Jerry_Atrick

It's our turn to get some rain now. We are in SW Engalnd, and while it has been raining a lot have only had minor flooding (at least where we are). Our village has had no flooding (and as it is on a high point, wouldn't expect it). https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn9dj2nry7qo

Inland Revenue and back taxes can be a pain. Isn't that why Willie Nielsson (sp?) had to return to the stage?

I am often on realestate.com.au (yeah, I know it is Murdoch owned, but it is the best real estate website I can find in Aus, and they are making a play for a UK property site.. I reckon they should just launch in competition). Sometimes I go window shopping i fancier (by that, I mean more expensive) areas, and it proves that money does not buy style; https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-vic-canterbury-146136740 I am sure some people find them lovely, but they really are gharish monoliths, and positively make me want to puke when you consider what was once standing there (or was typical of the area, anyway).

I was one of those suckers once. I made an offer on a rocking horse for my daughter that was 10% lower than the price asked which was already cheaper than I was expecting. It was auto-accepteed and I though, "hang on, that was quick.. am I getting gyped?" Turns out I could have got it 25% cheaper by going to Amazon. Lesson learned.. The internet lets one always check the prices before making that irreversible offer (Paypal took the money automagically, and it was before the days that chargebacks were easy).

Thanks, OT; apologies, @red750; 'twas an honest mistake. Somehow, I can't help but think Abbott and Hockey had something against Vic and SA. It was bloody-mindedness to do what they did as their gripe was, as I recall, just with GMH and where they located their R&D that claimed the R&D tax credit. However, it is always more complex than a single issue and the holes in the Swiss Cheese probably aligned on different fronts - but I can't recall everything. What I do recall is both the left and right of politics, the academics and business people were dead against it, but the Abbott/Hiockey government pursued it dogmatically. In the end, though, I think it would have happened anyway as in the late 2010's global manufacturers were consolidating and pulling their regional manufacutring back home.. The Australian car market operating in a relatrively small market and expensive cost base probably would not have survived anyway. I don't think there is appetite to build an automobile manufacutring base in Australia. H2V tried but haven't got far, and it is useless competing with the bottom feeders - innovative, high-end stuff is required, but that is bog outlay and huge risks. Most of the British iconic manufacturers with a alrgeish market are all foreign owned. I think Mclaren is still British owned, as is Cateram, Morgan, and Noble.. But Mini, Land Rover, Aston Martin and the like are all foreign owned. I believe those cheap and fixed price exports of gas to China were done by the Howard government - long before Net Zero was in. And we have been exporting our natural resources in quantities well over domestic use for many decades. I seem to recall pig iron and Menzies, and I don't think Net Zero was a thing then. In fact, the net Zero would see us stopping the export so as not to continbute to emissions generated overseas using Aussie resources. The doemstic consumption of these resources has fallen away because of the drp in manufacturing which was acconpanued by, hang on.. the destruction of the car industry, which has had many other manifacuting industries hang off its coat-tails. That is why other countries, inclluding China, subsidise it still. If your manufacturing base drops away, people still consume and the mining companies still have to sell their resources somewhere. So, we export out resources and import the finished product, as we have been progressively doing since the 60s at least.

Just looks like a phallic symbol, to me.

Throughout my adult life, I rarely carried more than $20 unless I had a specific purpose.. I was about 16 when the then State Bank of Victoria came out with thei EasyBank card, and I got one.. I honestly can't remember the last time I used cash. Nope, I just remembered; I bought a second hand bed frame off eBay - collected in cash. That was about 2 months ago and not a skerry of cash has been in my wallet since.

Mind you, this is the photo from the article: Jacinta Allen is quite apt at giving us both the bird and the two fingers 🙂

Not sure that will go down with the magistrate 😉

It's $840m, not $840bn. Will take the total cost to $15bn (https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/metro-tunnel-blowout-to-cost-taxpayers-extra-840-million-20240926-p5kdqu.html) . Since when have major capital works, especially in government, come in on budget and on time?

I have never written in Ada, so not sure how it works. (Note, I only touched the tip of the iceberg above). One of the things to look at is the use of GPUs.. Effectively a bitstream in, calcs, and a bitstream out... but for simple computations, can massively scale the power available. Here is an article for Python developers: https://medium.com/@geminae.stellae/introduction-to-gpu-programming-with-python-cuda-577bfdaa47f3 CUDA is one of two main frameworks for GPU programming; the other is OpenGL. They are both used for AI and ML extensively. And also, native Python is slow.. Really slow. So the libraries like numpy, panda, cupy (for CUDA) are often written in C++

Sorry - you're right - I meant father christmas and how Santa Claus is now commonly portrayed.

A little patronising, don't you think calling established academia that have to go through a process of qualification/accreditation and have their work peer reviewed? Ahh.. so not so self appointed experts. .I will quote from Ernie Dingo (as quoted int eh Guardian report): "Dingo says before that occasion, “We couldn’t do it to white people because they wouldn’t understand, and there was too much negativity.”" I am not sure of your grandparents background, but given that comment, could it not ne that the Aboriginals they frequented with did not dosclose everything about their ceremonies and cultures? What rigour did your grandparents go through to establish the totality of Aboriginal culture? I don't know, and I don't think you do, either. Anthoroppologists look for other evidence as well.. documents, drawings, etc. Aboriginals have a rich artistic heritage that captures life. Could it be it "grandad's stories" are captured in the art.. And because of the lack of documentation/writing, passing knowledge (and dare I say ceremonies, religion, etc) from generation to generation is avery strong part of Aboriginal culture, so even if it was simply grandad saying it, and the previous gandad and the previous one, etc.. and probably also doing it, may (and I stress may) be good enough. And is that not how cultures are evolved over time? The reality is I don't know a lot about it and I go to accepted western expert who studyt it in accordance with accepted western practices as with all other studies to find out.. I don't know.. But I doubt your grand parents know.. and your just saying what grandparents passed down. So could that not also be doubtful? In other words why would your grandparents word be better than theirs.. who, you know, are the population we are discussing?

No, I watched it live through watchafl.com.au.. I got up and did something else. As I do on the Grand Final when they sing the national anthem. Doesn't interest me, I do somethmg else. I am not forced to watch it.. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

Really.. My brother is a member of the Tigers and goes to their games (even this year) and yes, they have the ceremonies but he isn't forced to watch them. Your not forced to watch them on telly. Make a cuppa and calm down.

To be clear as I am workign at the same time and didn't edit in the timeframe allowed what I wanted to say, I meant this: I should be very clear - I personally don't give a toss about what anyone thinks about welcome to country.. But when people start spouting BS as facts to justify their position, or apply double standards, then I get riled. What you think of it is of consequence to me.. But don't tell me BS to try and have me form an opinion. I do prefer facts. (That is not aimed specifcally at you, @red750, it's rhetorical).

I don't have to. You don't have to, and neither do Muslims. Can you please advise where you have to attend or listen to Welcome to Country. Because I was in Aus not that long ago.. and didn't see it once - not even on the telly, let alone the pubs I visited (and I made sure I went to a few). My brother who is visiting here at the moment and I had a couple of drinks last night and got talking about it; and he has never been to one and can't remember sitting through one. ever. I watched the GWS Sydney game on the telly and I didn't see it. Why is it imposed on you and not him, nor I when I watch Aussie events where Welcome to Counry is staged? (Actually I may make a point of watching one now to see what the hoo-hah is about). Again, statements don't seem to tally with observable facts, and presented in a way that is... divisive. I should be very clear - I personally don't give a toss about what anyone thinks about welcome to country.. But when people start spouting BS to justify their, or apply double standards, then I get riled, because they are tyring to impose nothing more than an opinion as fact or are discriminating with no basis for that discrimination. So give me the evidence and fine.. I may not agree with your position but we are all different.

By what measure? I don't know. I should have used to the words, "may help" (I had had a few last night so forgive me not entirely lucid in my expressions). But, if you have an audience of people that you can express part of your culture to who, as it turns out know very little about it, then does that nor afford them the opportunity to instill some interest in some of that audience to learn a bit more? It is obviously not successful, and is enduring a tirade in all walks of Aussie society. But why is it offending of people's sensitivities when people can, like many other things that offend their sensitivities, ignore it. Everyone, including the senator talks about wokeism and how bad it is, but isn't getting upset about Welcome to Country, an example of wokeism in the sense that it seems to be offending delicate sensitivities and whipping up a frenzy about it? It really is simple - if you don't like it, ignore it. No one is forcing to you watch or listen to, or attending it. BTW, it has no meaning to me and when it comes on when I am watching something (usually an AFL final), I don't actually recall what I do.. I choose not to take too much notice of it. From what I read (even from the supposedly "dissenting" Aboriginals, of which there don't seem to be too many), there is much more agreement on the ceremony. But just like the myth that propagated that Welcome to Country was invented by Ernie Dingo, I am less likely to believe press and more likely to believe more reputable sources which almost all conclude Welcome to Country is an authentic tradition in Aboriginal culture but there are differences in what that ceremony is in different First Nations countries. I would suggest you read the Guardian article I posted (irony of referring you to the press) or go to Google Scholar and search origins of Welcome to Country. Here is an easily digestible article which touches on it (see P 124, extracted from a bigger journal): https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/LA/article/view/14269/12768. I find it really odd that in the overwhelming evidence that Welcome to Country is authentic, people dig their heels in about its inauthenticity.. without citing any real evidence to support their position. I would take and those from similar origins, whether they state Welcome to Ceremony, that over anything messrs Murdoch, Stokes, Costello, and the like, which is what we normally do, right? You learn a new thing every day. I had never heard of the word, mullock, before. I am going to use it at work on Monday "there's a lot of mullock around here". Why would you want to exclude learning about an aspect of someone's culture.. Surely the "legal" (social?) aspect of one's culture is what drives much of everything else about that culture. In fact, understanding some of the differences between the "legal" aspect of their culture helps understand some of the perceived difficulties in living alongside them (I am not only referring to Aboriginal culture, by the way). Surely you can both learn about their sociological aspects as well as the more scientific aspects. And it is the sociological aspects that hold the key to successful integration, is it not? Or, are you saying, as I am rejecting their culture, I don't want to learn about it and they just have to succumb to our culture? This is what I am observing. There is a culture that is on display that you don't have to a) partake in; or b) even watch. That actual performance may or may not be authentic , but the ceremony as a concept is real and proven. It may, like the performance referenced, contain scientific inaccuracies based on a mistake, or, let's go with the senator; factual inaccuracy based on their religion (or spiritual beliefs). Let's look at another couple of ceremonies, both within the same religion foisted upon us. Christmas and Easter. Same broad religion, worshipping the same (arguably fictional) god. Let's start with Christmas. One country starts the ceremonial rituals on the 5th of December and it runs through to the actual celebration and opening of presents on Christmas eve (Germany). Others have their dates on the 5th/6th January. So we can't even agree on the date of the birth of the fella (nor as it turns out the death/supposed resurrection as orthodox Easters are on a different date). and the ceremonies/riutuals performed are very different between different counties... And even the central character through which we celebrate - Santa Claus - is not the embodiment of anything other than Coca Cola's invention in the 30s. How authentic is that in 2,000 years of Christianity? Yet no one complains or is offended by it.. Or the other myriad of ceremonies we are continually creating or modifying as society moves.. So, even if Welcome to Country is a "new" ceremony and is not rooted in 60,000 years of tradition, or it has changed over the years, so what? When I was a kid no one heard of Halloween or Valentines Day, but f! me if another kid comes around asking for a treat and tries to stuff hs hands full of them, he will meet an early end (just kidding, but you get my drift). All of these other ceremonies are foisted on us.. Go to a shop in October and they have the Chrissie decorations up and belting out tunes that have been repeated time and time again. Well, actually, even my kids complain about that. Why are Aboriginals held to a standard others aren't? Well, I am going to call it out. I don't think it is positive racism. I am sure everyone of us, if interviewing candidates for a job would pick the Aboriginal who is marginally better over a caucasian who is equally competent in all but a minor area. But it is the unconscious bias that pervades our society and this is just one area where it looks like it is rearing. In the face of credible evidence to the contrary, people are still claiming Welcome to Country was made up by Ernie Dingo or not autentic, but can't offer evidence to the contrary. And the standard is that the ceremony is different (or new) as if it has to stand still over miillenia, yet our ceremonies are forever changing; we are inventing new ones (or invigorating irrelevant ones) and have dropped others (isn't there talk about what to do with the Azac Day ceremonies). We are all getting upset at something that we can totally ignore if we don't like, and it does not make one shred of difference to our lives. Even if Welcome to Country is totally unsuccessful at providing xome appreciation of Aboriginal culture, given we now (as a country) recognise native land rights, if it is an important spiritual ritual for those that have a native connection to the land, why deny them that? It masy be spiritually important to them. Geez, I was in church not too long ago for a wedding. When the, in my mind, religous crap was being spurted, I started singing my currently favourite songs to myself and ignored their resurrection rubbish (in my view - but I am only putting it here to highlight that I can choose to believe/listed to it or not, and I am not saying someone who believes it is somehow being divisive, because I beleieve people the right to believe what they want. If I was to make a hoo-hah about it, it would not be them that is divisive. It would be me. And that is my point about the divisiveness thing.. It's not the Aboriginals that are being divisive; They are not forcing anyone to do anything. They are partaking in what is a cultural ceremony that has been around for millenia. It has no impact on you or I; why are we (non Aboriginals) making such a hoo-hah about it? Who is being divisive? Comes back to unconsious bias, IMHO. If anyone has credible evidence that Welcome to Country is not a very long standing feattur of Aboriginal Country (i.e. made up recently), then I will happily eat my words if it stands up to scrutiny. And I am not talking about an individual ceremony, or even possibly single Aborignal nations that didn't have them, bvut, as is claimed, it is totally unauthentic or never pre-dated Ernie. If anyone has evidence that our veremonies have survived intact without change for millenia, then I will also eat my words (again, not individual ones, but, most of them) It doesn't mean one has to want to do it, like it, agree with it, etc. etc. But if one is basing one's judgements on facts they continually reject without being able to offer evidence to the contrary, quite frankly, we are in MAGA terrirtory.. (Flameproof, kevlar jacket on)

I said a return - not necessarily a direct monetary return.. But, at the end of the day, when the VFL became the AFL, money became a more priortised element of the game. Despite me thinking that one of the reasons for welcome to country at AFL games will be for them to present themselves in a better light, it really has bugger all to do with the imposition on society that seems to be perceived of Welcome to Country when there are so many other rituals we have to endure that no one seems to complain about.. but these are complained about as if one is obligated to attend and respect them.. which they aren't. I agree with the first statement.. .However, the other way of thinking is that it helps promote and understainding of the culture and I will take that opportunity. Sometimes we should be looking at the potential upsides rather than the downsides. Unless you have intimate knowledge of First Nations peoples feelings (which I certainly do not claim to have), suppositions of how they may react or feel should probably be muted. One person who probably had a closer affinity to how First Nations people would react has declient to continue his valuable contributions on these good forums.. for reasons well known.

Because if you incorporate recognition of the usual greeting, and then recognition in native land via Welcome to Country, you can say, "See, we are inclusive and are sympathetic/empathetic to First Nations culture.." The the AFL Commissioners (the folks who worry about, amongst other things, the money) wouldn't spend the money they didn't think think there was a return involved. That is not to say they couldn't care about First Nations cultures and racism, etc.

I honestly believe it helps the AFL pedal socially inclusive credentials.. yes... especially given there are segments which are alledged to have been not terribly sympathetic to First Nations culture.

Yeah - sorry to hear about your wife - as Litespeed says, hope she is OK.

Oh.. and the politica machineyry in Australia (and the rest of the world, for that matter) are whiter than kit gloves and when the rarity of fraud happens, the perpatrators are also broght to justice and the system has the checks and controls that ATSIC doesn't? Please! I am not excusing fraudsters, but why single it out as an Aboriginal issue?

My point about the welcome to country tirade from the seantor was it is a bit rich when his party seems to be representative of a religion that equally spreads BS like talking snakes, arks, pparting seas and the like, I think I used the term pot calling the kettle black (i.e. it's not OK for Aborginals to do it, but anyone else and it barely rates a mention). I wasn't going down the rabbit hole that we have been down before about the authenticity of the ceremony, but since others have, I will bite Are youy getting it shoved down your throat day in day out? Really. Even if you wer at the game, it is a ceremony and you can totally ignore because it happens about 100m from where you're sitting and you have a crowd around you. Hardly call that shoving itdown your throat. We have things shioved down our throat every day we don't want - ads, religion (yeah - we still get the Wtinesses and others knocking on the door pedalling their crap - a few weeks ago I had and older ocuple thank me for at least teating them courteously). Politicians? Sports? We filter out what we don't want to partake in and get on with life. When was the last time you were at a Welcome to Country ceremony? And what sort of shit have First Nations people had and continue to have shoved down their throat that in repugnant to them? I thought we dispelled that myth. You have to remember that Ernie Dingo did not invent Welcome to Country. It has been going for Millenia and different first nations had different rituals for it - not all involving buring gum leaves or whatever. What Ernie Dingo did was perform it for non-First Nations people for the first time (alledgedly): https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/23/ernie-dingo-and-richard-walley-on-the-40th-year-of-their-welcome-to-country And there are a plethora of resources including reputable anthropological studies on it.. Unless, of course, like the good senator, they are all woke fabrications. Just Google Origins of Welcome to Country. Amazing how myths propagate to fit a collective agenda. It's only divisive by people who want that division - like that senator. Seriously, what impact does it have on the every day lives of Australians? I would suggest its a nice way for them to deflect from real divisive things like their government policy on, oh, I dunno, Robodebt maybe. Or other grave socially divisive policies they have. But lets forget that and worry about an Aboriginal in the middfle of a sports field performing a ceremony to give some sort of social cedibility to the AFL. Yeah.. right. I think I have dealt with the fabricated charge. What - do you think the singing of the national anthem at the Grand final is done for free. The singer does it because he or she gets paid handsomely for it. But, that is oK, right? The worlds biggest business untul not so long ago is an institution that is centred on ceremony of BS - the Catholic church.. SO what if they want to capitalise on their rituals? On the national anthem before the Grand Final - I find that a waste of time and don't even like the song. And we get all sorts of BS thrown at us.. And can you provide evidence of how a Welcome to Country ceremony influences government policy? If it does, I would not be voting for that government next time. and Maybe - I can't comment, but given Ernie Dingo claims to be the first person to have performed Welcome to Country in from of non First Nations peoples, it could be that they didn't do it in front of non First Nations peoples so your father (OT) and yourself (BT) didn;t get to see it and there was no need for you to know about it. I understand where you're coming from, Spacey. So, how many times have you had to close your windows because of a Welcome to Country ceremony? And, of course, if you were at the game, sitting in the stands, that thick smoke would of course have been a threat against, what, all the car and truck fumes, and of course aviation fumes that drive and threaten asthamitcs? Good thing your objections are such that you don't drive your ICE car and lucky you are so dedicated that you keep your aircraft grounded, right? Because they are much more of a threat to asthamitcs than a Welcome to Country ceremony.. And weren't you a smoker? My mother was, and I recall in those days (and many smokers these days) will smoke in confined areas with children. But, these are all non-Aboriginal things, so that is excusable and OK, or do you object to them as wwll.. And the Sydney fires you speak of - were they started by Welcome to Counry ceremonies - of course, each of then involves destroying the country you are being elxomed to. Fair Dinkum, Spacey... what can I say? And, of course, iof you have an ailment that is sensitive to smoke, you don't have to participate.. It isn't a bushfire that they do, after all.

And they have them... and the lord said flatten them