Comments
HornyJamal t1_j1g7v48 wrote
They already started that when they wanted a government ID for shit like Paypal and co.
nicuramar t1_j1itljp wrote
Maybe I’m just used to a different kind of society (Denmark), but I don’t really see the problem with that?
ihavestrings OP t1_j1ke1in wrote
A social credit score or ID for PayPal?
nicuramar t1_j1ldi1d wrote
ID for PayPal :).
andygchicago t1_j1hebj2 wrote
A few steps after that will be GATTACA and DNA tests on street corners
XxHavanaHoneyxX t1_j1h05po wrote
They run criminal record checks for people applying to work with children. This isn’t really any different. Meet some completely stranger, often for drinks, on an app is extremely risky. Most of the time it’s fine but you are extremely vulnerable of the person you are meeting has bad intentions. If they can filter out people known to have previously had bad intentions that isn’t a bad thing.
elefantsblue t1_j1i139u wrote
Except the courts aren’t just and their intentions aren’t pure. It’s just another way to further insert themselves and their self righteous bullshit into the lives of individuals.
nicuramar t1_j1itobp wrote
> Except the courts aren’t just and their intentions aren’t pure.
Is that a fact or your opinion? Also, in what country?
elefantsblue t1_j1j0xq1 wrote
All of them.
psyon t1_j1iq69h wrote
How is it any different if you meet some stranger at a bar, a grocery store, or anywhere else? You can have your first date in a very public space, but if they woo you enough, you will eventually be alone with them.
XxHavanaHoneyxX t1_j1ixj20 wrote
It’s isn’t. They might be lying to you but in the very least you have seen their face. Difference with online is that there’s an opportunity to screen convicted fraudsters, murders, violent offenders, stalkers and rapists. It won’t catch potential criminals for sure. But it’s something.
psyon t1_j1jio43 wrote
Meet them in a very public place for your first date then.
seksismart t1_j1is2s0 wrote
Lmfao WHAAAAAAT? Did you just really compare getting a background check to work with vulnerable populations to using Tinder?
I mean, there ARE alot of people with mental ilness trying to date these days... Maybe you are right. Maybe we should make a MentalCaseTinder app, specifically for vulnerable population people.
Would certainly make my life easier not to have to deal with them.
CatastropheJohn t1_j1gicyp wrote
I made a minor mistake 36 years ago, so don’t date me.
Lanoris t1_j1glt73 wrote
I mean shop lifting from a Walmart or a bounced check is whatever.
But I sure as fuck want to know if the person I'm going to be seeing this evening has been known to put their hands on their previous partners.
CatastropheJohn t1_j1gnic7 wrote
All the record search will reveal is yes or no. The offence will be left to the imagination.
Lanoris t1_j1go03q wrote
Did you even read the article?
"That needs to be stopped. We need to completely ban people with violent criminal histories or alleged histories, with any sort of civil intervention order in place, from these apps.”
It's not like they're worried about your marijuana charge or the time you got way too drunk and spent the night in a cell.
The purpose is to protect people from predators not penalize small time offenders.
CatastropheJohn t1_j1gure9 wrote
Of course I didn’t read it. I stopped that in 2016. And imagine my surprise: the headline was misleading
Dernom t1_j1hv35p wrote
How is "require criminal checks" misleading? That's exactly what is proposed. It doesn't say "ban anyone with a criminal record".
ihavestrings OP t1_j1keog8 wrote
Or "alleged histories"? So if you were accused of something and found not guilty they'll still ban you?
[deleted] t1_j1hhgtp wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_j1h12p6 wrote
Your logic is flawed. Is every crime a “minor mistake?”
There’s a whole range of crimes i.e why a convict is sentenced to more time the more violent the crime
kobeyoboy t1_j1ho3w2 wrote
Getting more time just messes with the offender. Majority of people who never been an offender won’t care that your marijuana charge for 2 years prison time while Martha ex boyfriend beat her up and was slapped on the write with 6 months country jail time
Pikauterangi t1_j1h3iec wrote
Anything they want private citizens to do, we should make public servants do.
EmbarrassedHelp t1_j1i0wxz wrote
The Australian government (eSafety Commissioner) is already demanding that companies implement encryption backdoors and mandatory proactive scanning for anything potentially "illegal". Source
I don't think people realize just how bad things are in Australia right now for anyone who cares about privacy and security online.
Its also interesting that r/Australia always calls out their governments anti-privacy bullshit, while non Australians on this subreddits are sometimes supportive of articles like these.
nicuramar t1_j1iu1io wrote
> The Australian government (eSafety Commissioner) is already demanding that companies implement encryption backdoors and mandatory proactive scanning for anything potentially “illegal”. Source
I don’t really see where your source specifically demands that they implement encryption backdoors. Of course that would be one way to implement what they seek.
ihavestrings OP t1_j1fw2ku wrote
Tldr
A criminologist has called for dating apps to introduce criminal history checks on users as the federal government is set to hold a summit into the security measures used by the platforms.
The AIC report found three-quarters of survey respondents had been subjected to sexual violence on dating apps in the last five years.
“The government expects dating apps and websites to do all they can to keep their users safe, such as providing easy-to-use reporting processes, support for victims of abuse, processes and policies that hold perpetrators accountable, and incorporating safety by design processes.”
A spokesperson for New South Wales’ minister for women, Bronnie Taylor, said she had recently written to Rowland asking her to take “urgent action” on “the issue of women’s safety on dating apps”.
DrunksInSpace t1_j1hjad7 wrote
Huh. This is an interesting conflict.
On the one hand, there didn’t used to be restrictions on dating spaces. Clubs don’t have background checks, bars don’t etc. Dating apps are online analogs, in many ways.
Ubiquitous criminal checks can punish and further alienate from society someone who has done their time and is trying to reintegrate.
On the other hand… safety. How many harmed daters are an acceptable number? What is the freedom of a few ex cons worth against the safety of others? Does the answer change, when we drop the “ex cons:” What is the freedom of a few worth against the safety of others? If the answer does change, why? Is that right?
ihavestrings OP t1_j1hnpag wrote
Yea, maybe something like banning people that have been convicted for sexual crimes, or people that have been convicted of using dating apps for committing crimes/searching for victims.
worstusername_sofar t1_j1g164i wrote
I'd also recommend girls stop going for the 'bad boys'. We can literally tell you who are dickheads by looking at them.
Financial-Bowl5454 t1_j1gjjcf wrote
Would you consider your self to be a “nice guy”
If so please post a photo of yourself so I can tell what the opposite of a “bad boy” is
BrokeMacMountain t1_j1hd1sw wrote
i would also advise the boys to mot go for 'fun girls'. we all know the rule... never put your dick in crazy.
locri t1_j1g4n2g wrote
Come to think of it, if women want (or are okay) to date criminals then shouldn't we let them? It does seem immature to glorify anti social behaviour but it's not for us to get involved with how they move past that. That's their life.
Criminal checks for dating sounds like you want to make it impossible for people who've served their time to date, I can't agree with that.
I don't like sleazy ex cons dating ridiculously young women but, again, none of my business.
unresolved_m t1_j1gdt45 wrote
The theory I heard was that women go for bad guys because they want to fix them
ihavestrings OP t1_j1kew3a wrote
Yea, but how do you stop that? How much does their relationship with their father growing up have to do with this?
Faustkatt t1_j1gxgj9 wrote
How accessible is that stuff? As an Australian I've had to do a background check only once and that involved me requesting info from the police and then submitting papers to the effect that I've never been caught doing anything particularly interesting in my life.
Surely they don't expect people will do that for a dating site? Is there some database the site can check instead?
ihavestrings OP t1_j1kfg4a wrote
"The federal government has announced it will hold a summit with state governments, peak bodies and advocates in January, focusing on reforming security and verification policies on dating apps"
Maybe the system that they'll implement is someone signs up, has to submit ID and the company has to do the background check? I don't know what their laws are right now, if companies are allowed to do that.
Pirate_Secure t1_j1hffwh wrote
Australia is racing China to be even more dystopian.
RovingMarsRobot t1_j1gvpii wrote
Good. Meanwhile in the progressive cities in the US, they’re trying to ban homeowners and landlords from doing criminal background checks on prospective tenants.
You could try to rent out a room in your house and the government would prevent you from checking if they’ve committed robberies or rapes
ihavestrings OP t1_j1gxf2n wrote
I don't know. If someone has been to jail and finished their jail sentence they have paid their debt to society and shouldn't be punished again by not being able to find a place to live.
RovingMarsRobot t1_j1gxqsz wrote
If that’s fine for you, then you can live with the robbers, thieves, and rapists. The rest of us should be able to check the criminal background of people we let into our homes.
meatyrails t1_j1hk6nl wrote
Or don't rent out your room if you're scared, housing is a human right, rental income is not.
Late-Ad-8520 t1_j1h6acw wrote
Yeah but you know it won’t stop at that, and any minor conviction would be enough to stop someone from having a home. I made a stupid harmless mistake when I was 19 and were it not for the laws in place where I was at the time I would have had to have disclosed that every single time I applied somewhere to work even though it had no bearing on my job.
The laws aren’t there to stop you from protecting yourself, they’re there to stop any conviction at all from barring someone from being a member of society
elefantsblue t1_j1g3esf wrote
Just a few steps away from the social credit score being fully implemented.