New Zealand’s ‘digital strip searches’: Give border agents your passwords or risk a $5,000 fine
washingtonpost.com/news/mornin

"Travelers who refuse to surrender passwords, codes, encryption keys and other information enabling access to electronic devices could be fined up to $5,000 in New Zealand, according to new customs rules that went into effect Monday."

Ugh, adding New Zealand to the list of destinations with oppressive border search laws.

#InfoSec

@rysiek $5000 is not as bad as what's proposed in Australia: $50,000 and/or 5 years in prison for refusing to provide phone and laptop passwords.

It seems like AU+NZ are testing grounds for new 5eyes surveillance legislation. Find the approach which provides the least pushback, then other countries can cite the new law to institute it elsewhere.

@rmxr @rysiek Well I guess that left wing government they recently elected turned out to be a complete fraud. Who could've guessed.

@adz @rysiek in recent years, I haven't credibly seen an opposition party push back against surveillance legislation in 5eyes nations. Canada, UK, NZ, AU, US...

Usually it's a handful of independent politicians making noise, but not enough of them to hold any of these proposals back.

It'd be nice, but I don't think there's the equivalent of a filibuster outside the US (which would possibly allow a minority to delay such laws).

@rmxr @adz we're screwed unles The People really get involved -- and that means we hackers need to get off of our arses, get out of our basements, and start "activisting" again.

But the hacker community by and large these days seems to be more focused on blockchain scams and enabling mafia to launder their money through zcash kinds of things (that do not bring any real benefit to a regular person looking for some privacy, btw) than on fixing the world.

Yeah, I'm bitter.

@rysiek @rmxr @adz
FWIW Team Trump is (so far) not giving in to crappy police who demand infinite powers.
We'd probably have much better politics if we got good at adding up costs & benefits then switching every time someone makes a slightly better offer...
However, evaluating "better" is tricky & people are highly Brand Loyal.

@rysiek @rmxr @adz

One model would be to flag politicians who are discredited:
Clinton -> Drug war, prisons, waco
Bush -> 911, Patriot act, Iraq
Obama -> 2008 bank bailout, foreclosure crisis/bonanza

Then use force directed graphing based on same campaign donors, same university/frat, same family & pick the more distant.

Depending on how you rated Clinton, that algorithm likely to pick Trump over Hillary, but maybe that's a rational decision...

Follow

@cjd @rysiek @rmxr @adz

but make the algorithm's decision easily verifiable by a human,
otherwise we'd get dangerously close to using machine learning for choosing political leaders...

@Wolf480pl @rysiek @rmxr @adz
Definitely... e-harmony for politicians... Rate a bunch of older politicians and it draws a pretty graph connecting things you care about to politicians you're currently voting on :)

@Wolf480pl @rysiek @rmxr @adz
Actually better to rate particular decisions, but then whoever makes up the questionnaire gets significant power to guide decisions :S

Sign in to participate in the conversation
niu.moe

Welcome to your niu world ! We are a cute and loving international community O(≧▽≦)O !