Nath @ Nath @aussie.zone

Posts

108

Comments

2,644

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

You won't often catch me defending Telstra, but here goes: they didn't let the copper network fall into disrepair. They did genuinely maintain it at a standard that was pretty close to if not as good as what Telstra did. Those copper cables though were designed for telephony and never designed for the Internet. Some of that copper is over 100 years old. If all the lines needed to handle were plain old telephone, Telstra was doing ok.

We'll never know whether Telecom would have gone to the Internet at all, as they were a telephone company. I can see Telecom in that alternate universe being all-in on mobile Internet though. It's an interesting thought discussion.

Apologies, I've been doing Friday night things. Um, at a glance, you'll need lemmy.world admins to help with a lemmy.world account. I'll take a better look tomorrow, I'm not really in a position to drive cars or admin access just at the moment.

Ha! I was going to say it's against the rules, but there's no actual rule in the sub about editorializing news headlines.

I mean, we mostly already have. What I think they should be doing is looking at this simple fact and asking themselves what they can do to make themselves more attractive to the electorate. I don't think they're doing that, and that's a pity. I happen to want multiple viable choices for government. By taking themselves so far off the table as a choice they're limiting everyone's options.

Rage at who? Kerr? Fraser? Whitlam? Everyone's long gone.

The 1975 dismissal is a wonderful case study in both the importance of Government checks and balances as well as the requirement to ensure they are used correctly, so that past mistakes won't be repeated. It's also why Australians even today get a little nervous when one party controls the senate alone.

But rage? No. I have nobody to rage at.

Melbourne cabs used to do this routinely (not just from the airport), which lead to them being hated and why Uber was an instant success when it rolled out in Melbourne. You flag them in the city, and they'd roll down the window and ask where you wanted to go. If they didn't like the response, they'd drive on.

Did this not happen in Sydney?

https://aussie.zone/comment/15915298

Seven months later and these 200g packets are New Low Price. 😀

They used to be $2.59 for the old size and now they're $2.29 for the new. I'm pretty sure they've still gone up, but I'm not going to figure it out on the phone in the aisle.

I'm not against this being a method people can employ for verification. But it won't be the only method. I'm not going to ask a recovering alcoholic or a Muslim to walk into a pub and buy a beer.

Also: it's users under 16. Not under 18. While I'm not aware of any users under 18, we did have a 17 year old last year.

This method has been considered, but it wouldn't catch everyone.

Tbh I would be amazed if anyone in the government knows that Lemmy exists.

It would be unwise to base any sort of response on this assumption. Section 13 of the legislation is pretty clear:

(1) For the purposes of this Act, age‑restricted social media platform means:

(a) an electronic service that satisfies the following conditions:

(i) the sole purpose, or a significant purpose, of the service is to enable online social interaction between 2 or more end‑users;
(ii) the service allows end‑users to link to, or interact with, some or all of the other end‑users;
(iii) the service allows end‑users to post material on the service;
(iv) such other conditions (if any) as are set out in the legislative rules; or

(b) an electronic service specified in the legislative rules;

I'll cover these "legislative rules" in a sec.

Most of the lists of affected sites you see flying all around the place are misleading, because they're being used by the media to get engagement rather than helping people to understand the actual law. In short: every site that meets section 13(1a) above is bound by the law. Which includes aussie.zone.

Services that eSafety considers will not be age-restricted social media platforms

These exception lists are important. For reasons, the government has included a provision in the legislation to exclude sites from section 13(1a). There are a whole bunch of provisions in the overall legislation that hang on the magic words "legislative rules". There are in fact 24 references to legislative rules in the legislation. If you read the thing all the way to section 240 (yes that's not a typo), you'll get to this bit:

240 Legislative rules

(1) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, make rules (legislative rules) prescribing matters:

(a) required or permitted by this Act to be prescribed by the legislative rules; or (b) necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to this Act.

In other words, the communications minister can ad-hoc declare that any site/service that meets the criteria in section 13 is exempt from this law whenever she likes.

We have had zero guidance from the government on what "reasonable steps" to ensure users are over 16 looks like. Frankly, I don't think the government is ready for this law to come in. I won't be at all surprised if we are given a new date.

All I know is what we won't be doing:

1. We won't be pulling a 4chan and totally ignoring the law.
2. We won't be asking for people's ID. We are not equipped to deal with that.
3. We won't be introducing IP blocks from Australian IPs like some sites have done to the UK.
4. We won't be closing down.

I know this isn't really answering the question. But our stance hasn't really changed from 'wait and see what everyone else does to comply'. I have something of a game in mind, I'll go that way if our hand is forced on the original date.

It's a regular work day for everyone outside Melbourne. So I'll be doing that.

Isn't it always?

Did Kerry Greenwood get a book in the works before passing?

Shhhhh! Nobody tell my wife. That's Christmas pressie fodder, that is!

This is the game I remember from primary school in the 80's on the Gold Coast. Then the family moved to WA and I don't think the game existed here. I haven't thought about this game in over 40 years!

I'll buy the Aldi Tim Tam knockoffs when Tim Tams have been full-price for too long. I refuse to pay $6-$7 for 11 biscuits, but will pick up a few packets when I find them half-price and use them up over the subsequent weeks.

The Aldi "Divines" are like most Aldi knock-off products: Not as good as the real deal, but close enough that you don't really miss the real product. And they're even a little cheaper than half-price Tim Tams.

Until this article, I'd never heard of Penguins. But I know the brand McVities and I like their Digestives, I'd probably have been willing to give Penguins a chance.

I'm having a two-day week after a five-day weekend. I did almost nothing, just went for a ride each day. It was amazing.

I get so embarrassed when I see these idiots. I can't watch this video, the cringe is too much for me.

hehehe - the headline reminded me of a fun little moment on a train with my oldest kid, who would have been 2-3 at the time.

"Daddy daddy! That lady is getting off!"

Much of it was in the tone of his voice - almost like he was shocked. Needless to say, she was exiting the train and not pleasuring herself. Though the carriage had a few smirks.

I'm not sure what metrics those sites adopt to determine whether the instance is up or not, but clearly they're in error regarding us being offline. I can't even get the second link to show instances to find us.

I can absolutely help with that. But not from here.

I'll get into this when I get home in a couple of hours.