Slashdot Mirror

Sorry but I suspect the endgame is presented in this http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/04/2809856.htm
quote:
Outside court, Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft executive director Neil Gane said he was disappointed with the decision. He said the case was lodged to try to protect the livelihoods of the thousands of Australians who work in the television and film industries. Mr Gane said he was confident that the Federal Government would now review the laws surrounding copyright infringement.

as the saying goes, who needs judges and courts when you can afford politicians.

during an election period,

You do know that the election period ends when the polls close (which happens to be 6PM ACDST 20/3/2010 in this scenario). Emphasis yours indeed.

cf: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/03/2808495.htm "South Australia's Attorney-General Michael Atkinson admits he misjudged public opinion on the state's attempt to curb political comment on the internet. Mr Atkinson says he will repeal a law which would have meant that anyone posting comment or blogs during an election period would have had to give their real name and postcode."

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1531634&cid=30974502

This article (happened in Australia - linked related articles contain more information):

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/16/2773868.htm [abc.net.au]

describes a problem with a Ford Territory getting stuck with the cruise control actively trying to keep the vehicle at 100km/hr.

A couple of things to answer the 'this guy was idiot, I'm so clever it wouldn't have happened to me' crowd:

1. He couldn't turn off the ignition as the car won't let you do that if the car is moving.

2. He couldn't shift to neutral because the car wouldn't let him push the shift release button. (It was an automatic, so no clutch pedal.)

3. Pushing the brake wasn't helping enough to stop the car. (In the end it worked, but he had to jump on it with both feet all his adrenaline fuelled strength while pulling as hard as he could on the handbrake.)

4. The accelerator pedal only worked to speed him up, It wasn't a pedal 'sticking to the mat' issue, as the car was holding itself exactly to the speed of the cruise control.

5. The car was going too fast to just ram into a barrier or tree, etc.

6. The guy called Ford Australia (on his mobile phone), who couldn't help him and put him on hold. So then he called the police who, to their credit, cleared the road ahead and kept him calm enough to eventually get the car to stop. The total ordeal lasted 50 minutes.

7. The recording of the police call was released and played on the news and it was pretty obvious that both the guy and the police were doing everything to get the car to stop. This was not a situation where a quick two second phone call to a know-it-all Slashdotter would have solved the problem.

Anyway, I can't believe this news didn't make Slashdot when it happened a couple of months ago, as it contains considerably more information than the usual fare on this topic.

This article (happened in Australia - linked related articles contain more information): http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/16/2773868.htm

describes a problem with a Ford Territory getting stuck with the cruise control actively trying to keep the vehicle at 100km/hr.

A couple of things to answer the 'this guy was idiot, I'm so clever it wouldn't have happened to me' crowd:

1. He couldn't turn off the ignition as the car won't let you do that if the car is moving.

2. He couldn't shift to neutral because the car wouldn't let him push the shift release button. (It was an automatic, so no clutch pedal.)

3. Pushing the brake wasn't helping enough to stop the car. (In the end it worked, but he had to jump on it with both feet all his adrenaline fuelled strength while pulling as hard as he could on the handbrake.)

4. The accelerator pedal only worked to speed him up, It wasn't a pedal 'sticking to the mat' issue, as the car was holding itself exactly to the speed of the cruise control.

5. The car was going too fast to just ram into a barrier or tree, etc.

6. The guy called Ford Australia (on his mobile phone), who couldn't help him and put him on hold. So then he called the police who, to their credit, cleared the road ahead and kept him calm enough to eventually get the car to stop. The total ordeal lasted 50 minutes.

7. The recording of the police call was released and played on the news and it was pretty obvious that both the guy and the police were doing everything to get the car to stop. This was not a situation where a quick two second phone call to a know-it-all Slashdotter would have solved the problem.

Anyway, I can't believe this news didn't make Slashdot when it happened a couple of months ago, as it contains considerably more information than the usual fare on this topic.

Ever wondered what the wifi patent suit by the Australian CSIRO against a bunch of American megacorps covered? It was the algorithms and technology to solve just the problem you've just mentioned (in the RF band). The engineers were Radio Telescope scientists, see the story and transcript at http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2708730.htm

I'm not sure how far into the US system they are but this documentary might give you some idea.

Controls like this are not really a new thing. Encryption techniques used to be considered a munition by most western countries and their export was strictly controlled after WW2. Products such as PGP made a mockery of those laws since the code could be changed from illegal to legal by editing a single #define. The response from governments appears to have been to drop the laws controlling the export specific technology and replace them with laws controlling all exports to specific groups/nations.

The US is very serious about those laws as was demonstrated when two charity workers were jailed for 65yrs for sending money to palestinians via Hamas despite the fact that prosecuters did not accuse them of directly funding terrorist activities.

I'm an athiest who reads a Catholic priests blog, listens to their podcast and their nationally syndicated talk show. He's been doing these for years. He even played around in Second Life for a while. Amazingly, he hasn't imploded yet due to spinning out of control.

Sure, the Vatican has an internal library they don't let just anyone into, and they respect the privacy of their parishoners who come to confession. Well good for them. You are imagining a vast conspiracy of secrecy where there is none.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/23/2799553.htm

Two unnamed US officials say 47 Guantanamo Bay detainees will be held in prison indefinitely, without charge.

They are reportedly too dangerous to be released, but cannot be tried either because the evidence against them is too flimsy or was extracted by coercion.

The outcome will dismay civil liberties groups who hoped US President Barack Obama would end the practice of detention without trial.

"The reality is that although they're talking about holding these 47 prisoners without charge or trial, the sad reality is they've been held for eight years without charge or trial," he said.

"So it's not as if they're going to be entering into any new arena, there's no new discussion or dialogue. The whole talk about the change has come to America was simply a lie."

The Presidential taskforce has recommended 35 of the 196 detainees left at Guantanamo Bay face prosecution.

I notice a few people commenting on using fresh water. Well according to CSIRO (Australia) you can happily use salt water There is even a prototype plant that has been commissioned to look at making this more cost effective.

For those not familiar, the show basically has random people that have invented something come and show it to a panel, and they decide on a winner each week. It's pretty cool, you get anything from automatic sheep tilters(yes, that) to stuff that automatically re-sheaths pneumatic hoses. Riveting stuff :) .

Thanks for the tip...looks like an interesting show, and unlike hulu, it's available to out of country viewers!!

Going for broke:
Sheep tilter:Featherbee Shearer's Trolley
Helicopter:Co-axial Rotor Helicopter

Did I get the correct videos you referenced in your comment?

For those not familiar, the show basically has random people that have invented something come and show it to a panel, and they decide on a winner each week. It's pretty cool, you get anything from automatic sheep tilters(yes, that) to stuff that automatically re-sheaths pneumatic hoses. Riveting stuff :) .

Thanks for the tip...looks like an interesting show, and unlike hulu, it's available to out of country viewers!!

Going for broke:
Sheep tilter:Featherbee Shearer's Trolley
Helicopter:Co-axial Rotor Helicopter

Did I get the correct videos you referenced in your comment?

For those not familiar, the show basically has random people that have invented something come and show it to a panel, and they decide on a winner each week. It's pretty cool, you get anything from automatic sheep tilters(yes, that) to stuff that automatically re-sheaths pneumatic hoses. Riveting stuff :) .

Thanks for the tip...looks like an interesting show, and unlike hulu, it's available to out of country viewers!!

Going for broke:
Sheep tilter:Featherbee Shearer's Trolley
Helicopter:Co-axial Rotor Helicopter

Did I get the correct videos you referenced in your comment?

The Australian Government issued warnings about IE today as well:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/19/2795684.htm

There are apparently recent medical journal articles about liver problems from HFCS over and above the usual problems from obesity. I'm no doctor so all I can do is point out a link to an interview with Dr Robert Lustig (Professor of Pediatric Endocrinology - University of California)that explains what the situation appears to be:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2007/1969924.htm#
Sometimes it's better to get an adult point of view instead of press releases crafted by public relations companies.
Of course your point about eating too much is the main thing, but eating too much of some things is worse than eating too much of others.

This is the whole problem, of course - the more sites go paywalled, the more incentive there is for the others to stay free.

The problem with that is that all sites have to become paywalled. If one site remains free they will see the majority of the traffic. In fact the more sites that become paywalled, the more incentive there is in remaining free as you will inveitably get a greater share of the audience.

Paywalled sites compete for the same dollar, the reader only has X dollars to spend, if all sites become paywalled this dollar either has to be stretched across multiple paywalls or denied to certain paywalls. The more paywalls there are the less likely they will make money. However with advertising this scarcity doesn't exist, at least not directly. One can view ad's on multiple sites with no cost.

But the paywall regime will never happen. The BBC and ABC have a guaranteed source of funding and a mandate that prevents them from paywalling. So if NewsCorp, PBL and Fairfax all decided to paywall at once the ABC will just get more readers. Not to mention that Australia's 3 biggest publishers all deciding to erect paywalls at once sounds like collusion and the ACCC would have a field day with that one.

...and there have been plenty of dangerous foods generated without GM. Of current interest are A1/A2 gene variants in dairy cows... the A1 milk is possibly linked to type 1 diabetes, heart disease and other illnesses : http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2008/2260411.htm . There are also potatoes produced from breeding programs which are too poisonous for human consumption, although this is expected because potatoes naturally contain glycoalkaloids. There is also evidence that ever sweeter fruit varieties (particularly in the form of fruit juice) are contributing to health problems due to fructose overload : http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2007/2104024.htm. What happens in the GMO world with the hugely increased recruitment of new varieties? It's just as easy, perhaps easier for a GM crop to have subtle but serious problems, and there's a whiff of corruption when Monsanto and our food regulators talk. Can we no longer place as much trust in brands such as "corn", "orange", "oats", "apple", "grape" etc?

...and there have been plenty of dangerous foods generated without GM. Of current interest are A1/A2 gene variants in dairy cows... the A1 milk is possibly linked to type 1 diabetes, heart disease and other illnesses : http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2008/2260411.htm . There are also potatoes produced from breeding programs which are too poisonous for human consumption, although this is expected because potatoes naturally contain glycoalkaloids. There is also evidence that ever sweeter fruit varieties (particularly in the form of fruit juice) are contributing to health problems due to fructose overload : http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2007/2104024.htm. What happens in the GMO world with the hugely increased recruitment of new varieties? It's just as easy, perhaps easier for a GM crop to have subtle but serious problems, and there's a whiff of corruption when Monsanto and our food regulators talk. Can we no longer place as much trust in brands such as "corn", "orange", "oats", "apple", "grape" etc?

Hmm, still two and a half hours to go for Wednesday here... where are you, the Cook Islands? Not the best place to be when a large object splashes into the ocean...

Let me state up front that for many, many reasons I think society is better of heading towards New Urbanism... both for sociological, psychological, resource efficiency and energy efficiency reasons. We could be happier, healthier, live in cleaner cities and maybe even work less hours and yet still have the same, if not better levels of comfort.

However, it seems the 2 main problems with EV's have been solved. Those 2 problems were:
1. No one wants to buy an expensive new battery every few years as the car battery runs down. (Although battery life technology increases all the time).
2. No one wants to have to stop and charge for 8 hours on the occasions they need to drive more than 160km.

This is solved with the "Better Place" battery swap system! The irony here is I actually think a "Better Place" is a car-free, or extremely "car-disciplined" town plan like New Urbanism is a much better place to live.

Better Place have developed a new international EV car standard and are inviting all car companies to join up or be left behind. Renault-Nissan have already joined up, and will be producing the first cheap mass produced electric car ever.

They sell you the car, but they own the battery.

Then for most suburban driving you'll just charge whenever the car is still. (Which works out on average about 22 hours a day!) You'll charge at home, at work, at the shops. (Better Place installs EV charge points everywhere when they "do" a city).

The CEO Shai Agassi gave a presentation at his TED talk.
Shai Agassi's bold plan for electric cars, Video on TED.com

Better Place is coming to taxis in Tokyo, a trial in Canberra, San Francisco, massive deployment in Israel (which will probably be the first country off oil for domestic car use), Hawaii, Denmark, and other places.

Shai's Australian talk basically said that on a per km basis, electricity will charge your car at about $0.80 cents a litre oil equivalent distance. Fuel in Australia costs around $1.20 to $1.30 a litre. Imagine how fast people are going to want these cars when they realise how convenient and cheap they are now, let alone when peak oil hits.

However.... there are a whole bunch of other peaks coming, including peaks in various rare earths and metals used in car production, which is why I prefer the lower embodied energy solutions of New Urbanism and walkable cities.

Even the Australian Senate found for "more walkable" cities... and yet realised this could be difficult.

"Increasing walking, cycling and public transport use in cities is a worthwhile goal for a number of reasons, regardless of predictions about the oil future. If there is a long term rise in the price of oil, it will be all the more necessary."

However we should not underestimate the difficulties involved. Vast areas of post World War 2 suburbia have been designed on the assumption that most travel would be by car, and with the aim of making this easier. The effect has been to make travel in any other way more difficult, as activity centres disperse to sites distant from the public transport network, and the environment for pedestrians and cyclists is degraded by traffic. In these areas existing public transport routes do not serve many travel needs, and existing services mostly function as welfare for people without cars, with a very low proportion of total trips (less than 5%)."

Chapter 5:21-22

My favourite piece ever to explore how quickly we could retrofit suburbia around walking distance plans is Worldchanging: My Other Car is a Bri

In a 1988 or 1989 edition of Astronomy Now (an english astronomy magazine), there was a very interesting article detailing Australian meteor craters.
In this article, there were about 30 craters listed, along with pictures and descriptions of the area, with the best-guess ages of the craters. Along with the radio-isotope dating, if there was a local name for the area that implies a large amount of sky-based fire in an area without volcanic activity, and without the vegetation to have a large bushfire.
A great examle of this is the Henbury Craters complex (NT, 24 34'S, 133 10'E) which is a collection of 14 craters, about 130 kilometres south of Alice Springs. They are scattered over an area of about one square kilometre. The craters range from 10 metres to about 73 metres across. The Aboriginal name for these craters is ''chindu chinna waru chingi yabu'' which roughly means ''sun walk fire devil rock''
text quoted from http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/trek/4wd/Over11.htm

Typical! I read the fine article, and it looks as though the article already has this listed.....

A very recent podcast with transcript (3. Jan 2010) called Aboriginal Astronomy from Radio Australia was about this topic, referring to this book Emu Dreaming by Ray Norris

A very recent podcast with transcript (3. Jan 2010) called Aboriginal Astronomy from Radio Australia was about this topic, referring to this book Emu Dreaming by Ray Norris

A very recent podcast with transcript (3. Jan 2010) called Aboriginal Astronomy from Radio Australia was about this topic, referring to this book Emu Dreaming by Ray Norris

A very recent podcast with transcript (3. Jan 2010) called Aboriginal Astronomy from Radio Australia was about this topic, referring to this book Emu Dreaming by Ray Norris

"If you are willing to run an experiment enough times, you will eventually get data to support your assertions."

Yes, I belive Edison tried over 5000 different hand made bulb/filiment combinations before he found one that supported his assertion.

Thowing out data is not about proving pet theories, it's about admitting you cocked up the experiment. eg: Prof Sumner Miller never edited out failed demonstrations from his TV show, nor did he claim the failed demo proved accepted theories of physics were wrong, rather he would simply exclaim - "Experiments never fail, it is I who have failed to set the right conditions for nature to cooperate" and then try again.

But if you want to parody/criticize, you need to know what battles to fight.

This editorial by Josh Melman makes some very interesting points about effectively wielding political power:

These groups have been - and continue to be - ineffective because, unlike those who favour the filter, they don't understand what it takes to achieve political change.

and

...introducing the internet filter would have almost no electoral consequences for the Government, save the possibility of losing inner-city Sydney and Melbourne seats to the Greens.

But not introducing the filter would upset one of the best organised and most influential political groups in the country.

Liberal MP Alex Hawke, a campaigner for Christian values who opposes the filter, believes the legislation is the result of a backroom deal between Senator Conroy and the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL).

The ACL is a seriously hefty lobby group, and the Government owes it favours. According to its website, the ACL counts among its victories "[turning] the tide on issues such as euthanasia" and " [alerting] parliamentarians on industry plans to introduce R-rated hand held computer games".

The ACL has also "positively influenced the debate on homosexual adoption in the ACT and Tasmania" and lobbied local councils on issues such as "the placement of brothels [and] offensive advertising".

Within Parliament, the ACL tells us there are "large numbers of Christian politicians at all levels of Government who value your prayers and support".

You could count on one hand the number of politicians whose knowledge of technology extends further than using a BlackBerry to Tweet during Question Time.

As a result, it is not enough to demonstrate that a large number of people, even the majority of people, think the filter is a bad idea. Defeating the filter means convincing Labor that it will have electoral consequences worse than pissing off the Christian lobby.

Filter opponents appear to believe Twitter, online petitions, protests and letter-writing campaigns will be enough.

However, 10,000 people blacking out their avatars, retweeting blog posts and furiously agreeing with each other on Twitter merely adds to the cacophony of the echo chamber; it has no effect in the real world.

The closed circle of the Australian Twitterati and their friends in the technology and political media might well believe everyone is against the internet filter since everyone they know is talking about it.

But in the mainstream media, the filter was a lower-order news item on the day it was announced and has since almost disappeared.

It all sounds very familiar... I suggest that if you don't understand this or feel it is unfair, go read The Power Broker by Robert Caro...

It all goes back to this group who got behind the left and right of Australian politics and positioned their people over many years.
http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1358912.htm
Note the part about "lesbians .. should be burnt at the stake along with all the other witches. " and "implored Christians to pray to bring down Satan's strongholds including bottleshops, brothels and Buddhist Temples. "
They now have key people on both sides and are showing their lust for many new powers.

Depends who you talk to.

I have noticed in recent times that there are a lot of TV shows picking up stories from /. - so much so that it seems really obvious. To me /. is my main source of useful news which I supplement with the (hard to find) quality journalism of Lateline - who don't seem to source stories from slashdot.

I wonder how long it is before many news sources get more news from /.

Congratulations.

Over here in sleepy old Adelaide, South Australia, our Westfield guards have been known to cause deaths Security guard charged over elderly man's death. Walking into a mall with your bike helmet accidentally left on will quickly atttract a number of tall, angry men.
A mask would be asking for way more trouble than it would be worth, as it'd be taken as practically a declaration of intent to cause trouble.

Before you all start pissing on Oz, saying we're all children, can't think for ourselves, etc.. oh, too late, fancy that. All I can say is, coming from 10 years of having your (US) gov't lie to your face and take you to war, those comments are a bit rich. This is just a computer game. When was your last "armed revolution", huh? Now shut the hell up about my country. Trot over to your precious WalMart, buy a broom and go sweep.

Now that's out of the way, here's some of the debate going on right now about this very issue. Yes, we're not happy having things banned for us, and it won't last. The problem is there's *no* "R" rating for games. None. As soon as we get an R rating into the system, there will be no need for a ban.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/13/2742345.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/nationalinterest/stories/2009/2749224.htm

A petition was handed to Mr Atkinson months ago.. so much for petitions I guess.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/25/2526244.htm

The problem is not with "Australians", or our culture, so get out of our face with that. It's idiots in high places thinking they know what's best for everyone and try to make their personal little mark on history. Every country has them.

Before you all start pissing on Oz, saying we're all children, can't think for ourselves, etc.. oh, too late, fancy that. All I can say is, coming from 10 years of having your (US) gov't lie to your face and take you to war, those comments are a bit rich. This is just a computer game. When was your last "armed revolution", huh? Now shut the hell up about my country. Trot over to your precious WalMart, buy a broom and go sweep.

Now that's out of the way, here's some of the debate going on right now about this very issue. Yes, we're not happy having things banned for us, and it won't last. The problem is there's *no* "R" rating for games. None. As soon as we get an R rating into the system, there will be no need for a ban.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/13/2742345.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/nationalinterest/stories/2009/2749224.htm

A petition was handed to Mr Atkinson months ago.. so much for petitions I guess.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/25/2526244.htm

The problem is not with "Australians", or our culture, so get out of our face with that. It's idiots in high places thinking they know what's best for everyone and try to make their personal little mark on history. Every country has them.

Before you all start pissing on Oz, saying we're all children, can't think for ourselves, etc.. oh, too late, fancy that. All I can say is, coming from 10 years of having your (US) gov't lie to your face and take you to war, those comments are a bit rich. This is just a computer game. When was your last "armed revolution", huh? Now shut the hell up about my country. Trot over to your precious WalMart, buy a broom and go sweep.

Now that's out of the way, here's some of the debate going on right now about this very issue. Yes, we're not happy having things banned for us, and it won't last. The problem is there's *no* "R" rating for games. None. As soon as we get an R rating into the system, there will be no need for a ban.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/13/2742345.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/nationalinterest/stories/2009/2749224.htm

A petition was handed to Mr Atkinson months ago.. so much for petitions I guess.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/25/2526244.htm

The problem is not with "Australians", or our culture, so get out of our face with that. It's idiots in high places thinking they know what's best for everyone and try to make their personal little mark on history. Every country has them.

Might I add that in many parts of the world the fossil industry receives way more government money than the alternative industry.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/02/2759398.htm

The first step in climate tackling change is to simply end those subsidies. Why shouldn't we at least ask for that?

Which is in fact a large segment that this treaty is targeting. Hence the title "Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement." You may recall the hubbub earlier when Louis-Vuitton, et al, sued Ebay for hosting listings of knock-off goods.

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2008/s2290973.htm

Why go for the high-tech solution? This link describes 'Quake Safe' which was developed by an engineering graduate http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s1794024.htm shows that simple bamboo and wire wrapping can protect buildings in earthquake zones, a lot of those being in Asia where bamboo is cheap and readily available.

Is that a Ruckit or Rickut? It'll be Beached Az, Eh?

I totally agree. Apparently 50 thousand cars = 1 gigawatt of stored electricity... so download this 50 minute podcast and check out the claims for this scheme about to be installed in Canberra, Australia. (Only download the audio as the video is just Shai Agassi walking around in front of the audience).

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/fora/stories/2009/08/14/2656263.htm

Anyone interested in some background on these jellyfish in video form can have a look at the (Australian) ABC's catalyst program - http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2721180.htm

Former Defense policy advisor to President Obama, Peter Singer does a great interview for Hungry Beast on autonomous military robotics. Quite an interesting interview. It is a video but it won't start buffering until you hit play.

He raises a good point about us human doing things like this and then thinking 'maybe that wasn't such a good idea'. So much for Asimov's laws for robotics.

Former Defense policy advisor to President Obama, Peter Singer does a great interview for Hungry Beast on autonomous military robotics. Quite an interesting interview. It is a video but it won't start buffering until you hit play.

He raises a good point about us human doing things like this and then thinking 'maybe that wasn't such a good idea'. So much for Asimov's laws for robotics.

On a more positive note, a woman in Australia was recently convicted under new laws that make it a crime to smoke in a car with children present.

The ABC's Hungry Beast put out a fake press release for their first episode which a lot of news outlets fell for, although I did read a comment someone made on their site (link) about the realities of the newsroom and how fluff pieces don't receive thorough investigation, and don't merit it.

Media Watch also covered Hungry Beast's fictional Levitt Institute. The funniest part was that their press released actually included a paragraph stating that the results of the survey were made up ("These results were completely made up to be fictitious material through a process of modified truth and credibility nodes.").

A more recent episode of Media Watch talked about a fake art piece called The Rape Tunnel. This was run by Gawker, and then the next day they published an admission that it was a hoax, and the original creator of the hoax (Artlurker) also admitted it. Five days later, News Limited picked it up and run the story as if it was factual.

In both cases, they're not all that interesting pieces and arguably don't deserve much scrutiny - they're basically just fluff pieces. But on the other hand, neither of these was particularly well-disguised. The fake Levitt Institute report could've been outed simply by reading the entire report. If someone at News Ltd had done even the simplest of searches or checked the originating websites they would've seen the article was a fake, seeing how it had been announced as such nearly a week prior.

It seems for these kind of thing, the news outlets are no better than that acquaintance with your email address that forwards you everything they receive in the email without checking if it's real, or even applying some basic common sense before forwarding it. I bet that if they receive something from someone they believe to be a government worker, they wouldn't do any kind of verification whatsoever.

In a way I don't really care; at the same time, I often see Big Media execs mouthing off about how bloggers are useless and publish unverified stories and can't be trusted, so it does irk me a bit to see that even "real" news agencies don't do basic fact-checking before publishing.

The ABC's Hungry Beast put out a fake press release for their first episode which a lot of news outlets fell for, although I did read a comment someone made on their site (link) about the realities of the newsroom and how fluff pieces don't receive thorough investigation, and don't merit it.

Media Watch also covered Hungry Beast's fictional Levitt Institute. The funniest part was that their press released actually included a paragraph stating that the results of the survey were made up ("These results were completely made up to be fictitious material through a process of modified truth and credibility nodes.").

A more recent episode of Media Watch talked about a fake art piece called The Rape Tunnel. This was run by Gawker, and then the next day they published an admission that it was a hoax, and the original creator of the hoax (Artlurker) also admitted it. Five days later, News Limited picked it up and run the story as if it was factual.

In both cases, they're not all that interesting pieces and arguably don't deserve much scrutiny - they're basically just fluff pieces. But on the other hand, neither of these was particularly well-disguised. The fake Levitt Institute report could've been outed simply by reading the entire report. If someone at News Ltd had done even the simplest of searches or checked the originating websites they would've seen the article was a fake, seeing how it had been announced as such nearly a week prior.

It seems for these kind of thing, the news outlets are no better than that acquaintance with your email address that forwards you everything they receive in the email without checking if it's real, or even applying some basic common sense before forwarding it. I bet that if they receive something from someone they believe to be a government worker, they wouldn't do any kind of verification whatsoever.

In a way I don't really care; at the same time, I often see Big Media execs mouthing off about how bloggers are useless and publish unverified stories and can't be trusted, so it does irk me a bit to see that even "real" news agencies don't do basic fact-checking before publishing.

The ABC's Hungry Beast put out a fake press release for their first episode which a lot of news outlets fell for, although I did read a comment someone made on their site (link) about the realities of the newsroom and how fluff pieces don't receive thorough investigation, and don't merit it.

Media Watch also covered Hungry Beast's fictional Levitt Institute. The funniest part was that their press released actually included a paragraph stating that the results of the survey were made up ("These results were completely made up to be fictitious material through a process of modified truth and credibility nodes.").

A more recent episode of Media Watch talked about a fake art piece called The Rape Tunnel. This was run by Gawker, and then the next day they published an admission that it was a hoax, and the original creator of the hoax (Artlurker) also admitted it. Five days later, News Limited picked it up and run the story as if it was factual.

In both cases, they're not all that interesting pieces and arguably don't deserve much scrutiny - they're basically just fluff pieces. But on the other hand, neither of these was particularly well-disguised. The fake Levitt Institute report could've been outed simply by reading the entire report. If someone at News Ltd had done even the simplest of searches or checked the originating websites they would've seen the article was a fake, seeing how it had been announced as such nearly a week prior.

It seems for these kind of thing, the news outlets are no better than that acquaintance with your email address that forwards you everything they receive in the email without checking if it's real, or even applying some basic common sense before forwarding it. I bet that if they receive something from someone they believe to be a government worker, they wouldn't do any kind of verification whatsoever.

In a way I don't really care; at the same time, I often see Big Media execs mouthing off about how bloggers are useless and publish unverified stories and can't be trusted, so it does irk me a bit to see that even "real" news agencies don't do basic fact-checking before publishing.

I'm not sure why you would think that I would care about what a US administration thinks. Perhaps you think former President Bush is a good diviner of scientific truth? Personally I think such an attitude is a bit crazy, but if you love the ex President that much, good for you.

Bush was brought up because like you he was a big denier. Once he was forced to face the facts he could no longer deny.

You're much more likely to get my attention by backing up your opinion with specifics, like scientists, studies, and actual data.

The IPCC, Stern Report, etc. There are plenty of science studies reaching the conclusions you don't want to hear. Meanwhile there are no credible studies that conclude the climate is changing, getting warmer in places.

How did that Kyoto protocol go? It didn't work, and it didn't have the desired affect.

Unfortunately I have to agree with you here. Those who pushed for Kyoto most, especially Europe, didn't keep their agreements. Now it doesn't matter much if we try to do something. Last year China passed the US as the biggest emitter of Greenhouse Gases, and Australia passed the US as the world's biggest per capita emitter. Number 3 emitter, Indonesia, isn't even an industrialized nation.

Falcon

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2708730.htm

If you're lucky, this might work in your region.

Many thanks. There seems to be a local server for ABC content. Halfway through watching it now and it's quite informative

There was an article on the ABC show Catalyst last week. Apparently 802.11g/n has its roots in radio astronomy. You can see the boffins for real on these vodcasts: http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/tv/geo/catalyst/catalyst_2009_ep29.mp4 http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/tv/geo/catalyst/catalyst_2009_ep29.wmv