Leaderboard

Purtting the intent aside, are those particular words racist? Just on the wording alone, I'd call them nationalistic as only the country was mentioned, not the person's race or religion. As an example, if an anglo saxon descent Australian person told a Pom of anglo saxon descent to piss off back to England, is that rascist even tough both parties are of the same race. Intent can differ, but the wording is the same in both cases. I always thought rascism was bias against someone because of their race, not nationality. If you are white and told two South Africans to piss off back to South Africa and one is black and one is white, is it racism in both cases, only in one case or in none?

Maybe not only an EV issue.....

People who worry that Covid Vaccine might change their genetic make-up, should welcome that possibility.

That's absolute rubbish. The ABC is far less biased than any other news service in Australia. It's widely recognised that Sky News or whatever they call themselves now are among the most biased. So surely Hanson refused entry to them too? The reason Hanson doesn't want the ABC around is because they ask difficult questions. Guess what? That's their job. They do it to all sides of politics. And as a politician, if you haven't got answers to difficult questions, then what are you doing there? As a reporter said this morning, it's dangerous for democracy when politicians exclude segments of the media from their announcements. Look how many criminal investigations leading to charges have been initiated by investigative journalism, especially by the ABC. Without proper media scrutiny, corruption flourishes.

I am humbled to be graced by the presence of so many Grande Masters! I bow to your superior grandiosity

OME, give Jerry his keyboard back.

Speak for yourself. The other senator is just as much an Australian as Hanson and has a right to her opinion. While her comment was a bit bolshie, that's because she's a Greens senator and probably nothing to do with her country of origin. And if you think about her words they are 100% correct, and also stand up for the original Australians. Pauline responded in your classical racist manner and deserves to lose. Maybe she should give up HER well paid position, her overseas holidays, clothes, plane and food all paid for by a billionaire buying influence, and piss off back to Ipswich.

So the Iran invasion achieved its purpose.

Nowadays I am forced to use the only tool that reduces that pain. It's called a debit card.

Yeah but then has to pay them $130k to keep it quiet. Guess they don't call it the "money shot" for nothing.

I don't think HE gets too Near HIS missus..Nev

He seems to come across a lot of them..

The walk from my house to the pub is 5 minutes. The walk back, however, is 30 minutes. The difference is staggering!

My favorite colour is purple. I like it better than red and blue combined.

Nothing wrong with that. Understood it perfectly. I am sure it was written by my brother

USA has the Best Politicians Money can BUY. They then turn into Dictators you can't get rid of. .Nev

If you are invited into someones home and start to mouth of about the traditional parts of their lifestyle and mouth of about a person who didn't actually have anything to do with the stuff that upsets them, I am sure that you are within your rights to tell them to leave. Pretty sure if we were in Pakistan and started to act like that it wouldn't go down to well. My definition of racism would be that the person was told to go back there just because of their heritage.

It will be interesting to see what becomes of a high court challenge. The judge in this case said it functioned as a test case for the claims of both parties. Marty, you judge Hanson's intent on her past history and you have every reason to, but a court can't take any previous statements on other past matters into account; they must only judge on the matter at hand. If an appeal to the high court happens, they'll have to judge on whether her words I quoted in a previous post constitute racism. The words alone don't in my opinion. Pakistan is a geographic area and a soverign state, so on words alone she's telling someone to go back there. It's her intent in using those words that the courts decide on. On words alone it's no different than if you came up here and I told you to piss off back to Tasmania. You know yourself how many times Tasmanians have said they wish mainlanders would piss off back to the mainland. That's not racist, and it could be argued not necessarily Stateist, just a desire to be left alone. But on words alone, it's no different to what Hanson said.

No I'm not saying that Marty. Read my post more carefully. What I'm saying is that the words alone don't refer to race, only former nationality. Get over the Hanson thing for a minute and think about the words alone, no matter who utters them. She told the person to piss off back to the country she migrated from, no mention of the person's race or religion. Forget about Hanson and look at the example of a white Australian telling a white Kiwi to piss off back to NZ. Would those words alone constitute racism of one white person toward another? I'd consider a case like that to be nationalistic based and not race based. If Hanson had told a white South African to piss off back to South Africa, is that racist? Would she be having a go at the person's race or nationality? The point I'm making is, that the words she used are not racist but nationalistic. That's looking solely at the wording and not taking perceived intent into account. The court obviously made the decision that they thought she had racist intent in what she said. The words alone (regardless of who spoke them) don't convey that. That's what a high court challenge will have to sort out.

Money should be taken out of politics entirely. Yes there still should be free and fair elections, but I think the application of a few public service rules would do wonders for the political class. No ability to accept any gift, donation or service of any value, for a start. And integrity checks. The ability of interest groups to lobby politicians erodes democracy. Everyone knows gambling advertising should be banned completely. It's a no-brainer. So why isn't it happening?

There already exists a National childrens day and an international childrens day. Whats the issue? Aboriginal children have the lowest health, educational and social outcomes in the country as a group. They obviously need extra attention and the day just expresses that need.

The TOPIC is ME conflict and the debates in the Parliament are recorded. Public Service is Not elected. The most Important things for a Functioning Democracy (a) A free and fair Election Process. Checks and rules applying to any Money donated or spent, A GOOD honest Press which is Not a fully incorporated arm of the Liberal Part and NOW PHON Otherwise why not Cut out the Middlemen/women) and let Gina and Merdey run the Country directly, Nats have been all about Fracking and mining Not Farms etc as they once were. Follow the Money trail That will find out who calls the shots. Nev

Become an *Islamic* republic perhaps? Gotta watch these muslims, they'll do anything to further their cause for Allah. Mehreen Faruqi didn't think things through before she opened her gob. If she got all the things she wanted, expressed in her "school kid" statement, she'd still be living on "stolen" land ... so, would she go live somewhere else and leave the Aboriginals in peace? ... not likely, she'd probably pretend to be their saviour and advise them of the virtues of Islam. God willing.

"Go back to where you came from?" Yeah, very much racism

You're missing the point. If Hanson was offended by those comments, she could have responded strongly in many ways without the racism. That she chose tell another Australian to "piss off back to Pakistan" just shows (if anyone needed more proof) that she's just a dog-whistling racist.

And no other indigenous population wherever on the planet has no cultural reference to the Moon? Australia is creating a culture of lunar tics.

Changing the conditions for negative gearing in a small economy like Australia's would not endanger the global economic system in the way unprovoked attacks on the economy of another country have done.

I was speaking to my local Member the other day. (I vote for another Party.) We spoke of Pauline and ON. He said that ON had no practical policies, which is something that many people are coming to consider to be correct. He said that he doubted if ON's results in the next election would mirror the current polling figures. The unfortunte thing is that I don't beleive his Party nor mine have a decent set of policies that would benefit all Australians. It seems to me that we have become terribly divided in our wants. Perhaps it's because we have been infected with the 'me first, last and every otehr time' virus.

So that everyone understands the context of Pauline Hanson’s loss on appeal: On 9 September 2022, following the death of Queen Elizabeth II, Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi posted the following statement online: “Condolences to those who knew the Queen. I cannot mourn the leader of a racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonised peoples. We are reminded of the urgency of Treaty with First Nations, justice & reparations for British colonies & becoming a republic.” Senator Pauline Hanson responded: “Your attitude appals and disgusts me. When you immigrated to Australia you took every advantage of this country. You took citizenship, bought multiple homes, and a job in a parliament. It’s clear you’re not happy, so pack your bags and piss off back to Pakistan.” I am 100% with Pauline on this, it is one of the reasons Australians want ON.

There's a bit of aggro going on between a couple of members. Hardly the sort of thing that makes for a pleasant place to come and interact with others. The aggro does not carry any of the discussion to a suitable resolve. In fact, it diminishes respect for those creating th aggro, and respecting others should be a foundational rule for we members. Let's make it the custom here to play the ball, not the man.

I’m basically saying don’t defend yourself by attacking the other person. Stick to defending your opinion and keep personal criticism out of it. That applies to both sides. Just stating the obvious really.

And almost no coverage of the Epstein files outrage

With engine stopped, switches off:- 1. Resistance check between Black wire coming out of charge controller & Batt neg terminal. 2. Resistance check between Red wire @ charge controller & Batt pos terminal. Expect almost zero ohms. Any higher restance will limit charging. With engine running at fast idle:- Measure DC voltage between Red & Black wires @ charge controller. Expect about 12 volts before starting, then at least 13 volts rising to 14.4 volts as battery (hopefully) charges. If this voltage is not the same as voltage measured @ Battery terminals, problem is poor continuity between charge controller & battery terminals. If the voltage @ charge controller does not rise with engine running, check the AC voltage between each of the three stator wires coming into the charge controller - all should be equal. Generic circuit - yours might have some difference but this gives you an idea of how it all hangs together.

Unlikely? Nev

The original Intoxicated Persons Act 1979 in NSW has been repealed. Police powers to detain and care for intoxicated people in public places are now governed by Section 206 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (LEPRA). Under this law, officers can detain a drunk person in public if they are disorderly, at risk of injury or damage, or need physical protection. However, there is no offence. The detention is meant to be a means of protecting the intoxicated person. Such a person could be taken to a police station and held until sober then released. They could be taken to a hospital, but hospitals never had the staff or facilities to care for drunks. In a small town, or if the person lived near, they could be taken home and handed into the care of a responsible adult.

Yeah, but.... Sure, it's Artificial. But not Intelligence. I have met people like that. They would never achieve Grande Mastere though.

Speaking of newcomers, has anyone heard from some of our long timers who have been a bit quiet, spacey hasn’t reappeared for a long time, OT has been a while since being about.

Maybe we should revise the common usage of the words 'race' & 'racism'. Last time I looked, folks from 'other countries' are all of the same race. Likewise all humans regardless of their skin pigment or language. So in the above discussion, wouldn't a Paki be of the same race as a Anglo Aussie? Aren't we all members of the Human Race? Racism? Bah!

Me too.

No. There is always more to do, and Learn. Nev

Why would you want to? I personally don't believe in any raced or religion based discrimination, or superiority but the Afor mentioned group aren't travellng that well for a lot of reasons so consideration of WHY might be the real issue. Nev

Memes like that one make one realise that one is getting old.

If anyone thinks it is OK for Senator Mehreen Faruqi to say that about the death of our Queen, then they don't believe in the Australia that I do. But it isn't just Australia. Most nations have expectations about loyalty to the flag, respect for what our forebears fought for, and so on. I can respect the Turks, for example, as equals to the Australians in WW1 because they believed just as strongly in their own country. I have no right to go over there and tell them they are racists built on stolen lives etc etc. Which argument could be equally made about Pakistan times one hundred, given their support for terrorists in recent decades. We have enough enemies trying to subvert our society without members of parliament doing the same. We urgently need our politicians to affirm that we have only one flag, and fly only that one in official places, and that we have a history to be proud of.

Sorry - I didn't see this... There are two ways - human and machine learning. And Machine Learning is often automated feedback loop between humans and machines, but can be, for example, response to external stimuli. Human learning, or tagging, is where a human takes the output and if it is inaccurate, explicitly tags the output to the degree it is inaccurate and corrects it. The data held to calculate the probability will be updated as a result. For machine learning, it is where the machine works it out for itself. For example, if a LLM answered your prompt, but answered the wrong question and you corrected it, it would update the statistical data where it think it went wrong. For non-human interactions, and to take an extreme example.. Say a self driving car predicts the person on the side of the road is not moving in front of it (say moving away from it) but ends up hitting it, it will use the data it received through the camera and radar to adjust the statistical data and learn whatever triggered it "thinking" or statistically deducing it would move away from the car, actually meant it would move toward the car and update its map accordingly... automatically. This is an oversimplification, as it would feed some central AI DB that would recompute the data maps and download it back or something similar. But the concept should be clear enough. It isn't inconceivable. But it would require almost autonomous and dextrous robots to do so, and I don't think we are quite there yet. In the future though, it may well be the case. Without context, the presenter is not making an entirely accurate statement. Yes, AI will work a lot quicker and uncover more vulnerabilities. But firms and governments are already using (and have been for some time) AI to scan networks and systems looking for and patching vulnerabilities. In addition, AI has been deployed to monitor real time behaviour to determine id actions being performed are likely to to be cyber breaches of some sort. So, it will settle down to a bit of like it is now, where vulnerabilities are found by those looking for them from both from a defensive and offensive/nefarious point of view and, like today.. some of the nefarious ones will get through, and some won't. The good thing is that AI will be a far better defence - especially monitoring real time activity that is suspicious. Also, the number of "hackers" (crackers - hacking is what I used to do - programming with "short cuts") that really know the nuts and bolt of what is happening is a relatively small percentage and most of the systems/networks hacking is already available in automated tools - usually free - that can be downloaded. Khali Linux is a cybersecurity "optimised" version of Linux for penetration testers. Basically it comes with most, if not all of the major available hacking software. Not many of these 16 year-old bright sparks know much more than how to download Khali Linux and point it to a server and run the software.. a real cracker would know how to cover their tracks and not get caught - like some of the ransomware gangs... So, this is already available today. And note, at least in today's world and I suspect when the AI between nefarious and defensive actors catch up, the weakest link in cybersecurity is humans.. social engineering (phishing, vishing, smishing and the like) are by far away the most common cause of breaches rather than the stereotyped hooded cracker at a keyboard. Real time AI monitoring will be much quicker at finding this (and already is). What will happen is you Windows Defender will become AI enabled. I found it ironic that Hugging Face, an AI cybersecurity start up was breached so easily. I think that may have damaged its reputation somewhat. The bigger threats on the horizon will be with quantum computing. This is a game changer.

Maybe, but it's much better to defend your argument. Defending yourself usually doesn't end well for anyone.

The FACT that Trump swore not to start such overseas Wars/Adventures will Probably be the Most significant ACT in bringing his inevitable demise ON. Nev.

I figure if I keep cutting they'll I think Jerry put a curse, not a cursor, on my keyboard.

Her successor has come out throwing punches, announcing a royal commission into corruption in the construction industry. Of course, if he was serious about integrity, with three weeks left of parliament, he could push through legislation to bring transparency to IBAC, in a similar way as the NSW ICAC. It is likely a new Lib government will call a royal commission anyway. But he also has announced a pro business an tougher on crime agenda. Surprisingly similar to Crusafilli (hope I spelt that right). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-28/ben-carroll-vic-labor-premier-analysis/106966210?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=other