Ultralights

external hard drive. and we have online storage of our best photos at a site called smugmug. also, free sites like Imgur etc. but for the hundreds of thousands of photos we have, all are on external backup hard drives linked to our home network

obviously never heard of Auburn council then...

but sadly we are strangling industries out of existence trying..

sad thing is, i have been racially abused a few times, while travelling through Oz, and i have no choice but to take it, lest i be labelled the racist.

but also, by their own book, death by your own hand is a burn in hell offence.

speaking of ignorance, apparently, there is no where in the koran that approves of suicide, you take your own life, your going to hell with the infidels... Suicide bombing began with Al qaeda, and have been the weapon of choice for jihadis ever since.. so to me, says that those who commit these atrocities, have no actual idea of the religion they are killing and dying for, but are doing it as their religious teachers have been telling them this is what they have to do... funny how their usually always young men, easily influenced and brainwashed.. ISIS is trying to build up racism in the west with these actions. Every time they hear a redneck politician or radio jock screaming against "muslims" is another victory for ISIS. The more they successfully get "middle white [insert country]" to demand retribution against muslims and create divisions in western societies the more ISIS celebrates. They don't want a conventional "war" they want massive civil upheaval and use that to recruit those that feel vilified as they feel they are given no other course of action. Every shock jock slandering the broader muslim community is actually doing ISIS's work for them but they are too redneck to realise it.

A death cult has declared war on the West Whatever this is, it is not a clash of civilisations. The concept of "civilisation" scarcely comes into it. Nor is it a struggle between competing sets of values, or a religious war, or a battle with an alien culture. There is no debate here – as there was in the Cold War – about how it is best for men to live: the enemy has stated explicitly that it does not revere life at all. On the contrary, it is in love with self-inflicted death, which it sees as the highest moral achievement. Civilians are not collateral damage in this campaign: their deaths are the whole point. This is not even war in any comprehensible sense. Where are the demands, the negotiable limits, or the intelligible objectives? A bullet hole adjacent to the La Belle Equipe cafe in Paris. Photo: Andrew Meares It is not the modern world versus medievalism, or the secular enlightenment trying to deal with fundamentalist religion. It isn't anything that can be encompassed in the vocabulary of coherent, systematic thought in which we are now accustomed to describe the world. This is just insanity. Advertisement There is no point now arguing about the historical or theological roots, about correct or incorrect interpretations of the Koran or even the social role of Islamic leadership. When the lucid try to impose logic on behaviour that is pathological, they will be driven into a dead end – or waste time coming to blows among themselves on matters that are no longer relevant. What we are faced with is a virulent and highly contagious madness, a hysterical death cult which has, almost by accident, fallen on the fertile ground of global circumstances: chaos in the Middle East, confusion and lack of resolve in the West and the awakening of a ruthless, opportunistic power base in the East. Le Carillon in Paris on Saturday. Photo: Andrew Meares But there is no time any more for international recriminations or parochial introspection. The old enmities and suspicions – between the West and Russia, Turkey and the Kurds – are going to have to be put aside in the name of one unified, relentless effort to stamp out an epidemic of murderous lunacy. Civilians are not collateral damage in this campaign: their deaths are the whole point. This time there isn't even the "logic" of the Charlie Hebdo attacks whose pretext was the blasphemous depiction of the Prophet. Just the slaughter of random innocents, many of whom may have been Muslims themselves, carried out for the sheer nihilistic thrill of it. It is that thrill – the brief absolute power of anarchic terror – that is going to have to be forcibly suppressed with all the weapons at our disposal. Francois Holland declared that France would provide "a merciless response to [these] ISIL barbarians". But the question remains: how do you respond to unreason? All the things that make an enemy – however evil and malign – predictable, analysable, and intelligible are missing here. The actions make no sense in any terms that are within common understanding. The prospect of free, unchecked movement between EU countries was one of the great attractions of those thousands of people who arrived at the un-policed external borders. Once having set foot on European soil it is possible to move from one end of the Schengen zone to another, to become effectively untraceable, seeking out the most favourable circumstances in any country at any moment. It is an economic migrant's dream, which may be no bad thing, but it is also an open field for terrorists – a thought which obviously occurred to Hollande when, on Friday night, he closed the French borders, presumably indefinitely. The wire services are reporting as I write that a Syrian passport was found on the body of one of the terrorists. If this turns out to be true, it is going to raise fresh controversy about the EU policy on migration – even about the accommodation of Syrian refugees who had been considered one of the most unambiguously deserving categories of asylum-seekers in the current wave. France and its attitude towards Islam are already being analysed and dissected for all they are worth. Is it the willingness of the country to become involved in action in the regions claimed by Islamic State that has incited this terrible vindictiveness? Or the enforced secularism of the society in which such a large Muslim minority lives in alienation from national civic norms? Armed police guard the Bataclan Theatre after Friday's terrorist attack. Photo: Getty Images Was it the French military intervention in Libya, or the banning of the burka that was responsible for this havoc? Maybe none – or all – of the above. But none of this speculation is to the point. France has the honourable and consistent foreign policy that it has. It is a proudly secular republic which made the decision to separate civil life from religious observance several centuries ago for what it believed then – and believes now – to be historically sound reasons. And what is the alternative that is being demanded? Sharia law? The subjection of women? An end to liberal democracy? Are any of these things even within the bounds of consideration? What could be accomplished by national self-doubt or criticism at this point, when there is not even a reasonable basis for discussion with the enemy? If there is any need to argue about these matters, it should come at some other time. This debate cannot be conducted at the point of a gun held by a madman. Whatever the attitudes of France's authorities, whatever mistakes might have been made in the assimilation of North African or Middle Eastern minorities, the French people did not deserve this, just as Americans did not deserve 9/11. It is wicked and irresponsible to suggest otherwise. The indiscriminate mass murder of civilians must put an end to that. The sane people of the world – even when their ultimate objectives differ or conflict – will need to join together now to stamp out, by whatever means are necessary, a threat to all varieties of civilised life.

Give me a modern car any day over an old solid built like a brick outhouse older car.

i wonder if they have implemented water restrictions yet?

still a kickstarter project, a long way to go yet, others have promised the same and failed so far....

years ago when i had a turbo petrol subaru forester, the manual stated any fuel octane above 95, i usually ran it with 98. but one day, the independent servo up the road advertised that E10 was also 98 octane. on the usual 98 unleaded, i would get around 450Km to a tank, and plenty of power. but on the 98 E10, i was lucky to get 300Km from that tank, and at full throttle and boost pressures, the ECU would retard the timing and other controls to the point where it would no longer accelerate. felt like the more throttle you gave it, the more someone was ripping on the handbrake. i decided that the cost saving for using the E10 was no where near worth the loss of economy and power. either that, or i just happened to get a bad batch of E10, either way, never used is since in a petrol car. (also, im not a fan of mandating a food substance to make automotive fuels)

yeah mine was the last shape, only got it then as it was the last that was not required to have the Diesel particulate filter or use the ablue fluid. though im pretty sure the newer ones dont require it either, cant comment on the 2015 models though. it now has 110,000km in 3 years, and still averages 5.1L/100km over all those Km's and with 280Nm torque, just a little less than a V6 Commodore, makes it perform more than expected, especially on highways.. Last week i was at Cameron Corner, and watched as someone filled up his petrol V8 Landcruiser, towing a huge off road camper, that was an expensive fuel stop. as for modern hybrids, i cant understand why they dont use small diesle engines in place of petrol, especially when they are doing nothing but turning a generator to provide the car with electricity, eg, Holden Volt.. or even the Mitsubishi PHEV...

i am cringing at those numbers, thats why i love diesels, and especially cars, im driving it to hard if i get over 5.3L/100Km economy, a good Hwy run at 4.3L/100Km and im happy.

please introduce cyclist rego, i cant wait to cycle right down the middle of the road on my way to work..... i will be paying, so its my road as well... /end sarcasm even though i pay income tax, and rego on 2 cars already.... so technically, i will pay more tax towards the roads than motorists.... whoohooo! i am entitled to more road when on my pushbike! (dont forget, in NSW, road funding comes from consolidated revenue, so every taxpayer pays for the roads... regardless if they own a car or not)

so, not as entitled as a car driver doing 70 kph on a 100kph stretch of single lane highway?