As someone who has read the Bill and the requirements under Section 187AA and as someone who is familiar with the billing systems that ISP use I can tell you that this is not true. The items under the section also record the duration and other parts of the communications that weren't previously recorded.

ISP's billing systems were only concerned if your account was financial, not the specifics of what the account was doing.

and I wrote to the politicians as well, bad day for Australia.

as a "a genetically engineered Kaiju that eats Plutonium and shits out crude oil" - for sure

Who knows our civilisation may be at its peak right now and we will never reach these technological heights again. For all we know our selfishness will drive humanity back to nomads with some crazy old man poking a stick in a fire saying 'We used to have great machines that could fly'. Not what I want, but just as likely.

Absolutely. Here is a link to the peer reviewed science that details net energy return after factoring input costs.

Have a great day!

People that hide behind the freedom of anonymous speech I fight for to criticize me, offend me. Go an write a letter to your duly elected representative you are wasting your time here.

Did anyone using this service expect anything less? The data created by the company is another product that can be consumed.

I used to love being a free person, now I'm a data product to be bought and sold, much like a slave.

What benchmark made you conclude that HFS+ is faster than NTFS when using big block sizes ?

None, NTFS is a crap filesystem. I was just pointing out the comparison there is wasteful vs sluggish.

Does anybody still use reiserfs and what makes it "enterprise grade" ?

It's the fastest filesystem I've tested vs ext(s), xfs, and a few others. I had to do a lot of throughput testing on different filesystems so I wrote a battery of tests that helped me figure it out years ago.

Windozes server 2012 uses some of the principles from reiserfs, I don't know if that counts and I can't speak to who users reiserfs commercially but I use it whenever I need something fast and reliable.

The guy may be a killer but he knows how to write a filesystem and I doubt the US military has given up on their investment in it.

Mac OS X still depends on old mac system 6/7 filesystem functionality like resource forks, these are not that easy to "retrofit" in ufs/zfs.

Interesting - I didn't know that - but still sucks for mac users.

A lot of the IO schedulers are implemented mainly to have some IO fairness because mechanical hard drives are very easy to saturate.

and also to make it look like all the processes running behave smoothly - if you have a dedicated application though your still s.o.o.l on a mac

These aren't that useful anymore when you can push 500.000 IOPS to a set of SSD's. And don't diss the FreeBSD storage subsystem: ufs allows for consistent backups without having to use volume management and creating a snapshot beforehand (LVM2+ext4).

Now way would I dis FreeBSD - I'm might be a linux guy but I still think BSD is a solid offering - and good on them for having apple use their work - they deserve more credit. Though ext4 suffers its own issues if you need to have big directory structures.

I'll stick with my guns here though, any limitations on linux disk performance is a function of how well the controller drivers implement the hardware functionality. Configurable I/O, CPU scheduling, software and hardware raid coupled with filesystem choice make Linux reign supreme in terms of achievable I/O performance.

Nah, I neglected to consider the on board controller quality of laptops - Apple have usually been pretty good in that regard - filesystems though - blech. It might be interesting to do a comparison with linux on a T series lenovo - which is a similar build quality an a mac but in reality mine was an observation about filesystem performance over hardware.

Even more interesting would be a comparison of similar macs with one hosting linux, but even that would just be limited by how well linux supports the apple controller under linux.

I have done extensive testing of filesystem throughput though, however those have been on higher end kit than laptops.

Well, I'm a linux guy too, but to be fair to the windows folk HFS+ only achieves that performance by using a 16kb block size, not by having a performance filesystem and thus was very wasteful with disk space - especially when you consider how many small files exist on an fs.

No the disk performance crown still resides with Linux users that have access to enterprise grade filesystems like murderFS, ahem I mean reiserfs, xfs and other performance kings of that ilk.

I'm sure that there are macOS users out there who know how to retrofit such a filesystem into their BSD kernels, but that is hardly a stock MAC, it's BSD functionality. Even then I'm not sure if BSD supports configurable IO and CPU schedulers or a pre-emptable kernel - not that 99% of mac users would even understand why that is important.

Ok, so what has been done by these organizations to protect the contamination of the ecosystem's genome from GMOs. I'm kind of on the fence about GMOs however it seems to me there is as much ground to be cautious about deploying them when they can introduce species extinction by interfering with the germination of seeds.

It seems to me that whilst there are great benefits there are also great risks, especially when there is an abundance of food and the real issue is attempting to manipulate commodity prices through the practice of grain dumping at sea.

If we need more food, wouldn't it be more logical to end grain dumping and improve food distribution than to grow more food that will just be dumped at sea anyway? Maybe we should be trying to understand the genome better before we go modifying it in the ecosystem.