Why doesn't the government...
Put the $400M it just earnt off the CSIRO's wireless patents back into the CSIRO?
1304 posts • joined 10 Apr 2012
Put the $400M it just earnt off the CSIRO's wireless patents back into the CSIRO?
"If I can bequeath my stack of CDs to a loved one upon death, which were only ever my right to listen to the content therein, then how does that differ from bequeathing my iTunes account (and the rights to listen to the media therein)?"
I can't bequeath my iTunes accounts and songs to my next of kin but I can bequeath my NAS drive full of pirated music and movies to them.
Damn lucky I don't have an iTunes account then isn't it?
"That's why people from Europe come to the US to pay our "outrageous prices" for the care they want."
Is that why Americans sneak over the border to sponge off Canada's universal healthcare system?
"Instead it was about making young, healthy people pay for the healthcare of older, unhealthy people."
Of course young health people pay for the healthcare of older unhealthy people. That's because young healthy people usually don't need a doctor as often and old people do.
In the end young people become old people and then they use the doctor.
Universal healthcare takes taxes from everyone and supplies a basic health system for everyone. You pay the taxes when your young and don't need it but it covers you when your old and you do. If you're unemployed or retired you will still be treated and don't have to die in the gutter.
Health insurance like to cover the young and healthy cause they don't need it so they make massive profits and then kick them to the curb when they get old and start eating into the profits.
The American system is entirely broken and all it takes for the fucktards who support it is some unemployment or scumbag insurance assessor cancelling their insurance when they need it to see just how wrong they were.
"Is Obama trying the same tactic on the Internet as he did with Obama Care?? "
I could never figure out what American's have against universal healthcare. Is it because it infringes on your democratic right to die in the gutter?
That said the moronic Australian government are trying to bring the same retarded healthcare system in here cause it works so well in #Merica
"(* apart from the carry piece and the back-up when considered prudent)"
The unregistered backup for when you accidently shoot some black kid and need a plant?
"The FBI - because when you put to much of the wrong substance in your body you wind up dead"
Like cheese burgers?
"Despite having a voting system that encourages the emergence of new parties"
What reality are you from cause it's not this one. Australia has a two party preferential voting system. It is designed to prevent new parties from ever replacing Labor/Liberals. New parties can start as much as they want but will always remain a minor party.
Despite personal thoughts about One Nation, it highlights everything that is wrong with the Australian system. When One Nation started, in some seats it had up to 48% of the primary vote in some seats but still lost. The two major parties can redirect their preferences to each other to kill off any serious contenders.
What we need is a graduated preferential system. My first place is worth one vote. Second place a half, third a quarter and so on. It would stop the major parties from controlling the outcome by preference stacking.
2 years is just the start. Next will be 5 years and then 10 years and then forever.
All it will take is a police office to dislike you and go fishing for something to charge you with. Currently they don't need a warrant but getting a warrant is a joke anyway. Just look at the AFP raids on the Muslim terrorists. 150 officers and 30 raids and all they got was one plastic sword.
Data retention will not make anyone one bit safer and will be just for screwing people's lives. Terrorists will be fine but remember that episode of Game Of Thrones you missed so you downloaded it to catch up...........
"you're not a real man until you've been fucked in the ass".
Does an ex wife using the family court count?
On behalf of Australia, I feel hurt to be left out. Better head to The Pirate Bay so we score better next year.....
"Poor bloody Martian bast*rds"
Only fair to invade them like they keep invading us in the movies...
I'd volunteer my ex except while her calorific expenditure is low it's because she does SFA.........
Still a total waste of time.
"You see your Honour, I caught this nasty bit of malware and some hacker stole the pictures of my ex and posted them skankyhos.com therefore I am completely innocent and a victim in this crime also"
"I've never been someone who is a scaremonger ..."
But peer pressure made me.......
"Surely a guy travelling alone with 3 external drives holding multiple terabytes of data (albeit they were by and large mirrors) constitutes something worth a look? Nope, not interested."
Were you wearing a turban?
I suspect racial profiling is alive and well and may have more to do with your situation.
"Shit like Customs being able to take your phone/laptop within 300 miles of the US border w/o any reason whatsoever makes me say "F*ck you, James. With a corn cob""
Australia has changed the laws to allow customs to search laptops/phones for porn. So now they can search any electronic device for whatever they like under the guise of looking for porn. If your device is password protected, you have to hand over the password. Not sure what happens if you tell them to bugger off.
How can you say you want a legal front door and full co-operation with tech companies when you're slurping all data with no legal grounds from said companies with and without their knowledge, then using secret courts to gag them afterwards should they find out?
Yes you can force them to co-operate and then force them to shut up about it afterwards so the only option is for them to make their systems secure against even themselves so they can't co-operate even if they wanted to.
The government has made this rod for their own backs.........
"The top 1% of earners in the UK pay 30% of all taxes. Please explain a) How that isn't fair, b) Just how much of the burden you think they should shoulder, and c) What is your plan b when they up sticks and relocate somewhere less hostile?"
Kerry Packer in the day blew $36M in a casino in one night but yet he paid less tax than me????
The ultra rich have such tax scams going such as the double Irish sandwich that they pay less tax than the average earner.
As for moving, they already do but the business they own remain and they should be taxed properly.
None of that makes sense.
Their name is in an accurate public record but they feel it's no longer relevant and such instead of getting the record removed, they go on a crusade to remove all links to the public record.
How F#$king retarded is that?
"but you can't get the pages taken down, that is the problem - well, some you probably could, like YouTube or a private blog, but official press is protected and public record can also not be removed. Therefore you have to make it harder to find "no longer relevant" information.
Also, using alternate search terms will still return the original article.
It stops the "poisoning" of personal search results with information, which could be derogatory, that is no longer relevant or is not in the public interest."
That doesn't make sense. You tell me that you have the right to be forgotten by everyone but the press and as such you need to target search engines to hide the truth?
Either what was said was true and too bad for you or it wasn't and so the page should be removed.
Talk about trying to shoot the messenger......
"Even if they are, time served is time served. If time is served and the conviction "spent" then the debt to society is paid and it is illegal for you to discriminate based on it. Illegal, as in, you would be committing a crime if you did so.
So a) why do you want this on record? and b) are you happy for the crime you commit in discriminating based upon it to also be permanently on record?"
The point is that getting Google to delete the references still doesn't delete the pages. The records still exist.
These people should focus on getting rid of the offending pages and leave the search engines alone.
If someone wants to be forgotten then all they need to do is get rid of the offending pages. If there is no content then the search engines will remove it the next round.
Getting the search engines to delete the reference is like removing a book from a library by taking the index card. The book is still there, just harder to find (until someone reindex it).
Pretty sure it was going before him. Will be going after him and is done by every single government in the world........
"By the way calling a deer, "Bambi" is a tactic in order to induce sympathy"
Not to me. Makes it sound more tasty........
Nude photos loaded into the cloud and privacy is a misnomer.
It's a whack a mole game. Hit a couple of sites and more sites pop up. Threatening to sue Google cause your crappy Apple account got hacked is kinda ironic......
"Nope, sorry, can't do it. It's just too easy."
Sticking one of them down your trousers, you deserve everything you get.....
The whole point of cheerleaders is to stare to the hot chicks. Might as well watch the toaster.......
Fishing has always been good down under......
If putting in an inferior system isn't going to be a cent cheaper then why push the inferior system?
The problem they create when they give exclusive deals to Murdoch to try and force people to sign up for his expensive crap cable tv network.
Piracy could be killed off overnight if the retards abandoned their antiquated distribution and licencing system and actually embraced technology
"Unfortunately, that's part of the power of copyright. If HBO feels Foxtel's deal rakes in more money than any potential loss of customers due to the bundling, that's for them to decide and no one else. The only way you can counter is to offer a sweeter deal, but you can still be outbid."
If you've taken piracy into consideration and still given exclusive rights to Murdoch then you can't bitch about piracy then can you?
"Make the sale when you're fresh in peoples' minds, not six months down the track when other distractions have come and gone."
I'd of walked out of the cinema and bought a copy of Guardians of the Galaxy straight after.
Maybe I should download a dodgy copy since I've already given them my money once already.....
People don't put out press releases that contradict everything they are trying to say therefore if it's a press release put out by big content providers at best it's cherry picked, at worse a total fabrication.
Choice on the other hand isn't a content provider and isn't a pirate so has no incentive to skew the results.
Content providers could kill piracy overnight if they wanted. Yes you can give the content away for free. Youtube doesn't charge. Free to air TV doesn't charge.
Imagine all content with the same ad breaks as TV streamed on demand. Free content, creators get paid and pirates cease to exist.
For an extra monthly fee ads are removed.
It's a total waste of time. Unless police are going to be allocated to try and trace the people posting the insults, wiping will just result in another being created and nothing will change.
What will change is legitimate arguments being shut down because someone gets their panties in a twist because someone mocked their religion or said dolphins tasted like tuna (which they do).
Nothing good will come from ill-conceived laws make by technophobic old men.
Cheetah isn't the right name for it. Fat pug with a bad back might seem closer........
I suspect you're right. Why would a woman keep going with Uber after being refused twelve times. Once yes. Twice maybe. Three times, you'd use someone else. Twelve times is a setup.
I think Steve would have hated it because it looks like a watch and not an Apple product. A Steve designed watch would have been sleeker and shinier and would scream Apple. No knob on the side and a longer, curved screen.
No point wearing a watch that looks like a watch. People need to wear an Apple watch and people need to know people are wearing Apple watches.
"One final point. People keep talking about aging copper, as if it's bad. If the copper really needs to be replaced, then it is either because it's due for normal maintenance work, or it wasn't maintained properly. I'll take that silence as an answer, shall I?"
The problem is that Telstra has to legally supply you with a phone line capable of phone calls. Broadband isn't covered and they are not going to replace anything that they aren't forced to.
"I don't agree with the first part. I believe that a combination of technologies can work for today's requirements. And yes, that will include FTTP. If you are saying that we must choose one and only one technology and that single infrastructure must work for everyone then yes, only FTTP/H will do. But, thankfully, there is no need to limit ourselves to a single technology."
The flaw in your argument is putting in infrastructure for a system that is already outdated and then having to rip it out and start again.
There is a use for wireless and a use for satellite both which was included in the original NBN plan. The only difference is the Libs have ripped out fibre to the home for fibre to the node which requires different infrastructure. At some point in the near future fibre will have to be run to the home which means every cent spent on fibre to the node is wasted.
The Vertigan report is a BS political spin report to hide the fact that fibre to the node is already outdated before they even try to start building it. Telling everyone that we'll only need 15mbs when the NBN's own sales figures show it to be utter rubbish, is just a Liberal lie to hide the fact that they cocked up.
Maybe your question would be better off as NBN for high end users or NBN for high end users that are less than 300M away from box.
High end users pay more for their service thus subsidising the low end users. It's exactly the same effort to install and exactly the same hardware.
At some point fibre needs to run to the house and personally I'd rather see it done once properly than spending almost as much on a second rate system that will need to be ripped out and done again properly not that far down the track.
" Theft is also commonly understood to mean "taking something that doesn't belong to you". A word can have more than one definition."
Taking is the magic word. Copyright infringement copies something that doesn't belong to you. It takes nothing.
ISP are just a service provider. Stupid draconian laws just means people will hide their actions better via a VPN or the TOR network and then the ISP will have no idea what people are doing.
End result is hidemyass.com makes more money and life goes on like before.
These laws are a total waste of time and money.
And if handsomely paid, Telstra would sell out their customers in a heatbeat......
A better question is how Australian law can be applied to a business that isn't in Australia?
Mind you I agree with the ACCC but it's the whole local law being applied to a foreign company.
Personally I don't care about the refund as I'm a cheapskate and the most I've paid on Steam is $16 and my time trying to get a refund is worth more than that.
I don't think so. In cities I suspect the drones will be land based but in rural areas, I can see routes established not over houses to deliver goods.
At least you'd have a better chance of receiving your good than relying on a courier (as they are a lazy useless pack of thieving bastards)
This is long term but twenty years from now I suspect it will be common.
Well he's a boy so could be after Astroboy?
When you log into your ISP, they store a couple of months worth of data. The government wants at least two years stored, preferably forever. They want this data to be accessible without a warrant.
There are no checks and balances. If some cop doesn't like you they can go fishing. Even more scary is Hollywood media companies fishing for visitors to the Pirate Bay so they can start a blackmail system for fines under the threat of prosecution.
Besides I bet they store far more than account holder names and ip addresses
"Untraceable? Whuh? The whole point of bitcoin is that it is traceable. By anybody. Publicly..."
So bitcoins are traceable? Well that's great news for the exchanges that got knocked off.....
Oh you mean the wallets are traceable but since they have no name on them, they're actually untraceable to anybody in the real world. As traceable as secret unlisted bank accounts.
Considered they can't even work out who invented them, I can't see it working.
Still leaves the tax department up the creek without a paddle.