Yep. This is a waste of time. Canva are just another US VC backed SaaS company despite their Australian origins. An affinity suite port would have been interesting under the previous UK ownership.
shirro
joined 2 years ago
You fool. This is social media where the loudest ignorant voice wins. You should agree with the clowns and farm the upvotes like on Reddit.
I live in Australia and the local winery is owned by a Californian company that sends all their output exclusively to the US domestic market. It would be such a shame if those US companies fucked off and profits went back into the local economy.
It looks like it will be handled by third party verification services in Australia. You will likely provide some form of ID with age which is likely to be government id and the service will check it then inform the social media company you pass. The legislation doesn't allow direct government involvement in running the verification service and the verification companies have to conform to privacy laws.
It is certainly a flawed system. If kids want to access things they will and there is potential for abuse. However when considering harm mitigation you need to look at the whole population.
A lot of the more extreme libertarian views on the Internet originate in the US where their "freedoms" of speech and firearms have obviously just been a distraction while they were robbed blind. They couldn't even protect their school kids from mass shootings because they put ideology and theoretical bullshit ahead of morality, empathy and the survival of their families. I used to buy into the Internet libertarian stuff in a huge way in the days of IRC and Usenet before the mega rich tech bros moved in and turned the Internet into a shitshow of scams, mass-surveillance and brain washing. Still a big proponent of free software and agree with a lot of stuff from the EFF but the oligarchs ruined it. Now I want to burn it down. Anything to keep these nonses away from our kids is good with me.
The idea in Australia is to place the responsibility on the social media companies.
The government isnt filtering traffic or enforcing behaviour. It is fining companies if they don't implement a form of age verification that is compliant with privacy laws.
We can't even make these companies pay tax and obey other laws so I am not very optimistic but at least it raises awareness of the problem.
A woman is absolutely a threat to another human. Any animal that size is. That you think women are harmlessly is ironically, misogyny.
Yes all people are potentially dangerous.
But the biomechanics in adults are very different and need to be recognised. Statistically the physical intimidation is mostly one way when you account for sexual dimorphism in height, weight, reach, muscle mass etc. There are always exceptions but women live in a very different threat environment. That isn't misogyny.
If people tend to hate what they fear and mysogyny is literally hatred of women like what the fuck? Perhaps some men are terrified of emotional harm. I can understand that but perhaps they would be better off with some therapy or a bit of self awareness.
I don't understand misogyny at all. What's it all about? If you were homosexual and were raised in an ancient Macedonian army or something perhaps you wouldn't see a mother, sisters, daughters, lovers, work colleagues, neighbors, friends but who lives like that? Boys who live in front of a screen and are too anxious and scared to go outside? Racism I can kind of understand if you only have superficial knowledge of other people and cultures.
Once that testosterone kicks in at puberty women aren't generally a physical threat to men. I don't really understand all the fear of them. Some women are really, really cool. Like serious friend material and lifelong partner stuff.
These systems are based on the flawed assumption that poor people and minorities are less able to manage money that others. It is hugely discriminatory and treated poor people (and specifically the most disadvantaged racial group in the country) like criminals and addicts. It removed personal agency and forced people to use specific retailers, preventing them buying used goods and fresh market produce. The program was expensive and the only people who benefited were the company running it. It is populist divisive nonsense.
Anyway the point is digital payment systems can absolutely be used in democratic states to enforce spending behaviours and you can even see how it starts with people here believing such a system is justifiable. Then it gets extended to other minorities. The elderly, veterans, disabled, unemployed.
Fortunately in a democracy we can educate people as to why overly simplistic solutions that appear to protect vulnerable people are in actuality a really bad idea.
Sadly not entirely true. The incredibly shitty previous government in Australia widely trialed a racist, classist cashless welfare card for indigenous people. Recipients got 80% of their welfare on it and it could not be used for alcohol, gambling or cash incase they spent it on drugs or porn or other "sinful" things.
As we become more dependent on digital systems there are new ways for our privacy and freedoms to be eroded which makes participatory democracy all the more important.
Almost all my transactions are contactless payments and it pisses me off that they all go through VISA when there is a perfectly good local network for debit card payments.
A lot of the deficiencies with Australian health care are due to tight budget control. Insufficient staffing etc. Health care is expensive but I believe our government health care spending is less per person than the US despite having a more equitable system.
Some of the cost pressures on our system are likely due to increasing use of private services. You can feel the dream of universal health and education slipping away here as bits are carved off for the private sector.
Not just the kids. The kids who were exposed to this stuff way back now have kids. It's generational now.