This headline is misleading ... "Australian gov" sounds like the Australian Federal government, but the government in question is the South Australian government, which is a State gov.
It is the article's headline, and there wasn't enough space to edit in the specific state. But is it actually a meaningful distinction as far as these policies being constrained permanently to just one part of Australia? Will this spread everywhere or is there a reason why this would only be constrained to a really small town no one really notices?
> It is the article's headline, and there wasn't enough space to edit in the specific state.
Sure - I noticed that and wasn't implying that you modified the article title. The article title is incorrect, at least in the way it reads at first glance - yes the South Australian government is "an Australian government", but it's not "The Australian Government".
> But is it actually a meaningful distinction as far as these policies being constrained permanently to just one part of Australia? Will this spread everywhere or is there a reason why this would only be constrained to a really small town no one really notices?
It's too early to tell - but it's worth noting that the main revenue generating states with the lion's share of attention in Australia are New South Wales and Victoria and so they usually set the tone of state policy countrywide. IMHO this is unlikely to spread to those states.
More importantly:
1) the article indicates that its use will be voluntary anyway;
2) Australia has a long track record of paying millions of dollars for technology like this that actually never works properly.
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.”
And are you comfortable remaining "not too concerned" as a Victorian when you admit that it's too early to tell if this idiocy will spread? Because idiocy it is, and spread it very well might. How long will you wait to call it out? Where will you draw the line in the sand? Power consolidates.
> Returning travelers quarantining at home will be forced to download an app
Interesting .. how exactly will they "force" people to download an app if they said person doesn't have a smart phone, or refuses to unlock it? Are they going to buy them one?
The police aren't going to see this as a useful use of their time and resources; and the public isn't going to put up with it either. There's one thing to make an announcement like this in Australia; and another thing completely to make it stick. Governments here have a habit of backing down completely when it's clear their re-election is at stake.
The proposal wouldn't fly in Victoria; but if it was attempted, I'm pretty sure it would be rolled back pretty quickly. Let's wait and see before getting too up in arms about it - the app isn't even written yet.
Did you post this article primarily so you could respond to everyone here touting your own opinions and disagree with anyone else’s? I get things are frustrating at the moment, but that’s pretty narcissistic.
