Currently studying CS and some other stuff. Best known for previously being top 50 (OCE) in LoL, expert RoN modder, and creator of RoN:EE’s community patch (CBP).
(header photo by Brian Maffitt)
If you read the article, which part of the last-resort financial consequences do you deem insufficient to curb the “absorb the fines” business approach?
Supermarkets that fail to meet these requirements would open themselves to fines worth three times any benefit they derived from their misconduct.
Alternatively, the fine could be up to $10 million, or 10 per cent of the supermarket’s annual turnover if the benefit can’t be determined.
Those fines would need to be approved by a court, but consumer watchdog the ACCC could also issue up-front infringement notices worth up to $187,800 if they believe there has been a breach.
Are you not entertained?
Procrastination is a hell of a drug
I worry that if mass graves due to covid weren’t enough to jolt near-unanimous support for protective measures, little else will. Would of course love to be proven wrong :(
Well, lop-eared rabbit rather than lopping off heads, but sure, whatever floats your boat.
Cool idea, though I was surprised by the level of fidelity loss in the fountain example. I would’ve expected that to be a good case scenario for noise cancellation so maybe it just needs some more time to iterate and improve on its level of “false positive” removal.
The graph comparing unemployment assistance across countries was really surprising to me. It makes me want more information about what’s behind that. Do we have a smaller gap between median and average income than most of our peers (maybe from less ludicrous-income jobs in e.g., tech)? Is there a significant difference in attitude towards transfers here vs elsewhere? Is it a difference in economic beliefs (surely our economic situation wouldn’t be that different though right?)?
Like what justification / reason is there for being last there?
I’ve known for ages that the payments are low as compared to median wage, but had honestly never even considered the possibility that we might be dead last out of OECD countries on that metric, and also way under the average.
SO comments are already CC-BY licensed (granted not -NC licensed, but still), but it doesn’t seem to have helped much.
It’s normally negative, yeah, hence the “reverse review bombing” implying that they’re positive reviews.
I’m not sure it qualifies as “reverse review bombing” if the recent review +/- percentage matches the all-time percentage. There’s just more reviews because of the shutdown, the ratio of positive vs negative hasn’t meaningfully changed (97% positive overall, 97% positive recently).
My quote is not the only content of the video; I’ve just included most of the introduction. The 13:23 long video has the following chapter markers:
00:00 Introduction 00:50 How was DOOM originally described? 02:20 DOOM clones 04:33 Quake Killers 6:06 A hypothetical question 12:05 Conclusion
Only the first half of the video is accurately described by your suggested title. The video as a whole is described by the existing title with reasonable accuracy. It’s not a bait-and-switch: the video also discusses what genre DOOM is, not only what genre DOOM was.
It seems that you (and many others) have used a heuristic of “clickbait-y sounding titles don’t accurately describe the contents of videos” and left corresponding comments. Although often accurate, that heuristic has failed in this instance.
Then let’s transcribe part of the opening:
I know what you’re thinking – it’s a stupid question, it’s an FPS. It’s the definitive FPS. And it’s a fair point. DOOM ticks all the boxes required for a reasonable definition of a first person shooter. It’s presented from a first-person perspective, and shooting the bad guys is a key part of it. But the FPS genre didn’t exist when DOOM was released. The term “first person shooter” wasn’t common until a few years later.
So what genre was DOOM? How was it originally described?
Our courts have a limited jurisdiction and it is just a matter of fact that we can’t enforce our domestic laws outside out borders anymore than an autocracy can suppress foreign reporting of their human rights abuses as much as they may try.
Are you saying this in a “this is how it _should work” way, or in a “this is how it does work” way? Because in the Xitter vs eSafety deal right now, an Australian court has already issued a temporary order to a non-Australian company to block access to something for all visitors regardless of region (not just limited to Australian visitors).
We broadly have two fairly obvious sets of international agreements that can get material taken down through most of the world. The first is child abuse material and the second is IP infringement.
IP law (as I understand it) relies on existing, bilateral agreements - it’s not a unilateral takedown demand from one side because we already agreed beforehand that we’d all have some shared ground in that area. CSAM law I’m less familiar with, but I assume at the very least that relevant laws in most countries are similar enough that what’s illegal for an Australian entity to host would also be illegal for, say, a Canadian entity to host. Maybe there’s also bilateral agreements in place on top of that similar to IP law – again, I’m less familiar with that.
I’m not aware of a parallel for either of these two aspects for the current situation, so I don’t really agree with it being a strawman. I don’t want it to just be a “China bad” thing so instead of saying China / Iran, let’s think about it with friendlier countries. If Canada gets a new government with a small authoritarian streak and they demand a takedown of something from an Australian host using a Canadian law which has no parallel in Australia, isn’t that comparable to what’s going on right now? A country issuing a global takedown just to satisfy their own domestic laws, even when there’s no legal requirement for it within the host country?
I think we could have an argument that on the scale of stuff that should be censored to stuff that shouldn’t, protecting adult victims of violent crime seems like it should fall somewhere between child abuse and IP rights.
I agree with this (and the article) that there’s going to need to be some thinking about where we want our (Australian) laws to handle these situations, but I’m also pretty uncomfortable with global enforcement of domestic laws until we come to agreements with other countries about it (ala IP law). Why was a geo-block considered insufficient? It seems to be enough to satisfy IP law (e.g.) - why not here?
The article’s point is that there isn’t really a distinction between the two legally.
Careful saying something is free, the coffee’s gonna get OzBargain’d
If comparison against average monthly wage is your benchmark, it’s still proportionately cheaper in Australia with average monthly wage being $6,201.43 (i.e., >50% of $11,000, whereas the coffee price is <50% of $10.16).
Average wages here are also higher than the majority of the countries above us on the average-coffee-price chart.
That is indeed the very first criteria listed in the sidebar, despite you being showered in downvotes for saying it.
It does absolutely flood the feeds of some subscribed users when you post 40 (!!) things in one go to a single place. Would you be willing to consider either submitting in batches or spreading some submissions into more targeted communities? While I admire your dedication (and of course don’t speak for everyone about preferences), I find this amount of stuff from a single sub/comm/mag at once really undesirable because in the aftermath it temporarily turns most of my subscription feed into just that and not much else.
There is this
I don’t personally know much about it beyond that.