Thursday, 30 November 2023

From this week’s coming news posts: on worker privacy / the lack thereof

This is from this weeks coming news post: 

“Australian privacy watchdog refuses to investigate employer that allegedly accessed worker’s personal emails”   https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/30/australian-privacy-watchdog-refuses-to-investigate-employer-that-allegedly-accessed-employees-personal-emails   I have never assumed I have a right to privacy on work devices - many companies explain this, some have warning messages, but there is also the issue of, in my opinion, common sense even if there is none of that! However, when companies engage in active monitoring, such as copying passwords (which happened to me once - fortunately I always use two factor authentication), I consider their conduct becomes unconscionable. In the case of this article, the employee's conduct was also unconscionable (and probably illegal), and thus - IRRESPECTIVE of what decision would have been reached - the case would always have moral doubt in the minds of many people, even thought the subsequent conduct of the employer was also unconscionable. This is one of those amathiac cases that should never have happened, and has left every employee worse off as a result    

 


If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.


Cynics are contemptible

Every now and then I come across someone exercise the contemptuousness of cynicism.

Those views are loved by authoritarians and despots like potus45, as it results in them having a free run. 

Cynics are being intellectually lazy, morally cowards, and politically enablers of evil. 

I reflect their contempt back to them, in that I have contempt - and anger - for them and the evil they are enabling.

Be frustrated, angry, disappointed, etc - but all of those hold the promise of doing something: cynicism says there is no point in trying - or even hoping ...

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.



 

The announced retirement of Senator Dodson

One of Australias most revered Indigenous Parliamentarians and leaders, Senator Pat Dodson, has announced that he will retire from the Senate next year. I have followed Senator Dodsons work from before his election to Parliament, and have always found him an inspiring, thoughtful person. He may, despite his health problems, continue his activism after leaving Parliament, but I consider his presence in the Senate will be missed.

Some links on this follow: 

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.



 

On my main blog: a post on not leaving people nowhere to go / without community

On my main blog I have posted an article about a webinar that I consider well worth a read. 

The details are:   

“Post No. 2,645 - From a webinar on addressing disinformation: don’t leave people nowhere to go / no community ... ”   https://gnwmythr.blogspot.com/2023/11/post-no-2645-from-webinar-on-addressing.html   “Earlier this evening I attended a webinar in addressing misinformation/disinformation (although the terms have different meanings, their use has become interchangeable). There were a few things that came out of it - including, as an aside, the need for someone to manage the chat and shut down the trolls.”   

The webinar covered a few topics, but the main one I am going to be thinking about is what I have referred to in the past as taking people with you.

Looks like I was more right than I knew, and should have backed myself more. 

However, there are, in my opinion, exceptions to this for situations of active harm, and one participant mentioned having dogs set on him for having voted yes!

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

  • this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.


Tuesday, 28 November 2023

To whoever is programming Microsoft's lock screen choices algorithm

Look, it's simple: I want lock screen photos featuring trees - preferably inside forests, or at least scenery with lots of trees. Whatever went into coming up with something that kept giving me choices including human made structures was utterly farcical - and when you gave me a photo of a ****** car exhaust!!! I gave up trying to use your stuff, and went with my photos. 

You only once ever gave me a choice I unreservedly loved - and never showed it again! 

I've get better things to do with my life than waste time and energy trying to teach your incompetent algorithm/fix your biased (limited perspectives on what would be pleasing!!!) programming.

I would go with a slideshow, except your software doesn't want to recognise the photo album I put on C: drive for you - and won't explain why there is a problem.

Bye bye lock screen algorithm - and good riddance to bad rubbish!!!


Monday, 27 November 2023

An argument for ratifying international agreements by Acts of Parliament rather than executive action

In the field of international politics, there are a number of ways each sovereign nation can formally enter into an agreement with other sovereign nations. A good summary was available at https://legalanswers.sl.nsw.gov.au/hot-topics-human-rights/international-law-and-human-rights (although that link no longer works), and is as follows: 

In concluding a multilateral treaty, states generally follow these procedures: 

Adoption 

The outcome of negotiations is generally the adoption of the text of the treaty in an international forum. Once adopted, the treaty becomes ‘open for signature’. 

Signature

By signing a treaty, a state indicates its intention to become a ‘party’ to the treaty. Whilst signature often constitutes the first step in becoming a party, it does not mean that the state is bound by the terms of the treaty.

Ratification and accession 

Ratification and accession are formal procedures by which a state indicates that it intends to be bound by a treaty. Once adopted, the treaty remains open for signature for a specified period of time. This time generally allows for ratification by the number of states that are necessary for the treaty to ‘enter into force’. Ratification is completed by a formal exchange or deposit of the treaty with the Secretary-General of the United Nations in New York. Accession is the process by which a state becomes party to a treaty it did not sign, and is only used in multilateral agreements. Accession may occur before or after a treaty has entered into force, but is usually used when the agreement has been previously signed by other states. These procedures generally occur when necessary domestic legislation or executive action is complete.

What I want to consider in more detail is the third step in that process: ratification (a dated list of ratifications is available at https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/commission-general/chart-australian-treaty-ratifications-may-2012-human-rights-your)

The summary states These procedures generally occur when necessary domestic legislation or executive action is complete, and that is correct. 

Of late, it seems that Australia has adopted the practice of ratification by executive action, which is simpler, quicker, and cheaper, but, in my opinion, problematic for the following reasons: 

  • it risks contributing to a perception amongst some voters of an arrogant, elitist “government”, with not too much differentiation as to what that word involves; 
  • it also risks contributing to a resentment based on a sense of loss of sovereignty owing to perceived external imposition of laws - again, with a notable vagueness about what that word means;
  • any view that it may be saving money is likely fantasist - this would largely be just shifting the cost down the track to someone elses KPIs, with a hope that no-one notices or gets motivated and/or organised enough to do something using the convention.

When disaffected voters gain political power, as happened in the USA in 2016, and here in Australia earlier, nations experience political and human rights regression - to the extent that gains are threatened. 

If, on the other hand, ratification by domestic legislation was adopted, I consider the potential benefits would be:

  • voters, including those who are potentially disaffected, would see this as respecting our processes & voices;
  • any reservations would be included in our laws (Australia still has a reservation to CEDAW about the extent of paid maternity leave - I cannot provide a direct link, but that can be tracked down via https://indicators.ohchr.org/);
  • potentially disaffected voters would possibly have a (somewhat misguided) sense that we could change / leave the treaty. While I have often read commentaries that we cant, the truth is that many treaties have provisions for individual nations to repudiate the treaty - or similar terminology. However, the weakness of using such provisions it that they do not mean we can ignore what has become customary law, and thus it creates a false sense of ... security”;
  • debate during the preparation and passage of the legislation would enable an airing of community views, with the chance to see rebuttals of concerns, or possibly just that the concerns are minority concerns that the majority of Australians do not agree with. Subsequently, vitriol within Australia would possibly be more likely on the details of implementation in enabling legislation, rather than attacking the human rights principles - and should such attacks on principles be made, they could possibly be countered by describing them as bad faith irrelevancies;
  • the legislation could also include measures which are necessary to implement the convention - e.g., new departments/authorities/monitoring/reporting/etc, some of which would potentially aid with our UPRs. 

An example of ratification by domestic legislation is Australias Genocide Act of 1949 - see https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C1949A00027

However, there were shortcomings with that approach. From http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AUJlHRights/2004/22.html

“... even if Australia had moved to ratify immediately the Convention, and the Convention had entered into force, it would not have impacted directly on Australian law unless the Australian Government had moved to implement the treaty in the domestic legal system. Australia has adopted a dualist interpretation of the relationship between international law and municipal law, according to which the two systems of law are distinct, and a treaty only impacts on Australian law once it has been explicitly incorporated into that law. ... Eager to accelerate Australia’s ratification of the Convention, officials in External Affairs were keen to proceed to ratification without waiting for the possibly considerable delays that may be involved in the preparation of implementing legislation. ... Article V of the Convention requires Contracting Parties to ‘undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or of any of the other acts enumerated in Article III’. Australia ratified the Convention on 8 July 1949 but the Commonwealth Government did not proceed to implement its provisions as required by art V. ... After a delay of more than half a century, the Commonwealth Government finally legislated in 2002 to make genocide a crime in Australia. Although the Government had been under domestic pressure to do so because of Indigenous issues, it was the establishment of an international criminal court with jurisdiction over the crime of genocide where a national jurisdiction is unwilling or genuinely unable to carry out an investigation or prosecution that finally prompted the Australian Government to act, and to do so in such a way as to avoid providing a basis for litigation on behalf of the ‘stolen generations’.”

When I first came across the Genocide Act, I thought it was an excellent approach: the legal fine points about the wording were something I was unaware of.

Nevertheless, such aspects could be dealt with by favouring a domestic legislation approach rather than executive action. 


If we had been doing so all along, I can think of quite a few groups who would have benefitted - including Indigenous peoples and refugees.

I may revisit and rework the wording of this post in the next few days: Im not happy with it, but I want to get it up.  

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

  • this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.


From this week’s coming news on politics & democracy, and international affairs

From this weeks coming news on politics & democracy

“PM confirms sacking of embattled home affairs boss P_______   https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/news/2023/11/27/mike-pezzullo-sacked    In my opinion, that person has been of one the core sources of much of the wrong - and evil - we have seen in the Australian Public Service: good riddance to bad rubbish!  - see also   “Rot in the Civil Service: Farewelling M___ P_______”   https://theaimn.com/rot-in-the-civil-service-farewelling-mike-pezzullo/   &   “Home affairs secretary M___ P_______ sacked for breaching government code of conduct”   https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/27/michael-pezzullo-sacked-home-affairs-secretary   “the longtime boss of Australia’s home affairs department, has been removed from the top job after an independent inquiry found he had breached the government’s code of conduct at least 14 times, including for using his power for personal benefit”  (the personal benefit actions surprised me: I dislike this person because they are the worst sort of neoliberal aka “economic rationalist” - cold hearted, inhumane, materialistic in the extreme, focused on the most small-minded interpretations of so-called national interest. Also, I have decided to not name them, as I consider they should be forgotten and consigned to the dustbin of history)   &   “M___ P_______ sacked after scathing findings accusing him of misusing his position”   https://theconversation.com/mike-pezzullo-sacked-after-scathing-findings-accusing-him-of-misusing-his-position-218592  

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

  • this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.



 

Sunday, 26 November 2023

A draft activism email

This is one of those emails I am going to sleep on, and I will decide after a period of reflection whether to send it as is, edit it and then send it, or abandon it. I am posting it now to illustrate part of the process I go through with these emails.

***

Dear Members of Parliament, 

Re:   Concerns about two media reports (CEO comment about protests at Newcastle and a transphobic article)  

I note recently, in the media report below, that the CEO of the NSW Minerals Council reportedly described protestors at the Newcastle port as extremist.


What is the right to freedom of opinion and expression?

The right to freedom of opinion is the right to hold opinions without interference, and cannot be subject to any exception or restriction.

The right to freedom of expression extends to any medium, including written and oral communications, the media, public protest, broadcasting, artistic works and commercial advertising. The right is not absolute. It carries with it special responsibilities, and may be restricted on several grounds. For example, restrictions could relate to filtering access to certain internet sites, the urging of violence or the classification of artistic material.

The right to protest is fundamental to democracy - and the history of protests includes the achievement of developments such as the five day working week, the 8 hour day, women's suffrage, and Equal Marriage.

The CEOs comment, if accurately reported, is, in my opinion, ridiculous and, as someone with nearly half a century of experience working in the corporate world, likely to be damaging to that CEOs credibility & public perception of that CEOs competence. They possibly think they are sending a message to the companies they represent, but in doing so, they are, in my opinion, damaging the social licence of those companies and making future objections more likely, not less.

The article is at:
In addition to the above, I also wish to draw your attention to the analysis of a transphobic article published recently by a mainstream media outlet. I wont give the article any more publicity by finding and including a URL, but the hosts analysis of the article raises some excellent points - as do several of the comments, and can be accessed at https://www.3cr.org.au/outofthepan/episode/analysis-good-weekend-article-trans-world-aids-day.

No reply to this email is necessary.

*** 

 PS - I cut the email down to just raising awareness of the transphobic article and analysis of same, and then sent it.

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

  • this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.



 

Saturday, 25 November 2023

Lost: news links on human rights

PS - I have a better back up system now :)

My apologies: I have lost this week's articles on human rights, and I do not have the energy to search through a week's worth of news to recreate it.

From the news on: the war in West Asia [Content Warning - links to reports on bigotry/hate, violence including SA & CSA/abuse/war, genocide, language. Reader discretion is advised]

Note: CONTENT WARNING - some of this content is about upsetting, disturbing or triggering events & attitudes. Seek competent help - including professional - if you need it. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised that linked articles may contains names and/or images of deceased people. READER CAUTION IS RECOMMENDED! For anyone distressed by anything in this post, or for any other reason considering seeking support, resources are available in Australia here, here, and here. In other nations, you will have to do an Internet search using terms such as mental health support - <your nation>(which, for instance, may lead to this, this, and this, in the USA, or this, this, and this, in France [biased towards English-language - my apologies]), or perhaps try https://www.befrienders.org/

Note: in my “from the news” posts, quotes are shown italicised and blue, my comments are in a different shade of blue, and “good items are shown in green. I have loosely grouped the posts where such seemed reasonable, but that is subjective (i.e., my opinion - others are free to disagree), and challenging, as some posts belong in multiple groups.

Reporting on recent and currently ongoing tragic events in West Asia, in Israel, Gaza, and adjoining nations, includes the following:



Note: as with other mass murderers, violent extremists crave publicity, so I refuse to give that to them - I will avoid using their names (which is a policy adopted by good law enforcement and media for other mass murderers), and I will not give them the satisfaction of being described with the T word. 

Note also that the genocidal intent of the VEs I refuse to name is clear, according to this from experts in that topic.

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

  • this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.