nomadpete

Brace yourself Marty. Tas rego on motorcycle >125cc .... $792 About $100 dearer than a car.

No Marty. That was just the re registration. Previously paid $100 stamp duty and transfer of rego. I am looking into Special Interest registration to keep the cost more reasonable.

BYD has finished their factory in Brazil. For the local market. It saves 25 days shipping time from China. Last month marked the first time BYD sold more cars abroad than in China. BYD sold 89,590 cars in China and 100,600 overseas. Note that last year the same company got into legal strife for slavery. "Brazilian labor inspectors rescued 163 Chinese workers from the plant’s construction site, accusing their employer, a subsidiary of BYD, of subjecting them to conditions analogous to slavery." Wouldn't have been a problem if they set up in Texas!

Yes, it does include 3rd party injury insurance. Note that doesn't cover the rider though.

My Gripe.... I just re regustered a motorcycle. Cost? $750 p.a. Why does it cost that much? How much pavement do you think it wears out every year?

Cast your mind back to September 1, 1983. Korean Air Lines Flight 007 was on a routine flight from New York to Seoul via Anchorage. It accidentally crossed into Soviet airspace. At the time, NATO had a policy of continually flying its bombers directly at Eastern Bloc airspace and then diverting at the last possible moment. The Soviets were kept on perpetual high alert. When Flight 007 accidentally crossed over the line, the Soviets, fearing an American bomber incursion, shot the plane out of the sky. The 269 civilian passengers died. The world seemed to be teetering on disaster. On September 22, 1983, the Toronto Disarmament Network issued a public warning of the danger of escalating tensions: “A miscalculation, a computer error, an itchy trigger finger could lead to the murder of not hundreds but millions of innocent civilians.” (WW3) In the immediate aftermath of the Korean jetliner disaster, the Soviets anticipated a retaliatory action, and their radar crews were trained to respond quickly in the event of a serious incursion. The crews knew that if they hesitated, the Soviets would be wiped out in a first-wave attack. On September 26, 1983, Soviet radar crews detected a large group of incoming missiles. But Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Petrov broke protocol by refusing to immediately launch the counter-strike. He suspected the blips on the screen might be some kind of computer error. Petrov was correct. Had the automatic rapid military response been controlled by A.I. You would not be reading this now. It is equally possible that human error might start MAD WW3. But I cannot trust computer to control it. In Iran, a missile landed on a park that was marked on the town map as "Police Park". It is alleged the target was chosen by A.I. Which begs the question "who targetted the school, human or A.I."?

There's an interesting through-line. Atwood's picture of Claude: Vonnegut's asshole in Breakfast of Champions looks like this:

This link takes you to a conversation between Claude (A.I.) and Margret Attwood. Totally worth a read. https://margaretatwood.substack.com/p/claude-you-are-a-cutie-pie?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1195719&post_id=190895157 Does A.I. have emotions? Is it a psychopath in sheep's clothing? Does it tell lies just to shut you up?

And exactly how would you find out? Your only source of information is Chat GPT Google search. And A.I. has a self survival algorithm. (Just like our frail human pollies)

I checked under my bed. No commies or yanks there.

I sometimes wonder how many 'tourists' worldwide are agents doing research. On each other's country? Spy vs spy ?

Chat GPT is aware of the wide scope of citizen's backgrounds and demographics. Chat GPT has none of those pesky human weaknesses. It is pragmatic, purely running logic. Dispense with state and fed governments (esp their expense accounts and fringe benefits) - look at the instant boost to the national economy. Dispense with elections - none needed (except the occassional software upgrades). Chat GPT for E-President of the new Republic!

I used to blame the greedy telcos, but now I know it's part of the nasty Russian cyberwar. McCarthy was right all along.

Damn those Russians! The very nerve of them. My internet went out yesterday, too. That war has got to stop!

Is that a good example of not endorsing or voting for a candidate?

Hooray! Pity you don't represent the majority.

Now who does that 3 fingered billionaire remind of?

Maybe this should go in the 'What has Putin Done?' Thread....

Bet he didn't learn that at home.

Quite so. But mainly so because our PM and party are playing nice in the sand pit. But just look at the Trump fiasco and you can see how a ruthless mob can tilt the playing field with disasterous consequences. We rely on the politicians obeying the checks and balances built into the system. So far that's worked. The yanks had checks and balances, but they stopped playing by the rules and it ceased being 'by the people, of the people or for the people'.

Well, they can impeach.

I agree about the USA. (And lib/nat impotence) But an opposition party must have some power to be assertive. Otherwise they are just background noise. Therefore even though unelected, and cannot pass legislation, they become an active part of government. Mix that with an opposition party's mandate to oppose, they actually generally hamper the elected party. Which brings the whole mob back to being like herding cats.

Wille, fair point about the constitution. I am looking from the perspective of how the system seems to work now. The average punters probably don't know half the names of candidates. That's why they vote above the line. Which is basically voting for their preferred party. The problem that I see is a fundamental one. If one person is going to get the top job, they expect it to give the top power along with the top responsibility. Which practically invites the most ruthless dictator. Given absolute power they could quickly bring about many good things for their people. But then human nature kicks in, along with a dose of sociopathy. In an attempt to moderate this kind of highly successful person, we put layers of politicions around the boss, to hamstring their more grandios selfserving plans. This is because in real life, dictators are never benevolent. There is no perfect system. But we are not doing too badly.

True words indeed. As OME pointed out, we rely on a majority party to be in power, and a minority party in opposition 'to keep the barstewards honest'. By definition that is a government divided. Dispense with the party and party leaders. The PM can be chosen by a majority vote from the floor. As Nev points out, we are heading toward a one party system. This is not a good path either. In theory, when a party decides a policy, it should be voted by secret ballot in a caucus meeting. But I think there is bullying going on in this process. I do not believe it is really democratic. If a policy is good, then both parties would approve and if the process was transparent, the electorate would see the reasoning behind it. At present clear policy information is not freely accessible, unless we really dig for it. Have you read the official party websites? They all sound the same, with all the right vague catchwords.