Thanks, I appreciate you care about us. Australia has been on this path for a while now but similar changes are happening everywhere. It does feel like a frog being slowly cooked. I would still choose an app at home compared to paying for hotel quarantine though. There are more serious and permanent changes happening with surveillance (every phone number is attached to a government ID, metadata is saved for years, number plates are scanned and logged at state borders etc), indirect crimes (you did something a criminal might do, so that's a crime) or extremely petty things like the defamation law or carrying a 'sharp object' or even not being able to pull the tab when you fill gas to needing an ID to buy a knife from the supermarket. It's not just that they seem to be able to pass whatever weird or overreaching laws but there seem to be little to no legal safe guards or limitations about what they can be used for or when they can be used. There are limited means to civilly object as things instantly become crimes. Is Australia really considered a 'very free' country.

To be part of a society there needs to be a compromise. I agree not to not to steal things in exchange for knowing people aren't allowed to steal things from me.

That I understand, and the same for the quarantine rules. But things have been getting really complicated lately. As you have pointed out, these agreements aren't feeling like community decisions and technology has been making the application of law humanless and arbitrary.

If I forget to pay for a loaf of bread, walk out the store, and then go back to pay immediately, it would just be a human misunderstanding nd everyone would be happy with that outcome. Societal dues paid.

But if instead a facial recognition camera tracked me leaving and the security gate detected the item unpaid then the matter goes into an automated system and even if I realise my mistake and pay my societal dues the system doesn't care. If we aren't careful it could elevate the system above the society, and lose its original purpose of helping resolve social conflits. Instead it would just apply law without the capacity to fully appreciate it's role of societal mediation.

There are things in Australia that are already like that. Expired registration cameras for example. A police officer can suss out the situation and see if you just forgot to do it this morning, or if you are constantly driving without insurance. The camera can't figure that out, so a simple mistake can cost you.

This is right. It is useful to know how much electricity production costs in health and environmental output. It is useful to know how much of bitcoins value is the electricity cost. We can put a value on environmental harm caused by total electricity usage. But, using these and suggesting that we can accurately measure the cost of cryptocurrency now and in the future compared to how the money/value would otherwise be spent is a distortion. The same reasoning can be used to make anything that stores value or does not have an obvious output look disproportionately harmful. It could be useful to compare cryptocurrencies with themselves. I am a little interested to see how they factored cryptocurrency's optimization to use the cheapest electricity possible. It disproportionately favors storing value from electricity that would otherwise be wasted.