Update on Australia's Meta Data Harvesting Project

[hiyayhi]

Source:

http://theconversation.com/expert-panel-metadata-retention-report-38168

 

As some of you may know, Australia is pushing to put forward a meta data harvesting program in which ISP are required to keep a customers Meta Data for at least 2 years. This is an extremely scary prospect and is worth scrutinising the entire way.

 

This article basically outlines some new details of the program that have come to light.

 

 

Major changes being made:

 

 

• offering monetary compensation for service providers to cover the costs of implementing the scheme

• limiting the discretionary powers of the Attorney-General in making changes to the bill once it’s passed

• preventing the stored metadata from being used as a part of civil litigation and

• that more consideration is needed regarding how to protect press freedom and anonymous sources.

 

 

 

Many of these recommendations seem to be reasonable. My question is focused on the statement “the Government make a substantial contribution to the upfront capital costs of service providers implementing their data retention obligations.”

I question whether the government plans to outline a similar set of surety for government/security departments. That is, the prime minister has said retention will cost approximately A$400 million per year. And if the government is making a substantial contribution, from where is that money coming?

 

400 million dollars per year. ARE YOU FREAKING SERIOUS!!!

For a country as small as ours that is an obscene amount of money for a system that has been proven NOT TO WORK in multiple countries around the world.

 

 

It also seems that experience from other parts of the world, especially the European Union, whose own mass data retention scheme was invalidated last year for being a disproportionate interference with the privacy of millions of law-abiding Europeans, has been completely ignored.

Ironically the UK’s data retention scheme has been pointed to in the report as representing best practice when actually it is under challenge for its incompatibility with the right to privacy.

 

Yeah... Incompatibility with the right to privacy sure is right. But then again, its not like Australia hasn't been snooping in everything they can for ever. They didn't allow digital mobile phones into the country until they could crack the encryption...

 

 

 

A strong, evidence-based case for why mass data retention is necessary in Australia has still not been made. And in its absence, these data retention proposals remain an expensive, intrusive and ineffective folly for the Australian government and opposition to pursue.

 

I think these are welcome developments, particularly including the dataset within the primary legislation. All through this whole process it has been immensely frustrating that we really don’t know what exactly is to be retained. The word “metadata” alone tells us very little.

I think that the data set needs to be made public as soon as possible and sufficient time be allowed for discussion before it be passed. I have particular concerns about the “messaging” data, but because we haven’t known what the data set is to be, all discussion so far has been built on speculation. It would be wrong to rush the bill through parliament without allowing time for proper analysis when we finally do get to know what is actually being proposed.

It seems to me like the whole data hoarding thing is completely silly, and by the looks of it, Australia is just jumping onto the bandwagon in time for all of the reports of how ineffective it is everywhere else in the world.

 

Yet again, Australia looks like they will be spending a ludicrous amount of money in the name of "national Security" a seemingly pointless black hole for taxpayer dollars. They are willing to spend billions on Jets, and Submarines that will likely be rendered useless in a couple of years, but they don't think they should spend money on Education. What a bunch of old hags.

[X1XNobleX1X]

 

But they don't think they should spend money on Education. What a bunch of old hags.

 

^

This

At least Julia Gillard did something for our education. 

[Dabombinable]

Unfortunately the people who 'run' Australia (ie. idiots who only care about their next pay-rise and obscene pension) follow the examples of other countries like lemmings, the idea may be bad but they jump off the cliff anyway.

[Guest]

But they don't think they should spend money on Education. What a bunch of old hags.

 

^

This

At least Julia Gillard did something for our education. 

Before this turns into lets all hate the government because they've cut X services. Look at our debt level, the liberal party is known to work to cut the debt while labor is known to spend everything they possibly can. Case and point is Kevin Rudd issuing $950 to every person who sent in a tax return the previous year in an effort to boost spending - most people spent it paying off personal debt.

[hiyayhi]

Unfortunately the people who 'run' Australia (ie. idiots who only care about their next pay-rise and obscene pension) follow the examples of other countries like lemmings, the idea may be bad but they jump off the cliff anyway.

Its like watching an 80 year old person installing malware intentionally thinking they are improving their computer. Its so fucking frustrating that I might actually end up in politics just to try and fix this mess of a political system.

[hiyayhi]

Before this turns into lets all hate the government because they've cut X services. Look at our debt level, the liberal party is known to work to cut the debt while labor is known to spend everything they possibly can. Case and point is Kevin Rudd issuing $950 to every person who sent in a tax return the previous year in an effort to boost spending - most people spent it paying off personal debt.

I'm not at all against cuts, I am just against illogical cuts that are detrimental to the health of the country in the long run.

 

And I have a nickname for ole mate Kevin.

 

Kevin Rud, the Dud.

 

He did one good thing for this country, and that was to say sorry.

[Dabombinable]

Before this turns into lets all hate the government because they've cut X services. Look at our debt level, the liberal party is known to work to cut the debt while labor is known to spend everything they possibly can. Case and point is Kevin Rudd issuing $950 to every person who sent in a tax return the previous year in an effort to boost spending - most people spent it paying off personal debt.

Quite literally, they need to reduce their pay and pensions. Quite a few of the smarter politicians noticed that the amount of money they were getting was wrong, and ended up getting told that they had to take rise. The stupid thing is, teachers are a lot more important and they get paid a shitload less. The assholes are being too short sighted in what they do.

[slightlyjaded]

Australia.... God we're fucked. Sorry for the profanity, but I can't think of a more succinct phrase. Okay, unfortunantly our politicians are a bunch that want power. I'm sure they start out wanting to do their part, but stuff happens.

 

Before this post turns into a we hate poli's speech, let me say they do a difficult job, balancing the want's of the vocal minority against those that just keep quiet in their disgust. My concern for this bill is simple. The isp's are being provided funding to improve their storage infrastructure....Who's providing security for this data?

 

Btw, I'm saying they do a difficult job. I'm not saying they do it well.

[Dabombinable]

Strange how to govt is starting to look like the oppressive people they condemn.

 

So instead of protecting and improving the country, they take your money to snoop on you.

Don't forget that they also force you to vote for them as well, even if they are all as bad a candidate as each other.

[slightlyjaded]

Don't forget that they also force you to vote for them as well, even if they are all as bad a candidate as each other.

35 years old, never registered..... Yep that's going to cost me when they notice....

[xewp]

35 years old, never registered..... Yep that's going to cost me when they notice....

out of curiosity, whats the penalty for not being registered?

 

and is it more the longer you're not registered?

[PerfectTemplar]

Australia has one of the highest gdp per capita in the world. Our economy is nearly as large as Britains with less than half the population. We have the second highest standard of living in the world and some of the lowest debt. I DO NOT SUPPORT METADATA. But saying we cant afford it is ignorant.

[HaZardousLP]

out of curiosity, whats the penalty for not being registered?

 

and is it more the longer you're not registered?

 

I believe the penalty for not voting is only about $20 in order to strike a medium between literally forcing people to vote and not enforcing it at all. I'm not sure whether or not this accumulates or is related with not actually registering but it's more just a slap on the wrist than anything.

 

Australia has one of the highest gdp per capita in the world. Our economy is nearly as large as Britains with less than half the population. We have the second highest standard of living in the world and some of the lowest debt. I DO NOT SUPPORT METADATA. But saying we cant afford it is ignorant.

 

This. 100% this. (although our economy is tapering off now ) Shouldn't be happening regardless but I found the comments in response to the quotes a little sensationalist...

[slightlyjaded]

out of curiosity, whats the penalty for not being registered?

 

and is it more the longer you're not registered?

No idea, but I assume it's going to hurt. Not rgistering for a tax return (even if your paying tax) is something like 250 bucks.

 

I believe the penalty for not voting is only about $20 in order to strike a medium between literally forcing people to vote and not enforcing it at all. I'm not sure whether or not this accumulates or is related with not actually registering but it's more just a slap on the wrist than anything.

 

 

This. 100% this. (although our economy is tapering off now ) Shouldn't be happening regardless but I found the comments in response to the quotes a little sensationalist...

Australia has one of the highest gdp's. also one of the highest tax rates, and also the most government "bloat" Seriously. multi million dollar commisions on a R18+ rating in video games that the government is going to ignore anyway? I wonder who's brother was on that commision.

[HaZardousLP]

Australia has one of the highest gdp's. also one of the highest tax rates, and also the most government "bloat" Seriously. multi million dollar commisions on a R18+ rating in video games that the government is going to ignore anyway? I wonder who's brother was on that commision.

 

Don't get me wrong there are many, many problems with our government and economy but we do pretty well here in Australia

[hiyayhi]

Australia has one of the highest gdp per capita in the world. Our economy is nearly as large as Britains with less than half the population. We have the second highest standard of living in the world and some of the lowest debt. I DO NOT SUPPORT METADATA. But saying we cant afford it is ignorant.

I'm not saying we CAN'T afford it, but even though we have one of the highest GDP in the world, we are still in debt. We should be working on things to get us out of that, not sinking money into a black hole.

[PerfectTemplar]

I'm not saying we CAN'T afford it, but even though we have one of the highest GDP in the world, we are still in debt. We should be working on things to get us out of that, not sinking money into a black hole.

Our debt takes up around 29% GDP, where the UKs debt for example takes up about 97% GDP (Around there). Compared to other developed nations our debt is nothing. Governments are often in debt and always have been, it is up to government to spend money and invest. As long as they don't spend OVER GDP then it's not a problem.

 

Again, I think this metadata thing is terrible and a clear violation of our rights and privacies. However, having sensationalist comments around the cost is very pointless since $400 million is actually nothing to our government. What about the up to $2 billion a year they're going to give to Telstra to use the shitty copper cables for our terrible internet instead of upgrading to fibre? There are better things to complain about when it comes to government spending imo. Such as cutting $200 million or so from the ABC's budget (which they need desperately) when $200 Million is marginal to them (the government). Both sides of politics in this country have been running scare campaigns for years on our state of the economy. When in fact we have one of, if not the most stable economies in the world.

[hiyayhi]

Our debt takes up around 29% GDP, where the UKs debt for example takes up about 97% GDP (Around there). Compared to other developed nations our debt is nothing. Governments are often in debt and always have been, it is up to government to spend money and invest. As long as they don't spend OVER GDP then it's not a problem.

 

Again, I think this metadata thing is terrible and a clear violation of our rights and privacies. However, having sensationalist comments around the cost is very pointless since $400 million is actually nothing to our government. What about the up to $2 billion a year they're going to give to Telstra to use the shitty copper cables for our terrible internet instead of upgrading to fibre? There are better things to complain about when it comes to government spending imo. Such as cutting $200 million or so from the ABC's budget (which they need desperately) when $200 Million is marginal to them (the government). Both sides of politics in this country have been running scare campaigns for years on our state of the economy. When in fact we have one of, if not the most stable economies in the world.

I agree with most points here except that 400 million is "nothing" 400 million is still a large sum of money no matte who you are, that could be going towards any number of things other than this project. For example, they could leave the ABC alone, and still have 200 million spare to spend on more beneficial things to our country.

 

This 400 million dollar investment per year will not benefit our country in any way, and we will likely not get any of the money back. Where I have been putting "sensationalist" arguments about the sum of money it is purely to emphasise that this is no small sum and there are better things that could be done.

 

Also, yes, the government is spending countless billions of dollars on things they don't need such as the 2 billion you mentioned as well as the 20 billion on Submarines, and the 24 billion per jet that wont be usable until 2020. This is definitely not the only thing that the government is spending unnecessary amounts of money on, but it sure as hell isn't one I'm going to turn a blind eye on. If the amount of money it costs is an argument against it, then it is an argument I shall use.

[mr moose]

Before this turns into lets all hate the government because they've cut X services. Look at our debt level, the liberal party is known to work to cut the debt while labor is known to spend everything they possibly can. Case and point is Kevin Rudd issuing $950 to every person who sent in a tax return the previous year in an effort to boost spending - most people spent it paying off personal debt.

Also casino and poky operators have said before that cash handouts from the government go straight into the pokies.

 

http://www.afr.com/p/national/gambled_away_pokies_swallow_carbon_jUmfC6pfzBsF7j4OgFLrgI

 

 

Also it should be noted that education and health have never had funding cuts from either party at either federal or state level.  The amount of funding has always gone up.  The problem is some people tend to think it should go up by X amount and so cry cuts when it doesn't.  People need to learn not  to trust media, unions or political parties for this information.  The federal and state treasuries have all this data available for public access.  Anyone can check for themselves.

[PerfectTemplar]

I agree with most points here except that 400 million is "nothing" 400 million is still a large sum of money no matte who you are, that could be going towards any number of things other than this project. For example, they could leave the ABC alone, and still have 200 million spare to spend on more beneficial things to our country.

 

This 400 million dollar investment per year will not benefit our country in any way, and we will likely not get any of the money back. Where I have been putting "sensationalist" arguments about the sum of money it is purely to emphasise that this is no small sum and there are better things that could be done.

 

Also, yes, the government is spending countless billions of dollars on things they don't need such as the 2 billion you mentioned as well as the 20 billion on Submarines, and the 24 billion per jet that wont be usable until 2020. This is definitely not the only thing that the government is spending unnecessary amounts of money on, but it sure as hell isn't one I'm going to turn a blind eye on. If the amount of money it costs is an argument against it, then it is an argument I shall use.

$400 million is a large amount of money to individuals, many companies ect.. But relative to $1 Trillion it really isn't that much, whilst I do recognise it's wasted money and yeah that submarines thing is super pointless I just don't think the cost is the biggest problem here, whether or not it is wasted money. They waste more money on many other things.

[Biased Opinion]

I'm not at all against cuts, I am just against illogical cuts that are detrimental to the health of the country in the long run.

 

And I have a nickname for ole mate Kevin.

 

Kevin Rud, the Dud.

 

He did one good thing for this country, and that was to say sorry.

Not that the sorry did anything.

[hiyayhi]

Not that the sorry did anything.

This is true, it was a great thing at the time, but there hasn't been any real after effects of it.

[Constantine]

Before this turns into lets all hate the government because they've cut X services. Look at our debt level, the liberal party is known to work to cut the debt while labor is known to spend everything they possibly can. Case and point is Kevin Rudd issuing $950 to every person who sent in a tax return the previous year in an effort to boost spending - most people spent it paying off personal debt.

 

If people spent it, doesn't that mean their plan worked? And wasn't that to make sure Australia didn't fall into the GFC?

[Briggsy]

As people get older, they become more fearful of everything. Makes perfect sense when they propose these kind of measures.

[mr moose]

If people spent it, doesn't that mean their plan worked? And wasn't that to make sure Australia didn't fall into the GFC?

 

Slightly but mostly no.  It was supposed to stimulate the economy,  if you get a sudden influx of people buying goods then there is a sudden cash injection into product movement, this stimulates economic growth. However what actually happen was that most people paid of their debts (which effectively unsettles the loan markets and can do more damage than good) or put it into pokies, The only people to benefit from that are companies like crown and coles who don't need to employ more people for one off revenue increases. Ergo the rudd money essentially did nothing to stave of the GFC. 

 

Detailed academic analysis has shown that Kevin Rudd’s “Stimulus: had – NO effect household non-durable consumption. None.  In fact, even the Australian Treasury found that Kevin Rudd’s $900 cheques  equaled only $1 of economic activity – that’s right, $1.

 

https://www.taxpayers.org.au/factcheck-did-kevin-save-us-from-the-gfc/

 

For the record I am not against the labour party, just the previous government.