source : the age
We’re now onto the digital duty of care bill, which was introduced into parliament today.
The Coalition’s digital economy spokesman Aaron Violi just asked Small Business Minister Anne Aly the following question:
Can the minister confirm Labor’s digital duty of care bill introduces a new requirement for every small business with a website to undertake annual risk assessments, which must be kept for six years?
Aly, who was a key target in question time yesterday but has so far received just one question, stressed that small businesses would have minimal obligations under the new digital safety laws.
This was the rest of the small business minister’s response:
The eSafety Commissioner will provide further regulatory guidance in due course. Now, that is in recognition of the fact that websites and apps run by small businesses generally don’t … facilitate any user-to-user interaction, private messaging, or otherwise facilitate connection between strangers [or] allow users of the website to upload or stream or generate content for other users.
Question time has now moved on to the topic of private health insurance subsidies for Australians over the age of 65.
Coalition spokeswoman for families and social Services Melissa McIntosh rose to her feet a short while ago to ask the prime minister: “When will Labor stop waging war on senior Australians?”
As Nick Newling has written, Health Minister Mark Butler has vowed to bring back his health savings measure to the Senate after it was yesterday scuppered by a Coalition and crossbench alliance.
Anthony Albanese, who has answered almost every question so far, repeated Labor’s familiar attack line that the Coalition was in fact a “noalition” for blocking budget savings he says will be reinvested into aged care.
“This sensible reform … would just mean one thing: the same private health rebate for someone, whether they’re 64 or 65.“
We expect to have more on this issue this evening and in tomorrow’s paper. Stay tuned.
The heckling in the chamber was replaced by sombre silence when independent MP for McKeller, Dr Sophie Scamps, rose to her feet to ask why Australia hadn’t joined some allies in imposing “comprehensive sanctions” on Israeli settlements.
Rising to his feet, the prime minister said Australia remained steadfast in its commitment to a two-state solution:
Australia is not pursuing a blanket-style import ban. We have concerns about the implementation of a blanket ban and unintended consequences for Palestinians and other entities.
And that, in fact, the declarations may not advance the objective of a two-state solution, but may in fact provide a setback.
We will continue to work with our partners, as we will continue to call on Israel to immediately address illegal settlements and settler violence, which are undermining the two-state solution. Just as we continue to condemn the ongoing acts of terror of Hamas, that also aimed at undermining the two-state solution.
The second question was from shadow treasurer Tim Wilson, who pointed out that the unemployment rate has risen to 4.7 per cent – the highest rate in five years.
“Because of Labor, 103,000 more Australians have lost their jobs this year. When is the treasurer going to lose his?” Wilson asked the prime minister.
In response, Albanese pointed out that 1.3 million jobs had been created under Labor’s watch.
“I’m asked about people in politics keeping their job, Mr Speaker,” Albanese continued.
“[The media] has reported that some Liberals privately concede Taylor is faring no better and possibly worse than the female leader he replaced.”
The prime minister repeated that he was proud of Jim Chalmers, to loud jeers from the opposition benches.
The final question time of the week has begun in the House of Representatives, with Opposition Leader Angus Taylor once attempting to drive a wedge between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers.
“The prime minister overruled and publicly humiliated the treasurer over his widow’s tax, his death tax, his super tax, his cap on veterans’ healthcare, and his botched ban on credit cards,” Taylor said when he rose to the dispatch box. “What will the prime minister humiliate the treasurer on next?”
When he rose to reply, Albanese insisted he was proud of Chalmers, before returning serve:
We are a government that works through a proper cabinet process … something that those opposite would not recognise.
OpenAI agreed not to use trade secrets that Apple claims were stolen by employees who defected from the iPhone maker to the artificial intelligence start-up while a legal fight between the companies plays out.
The ChatGPT maker made the voluntary concession during a court hearing on Wednesday in which a federal judge said he was “highly likely” to side with Apple and issue an injunction against OpenAI. US District Judge Edward Davila will have the power to enforce the agreement, which also requires OpenAI to collect forensic images of 14 employees’ devices that may contain Apple’s confidential information.
For OpenAI, the agreement avoids the stain of an outright loss in its first substantive court showdown with Apple. The start-up headed by Sam Altman was accused by Apple in a July lawsuit of scheming to steal intellectual property related to upcoming products and use that information to bolster its work on competing future devices.
Practically speaking, the accord gives Apple most of what it was seeking from Davila – a guarantee that its proprietary information remains off-limits for OpenAI’s own technology development.
Communications Minister Anika Wells says the digital duty of care laws introduced into parliament today are about platforms hosting harmful content, rather than individuals who may post it.
“This is not about any individual post, any individual person, any individual comment, any individual reply or meme or video,” Wells told the National Press Club.
“It is about the platform that hosts that piece of content, having systems in place that identifies where content might be risky for its users, and taking steps to mitigate against those risks.
“Ultimately, a question of compliance would be determined by the eSafety Commissioner if it came to that.”
Communications Minister Anika Wells says she is considering a move to an eSafety commission, rather than having a single commissioner after Julie Inman Grant retires from the role next year.
Wells was responding to a question regarding the abuse Inman Grant had copped in her years serving in the job.
“I am considering at the moment, given the resourcing required for the digital duty of care, and the volume that is rising sharply in complaints and people seeking recourse, how we re-gear our system so it’s modern,” Wells said in her address at the National Press Club.
“I really want to be a forward-facing minister.
“I want this to be a future-oriented portfolio.
“I believe that the communications portfolio is essentially infrastructure for the future, and I’m always looking at ways that we can do that.”
Communications Minister Anika Wells says that after the removal of ministerial powers in the new digital duty of care laws, she wouldn’t be able to prevent the potential livestreaming of an execution in the US.
The Pentagon announced last week that the execution of Nidal Malik Hasan, convicted of killing 13 people at a military base at Fort Hood in Texas in 2009, would be livestreamed on December 3.
Wells said “the digital duty of care legislation would not be in effect by December 3, so it wouldn’t have allowed us in this situation”.
But pushed on the hypothetical, Wells said, “as you heard me argue, the ministerial rulemaking power was designed to act swiftly when your child has photos of them being ‘nudified’ online, you want the minister to act as quickly as I could.
