Yeah, best move for them (Labor Party). Sorry should have been clearer.
As for myself - I feel there are a lot of problems with the way censorship is handled in this country, and it's getting worse with the proposed internet filter etc.
The government is using the 'protect the children' line to outflank the Right and minimise electoral damage. Basically having their cake and eating it too.
If you read Brendan O'Conner's comments you'll see that the government is suggesting the purpose of the R18 rating for games is to 'protect teenagers' - and by pushing this line in the media they deny that ground to the conservatives. This way the government gets to implement a sensible policy which the majority of the electorate want, but at the same time they can sell it as 'protecting the children' to make it palatable to the more moderate social conservatives.
This was really the best move, although it's a shame they can't just be honest with the electorate and sell the policy on its own merits. I suspect it has been planned this way since their community consultation backfired so spectacularly. It was just a matter of timing, waiting for the SA attorney-general to leave.
I didn't suggest that clearance implies access. Nor that these 854000 all had access to the documents that have come out via WikiLeaks.
The point I was making:
With so many people involved in the security apparatus, it is inevitable that security breaches will happen. The more secrets and the more people involved, the higher the risk of breaches occurring.
Even if people are loyal and trustworthy 100% of the time, the complexity of such a large bureaucracy guarantees that mistakes will happen.
How is my reasoning 'completely bogus'?
While we're talking about the Washington Post:
Remember the saying 'two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead'?
How about 854 000? I'm sure they are all completely trustworthy huh.
Cameron, love the site, it's a great tool. I managed to have a look before it was nuked.
The AEC should have thought of this a long time ago!
Now all we need is some information on those dozens of independent candidates. Beyond their name. Google could only help me with a few of them.
I concur.
Now, let's talk about HTML5 and encumbered video codecs....
I also grew up in Queensland, and am back living here now. Sadly there is a lot of truth in the comment above.
Queensland used to be very progressive... in the 19th century. We had the world's first Labour government in 1899. And until 1910 the Queensland Education Act guaranteed a free and secular education for every child. Then it was amended, to remove the 'secular' references and include provisions for bible classes in government schools. It's been that way since.
It's depressing to think we've been going backwards for 100 years.
Not sure if this was a troll or not... but here you go anyway:
King prawn info from Sydney Fish Market
This is what is being cooked when Hoges says he will 'slip another shrimp on the barbie'
I disagree. Abbott already has a proven record of forcing it down people's throats.
Unfortunately Abbott is not on his own in this regard, I believe this may be something that Abbott and Rudd actually have in common.
For example, the ridiculous taxpayer-funded school chaplaincy program introduced under Howard, has been continued with additional funding under Rudd.
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/NationalSchoolChaplaincyProgram/Pages/home.aspx
I don't see how my taxes should be paying for someone to evangelise at what is meant to be a secular school. If they wanted a school counselling program with actual psychologists, I'd be all for that. And don't get me started on 'religious education' at secular schools...
Also while we're talking lobbies, I'll point out an alternative: http://australiansecularlobby.com/
I too, think it will suck. Dune was a great novel, but pretty dense in terms of details and plot even for a book. Trying to film it has not worked well so far - you just can't translate a book like that into a 2 hour movie.
I also thought the Lord of the Rings movies sucked too. After watching even just the first one, I hated hobbits - if I saw one walking down the street I'd want to punch it in the face. I say that as a fan of the books.
Taking this further - why does government have anything to do with religion at all?
Why are there tax breaks for religions?
How does that fit in to capitalism and open markets? e.g. the Sanitarium food company in Australia, owned by the Seventh Day Adventist church. Their advertisements on TV do not advertise the fact that they are owned by the church or operate as a charity (if you're a charity why not advertise the fact!), and while as a charitable company I'm sure most of the profits go back to the community, you can certainly argue that this is state-sponsored evangelism due to the tax breaks they receive.
Why does the state have anything to do with marriage - gay or hetero?
Rather than debate about whether the government should allow or ban gay marriages, I suggest the government get out of the marriage business altogether. Marriage is about belief systems, this is personal and different people have different views. It shouldn't be legislated any more than what pants I decide to wear or what music I like to listen to - or what church I choose to belong to (if any). The government and courts should have a minimal role regarding living arrangements and tax arrangements, but only to protect people financially in case of relationship breakdowns, or to resolve custody issues.
Apart from this let people decide who they want to live with, and when, and if they are a member of a church and want to get married that's between their church, their god, and themselves.
I've had a quick scan through the comments and couldn't find any jokes about the Toyota Matrix using its passengers as human batteries for environmentally-friendly power... or about how the automatic traction control system gained sentience and has now started a war against mankind... or about how this lady should've taken the blue pill instead if she just wanted to live her normal boring content life...
What is Slashdot coming to... I thought it was news for nerds?
"The Washington Times reports, 'The problems at the National Science Foundation (NSF) were so pervasive they swamped the agency's inspector general and forced the internal watchdog to cut back on its primary mission of investigating grant fraud and recovering misspent tax dollars.' One senior executive at the National Science Foundation spent at least 331 days looking at Slashdot on his government computer, records show. The cost to taxpayers: up to $58,000. Why aren't they running a product like Websense?"
I hate to think how much money Slashdot has cost us collectively, over the years.... not to mention all the 'psych problems'
As far as justifying use of full-volume encryption, I would guess that for 99% of people they are protecting data against accidental loss or theft of laptops and portable storage devices.
Corporate espionage etc is a whole other ballgame. Disk encryption can't protect against someone who is really determined to get their hands on your data, remember most users will divulge their passwords if you give them a chocolate bar... that's without resorting to rubber hoses
But disk encryption is useful and worthwhile if just to prevent PR disasters when an exec's laptop is left in a cab or at an airport.
Refreshed by a brief blackout, I got to my feet and went next door. -- Martin Amis, _Money_
