Putting 2 and 2 together requires more mathematical capability than is presently on display in Australian politics.

It is presently illegal under Federal, State, and Territory laws to do most of the things needed to build and operate a nuclear power plant, fuel a plant, or dispose of its waste: a building permit for such a thing is a non-starter here. For shits and giggles, let's posit the appearance of magical SMR unicorns and native nuclear capability in the requisite timeline, no opposition to compulsory acquisition of the sites, and grant survival as a government long enough to achieve this given the legislative hurdles and State opposition. Even then, none of the proposed locations is slated to have more than one reactor and none are close enough to requisite massive data transmission infrastructure to qualify as suitable locations.

Last time I moved it was paperwork submitted through the gaining superannuation fund that, behind the scenes, triggered a transfer of the balance from the losing fund (i.e. the money does not pass through the customer). So, the process was not dependent on the user web interface of the losing fund although the customer may not have had a good idea of the precise balance. I am sure though, like for banks, the super funds have law and conditions they can invoke to prevent or moderate a run on transfers. I do agree that losing a pretty UI is not reason enough to cut your investment nose off to spite your face. If Unisuper is performing then stay.

I live for my weekly story of yet another new "feature" as useful as a chocolate teapot.

What universe do you live in where your wifi has 20-30ms of latency? I get grumpy when my wifi can't consistently stay under 2ms.

I have been dealing with A-SMGCS data streams from "big boy" systems for the past few months. Identifying everything moving in an airport precinct is a difficult problem. You have radars with all their weaknesses, active transponders with their weaknesses, numerous other potential sensors, a range of motions from stopped to ~200 knots on the ground and in the air, large numbers of obstructions (buildings, other aircraft, terrain, other transmissions...) that reduce raw data quality, human inputs (e.g. notification that an aircraft has been cleared to push back), disagreements about "facts" like what constitutes "airborne" or "landed", unavoidable measurement errors, ... and you have to synthesise a single, cohesive picture that is fit for its purposes (the one's you designed for and the others that have crept in). Above all, the system must improve safety. It cannot fail (usually at all) and certainly not in a way the causes safety issues.

They've been starved because they pay garbage rates in comparison to the tech sector itself.

There's a disconnect - tech pays well in the tech sector, especially as you move into the big tech space... those rates reflect the value that those people contribute to those industries. If you want tech outside the tech sector, you look at the value they provide and you probably don't realize (or more practically, can't quantify) the multiplicative effect they have on your entire business, so you pay them like you'd pay a leading warehouse worker, or an experienced accountant, and you wonder why you don't get even medium tier talent.

The problem is tech pays 2-5x those rates in businesses that properly understand and will leverage those skills appropriately. Hence, all those other businesses just end up outsourcing to third parties.

In gods name can you paste your work into chatgpt? You know that shit is logged, right?

Ever read an S1 filing? They list everything from solar flares to nuclear war as risks. The list of risks in an S1 is stuffed, somewhat intentionally, with everything they can possibly think of in the case that it happens. Public companies are sued, constantly, for general day to day operations because some investor somewhere will scream you didn't tell me that the collapse of society will negatively affect my investment.

I'm not saying any of these things are good nor bad, really - but pointing to someone's comments in the risks section of an S1 filing and saying LOOK AT THIS RISK THEY CALLED OUT is a bit like being aghast that the weather forecast isn't always accurate, and the weather guy warned you.

You start by describing a sociopathic pursuit of [X] at the expense of all else as something to be admired, and end with a thinly veiled racist comment about "Protestant work culture" being equated with being white. Google may be stagnating, but you're trying to say the problem is "the people I already hate clearly are the problem at Google", which I don't think has a basis. The article did a great job of analysis on the issue and presented a clear set of thoughts. You .. well, you didn't do that.

I'm not ever sure where to start with this, but the simple reality is that we don't need to work like we did 200 years ago. The entire point of technological and social progress is to make life easier. If working 20 hours a day is required to make twitter work, maybe twitter shouldn't work. It's clearly not surviving the free market in that case.

This almost entirely depends on where you live. That would be a comfortable retirement outside of major population centers - but not in them. The "safe" rule, where investing in a moderate ETF strategy is your primary holding, is 2.7% withdraw rate per year - see https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

At 2.7% of $2M, you're looking at just $54k per year. How many places in the US could that cover? Granted your transportation and housing costs are low, but they aren't zero, and you're still paying taxes. You could do it, but you certainly wouldn't be traveling much or enjoying your success much either. Personally, I'd want probably 2-3 times that number, so I could have a reasonable level of travel/fun/etc.

Except it's far dumber than that. On the face of it, everyone knows is MORE important to fact-check politicians.

The problem is, if your company is a trillion-dollar enterprise, constantly fact-checking and calling out lies of politicians, those same politicians will come after you for blood if they win, and they can break up or end your company.

The choice to stop fact-checking politicians is political. And so goes democracy.

And the entire job of someone in a leadership role on cybersecurity is to understand where to draw those lines. The judgement call that is required does NOT fall to other executives; this is the entire point of having the role in the first place. Hard choices about these things need to be made by people who understand the risks, both legal and reputational.

I'd argue that half the staff having UNAUDITED access to production is absolutely criminal negligence. It's the most basic, fundamental first step of any security framework. If you have a good and reliable control, auditing, review, and response system for production access, you can give every employee access to prod. Having unaudited access to production in this decade, for anyone, is negligence for a company beyond an early startup - especially a public company.

Actually, companies absolutely can and should be punished for their actions, as well as executives. Neither of these things happens enough.

In the case of a CISO, I would want in writing legal coverage should any criminal charges arise specifically from my employment. If I say "you have a legal requirement to do X", and the CEO says "oh yeah lets make sure we do X", then refuses to actually DO IT... it's not my fault.

I haven't been a CISO directly, but I've been in the situation where lip-service is paid to security and compliance considerations, but that's it.

And don't suggest that they're equivalent. One is immoral, designed to get you to quit without justifiable reason by making your life a living hell. The other is applying reasonable boundaries in your day to day life.

I hate the term "quiet quitting". I worked my ass off, outside of work, being available 24/7 and working crazy hours in my 20s and early 30s. At a certain point, after some serious problems with stress and personal life imbalances, I realized my hyper-focus on work was not only unhealthy for me, it was unhealthy for my career because I cared too much about work.

I "quiet quit" in my early/mid 30s and my happiness skyrocketed, my job performance improved, my career progressed and my income went way up. And I react outside of work hours only to emergencies, as it should be.

And this is the problem, right here. Somehow choice of drivetrain in your car is a political issue. Identity politics at it's absolute worst.

Well, I suppose the COVID-19 response and vaccine was at it's worst. Few hundred thousand extra dead people because fuck the left.