loose into the country, exponentially infecting everyone? I'm in the US, and that strategy did not work out very well. 660K deaths and counting. Quarantine has historically been a sensible, effective way to deal with deadly communicable diseases. I wish the US took it as seriously as Australia and NZ did. EDIT: Crap, I just realized I responded to the article's submitter, someone who's already posted the same ax-grind 30 times to the article's threads. Guess I've been had.

notatoad 5y ago

i read out loud what i said. it still sounds reasonable to me, and given the choice between quarantining at home with app-based check ups and quaranting in a quarantine facility, i'd choose to stay at home. when you disagree with somebody, please make an attempt to believe that the person you disagree with has actually thought about what they said. assuming that the only reason somebody might disagree with you is becauase they don't understand an issue as well as you do is a really insulting way to attempt to join a conversation.

plugger 5y ago

Do you understand that Western Australia hasn't opted for the 'let rip deaths be damned' strategy that the US has and has instead had zero community transmission for the vast majority of the pandemic? Your comments read like you've got little understanding of the situation here full stop.