Selling anything related to 'Stephen Conroy' or even selling advertising for anything related to 'Stephen Conroy' would be enough to meet the commercial requirements. Further a new website would not be expected to be up a running immediately and auDA should have given them a chance to correct the issue.

You are wrong about the .com.au domain name needs to have a registered business/trading name related to the domain. The auDA allows monetised website with ads related to the name and this does not need to be your business name. Please so many people are stating misinformation on this issue could someone flag them all as misinformation.

The auDA support squatting but with the limitation that the name can not be sold for 6 months - you just have to put some advertising related to the name on the website to qualify as a monetised website under the auDA policy.

There is no requirement that a .com.au domain name is related to the company name, it just has to be related to their business activity and placing some ads on the website related to the name is enough!

Wrong, simply selling something related to the domain name is enough, such as ads. Things have changed over the paster few years.

You are wrong about the commercial requirements. These are very minimal. Just placing some ads on their website selling Steve dolls or Steve posters etc would be enough to meet the auDA monetised website requirements.

There are only very minimal requirements which are very easy to meet such as placing a few ads on the sited related to the name which would qualify the site as a commercial monetised website - you can't resell the site for 6 months, but this is not a real barrier. Yes, this is not what most people would expect, but this is how auDA have managed the .com.au domain space, which is now full of parked domain names.

Inkjets have higher resolution than dyesub printers. I explored dye sub printers but returned to Epson inkjet printers for high quality prints. Some people will argue that the wide range of ink levels that a dye sub can place on the paper will make up for the low resolution (typically 300dpi), however the dye sub ink also spreads and the heating element has a slow response so you don't even get 300dpi. A Epson Inkjet can place dots a 5760dpi so it can reproduce high resolution detail; the ink dots need to be dithered to produce shades, but the dithered pattern can still be placed at 5760 dpi compared to a dye sub can only place a pattern at 300 dpi. Another way to look at it is that a dye sub can place a fuzzy pattern on a 300 dpi grid, but an Epson Inkjet can place a fuzzy pattern at 5760 dpi and this does make a big difference. Inkjet printers also have a wider range of inks so product a much better color gamut. For example: if you combine the CMY on dye sub you get a dark brown. An Inkjey printer typically has a black ink for better blacks. Inkjet printers are a good option, and dye sub and laser printer do not appears to be replacing their quality any time soon.

There are lenticular displays that do not require glasses however they have some disadvantages and can not deliver the same image quality as solutions using glasses.

A larger horizontal translation is needed than can be achieved with a single standard lens. A slight displacement is not enough except for some macro photography. This is even more so for lenticular 3D monitors - the viewer is only seeing a fraction of the total available displacement so the recorded displacement must be at least many times the human eye separation.