Slashdot Mirror

They're just part of the Security Theatre.

Statistics from the NSW Ombudsman in a review of drug detection dogs indicated that about 74 per cent of drug indications by drug detection dogs found no drugs.

What makes them think ESD dogs will be any better?

Small claims tribunals (or consumer tribunals, etc) in Australia actively discourage legal representation.
You need to apply to have a lawyer represent you, and that request may very well be turned down.

http://www.ncat.nsw.gov.au/Pages/going_to_the_tribunal/representation.aspx

A right is protection against government abuse and oppression, nothing else.

"Nonsense walking on stilts!" How are the various rights appurtenant to copyright ownership, for example, "a protection against government abuse and oppression?"

A right is that which you can successfully enforce against another party in a court of law. Of course that is the legal positivist view of what a right is, the natural law folks, among others, entertain different illusions. ;)

Thus (lawful) occupancy of land, for example, grants rights (enforced ultimately by the state, but for whom no rights could exist), inter alia the right to exclude from the property other parties (including, but subject to the terms of the lease, the non-occupant owner).

As it happens the standard (short-term) lease in NSW (and this is a matter for the states not the federal government), at least, gives the landlord and tenant the opportunity to come to an arrangement regarding subletting, as it give the landlord a right of refusal providing that right is exercised "reasonably" (see Clause 32)

Parliament House
6 Macquarie Street,
Sydney, NSW 2000.

I don't post many comments on here, but I just wanted to offer my perspective (Take it or leave it) As a Licenced Gun Owner in Australia, there are a few things I think we have got right (Some things we have got wrong too)

There are a few categories over here for ownership
Cat A: Rimfire Rifles (Not Semi/Full Auto), and Shotguns (Not Semi/Full Auto or Pump) - Magazine Capacity up to 10 rounds
Cat B: Center fire Rifles (Not Semi/Full Auto) - Magazine capacity up to 10 rounds
Cat C: Pump Action Shotguns up to 5 rounds, Semi Auto Rimfire Rifles with Magazine capacity up to 10 Rounds
Cat D: Semi Auto Centre fire Rifles and all other rifles/shutguns with Larger magazine capacity
Cat H: Handguns

1. Safe Storage
This in my opinion is the most important thing. Anyone can break into a Firearms Safe but is required for all owners and is inspected regularly by local police.
Does this stop someone steeling your firearms... not really. It does stop my kids and other people from getting at them.
Ammo and Firearms must be stored separately.
There are further requirements for Cat C,D and H above normal firearms safes.

2. It is very hard to get a Cat C/D licence here. You need to be a primary producer (Run a farm etc.) for Cat C, and there are even more restrictions on Cat D.
As much as I would love to shoot/go hunting with a Semi Auto Rifle, it really isn't a big deal. If you need a semi auto for hunting, then it isn't much of a sport.

3. You can't get a licence if you have had a Criminal Conviction within the last 10 years (Firearms, Drugs, Robbery etc.) or if you have had an Apprehended Violence Order in the last 10 years. So... don't give them to criminals and people that should not be trusted with a firearm. Most Australian Firearms owners are good citizens because they do not wish to loose their licence!

4. Permits to acquire are needed. You need to Apply for a permit to buy a firearm, and specify what type you are buying. The turnaround is around 2 weeks to get it back, but only once you have a permit you can walk in and pick up a firearm. They are about $30 a throw and are valid for 3 months.... This stops people walking in off the street and picking up a firearm, rounds and walking out to use it straight away.

We do have some stupid laws that prohibit gun owners from enjoying their sport.
If you only have a reason to hunt (Vermin control on a property etc) you can't just walk up to a shooting range and shoot, because you must be a member of a range and have that genuine reason too.
No Silencers


Are some of these things a hindrance? Yes, but nothing that stops me enjoying using my rifles, and stopping them getting into the hands of people that will use them for the wrong reasons, or do not know how to use them and could injure themselves or others accidentally.

The questions of personal protection? I guess if most people are not carrying and or using them all the time, then there isn't a problem. I think it will be very hard for America to reverse its stance on that... It would leave the honest people without guns and the not so honest (Read criminals) with them.
I don't have an answer for this, and not sure if the way our laws work would help or hinder this in the short term. Long term it could work.
Don't get me wrong, we have criminals with guns here, but they are much harder to get. Pretty much all guns used in crime are not registered and full automatic firearms (Such as AR15's etc) are going to be hard to find and very expensive.

More info from NSW Police
https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/...
https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/...

I don't post many comments on here, but I just wanted to offer my perspective (Take it or leave it) As a Licenced Gun Owner in Australia, there are a few things I think we have got right (Some things we have got wrong too)

There are a few categories over here for ownership
Cat A: Rimfire Rifles (Not Semi/Full Auto), and Shotguns (Not Semi/Full Auto or Pump) - Magazine Capacity up to 10 rounds
Cat B: Center fire Rifles (Not Semi/Full Auto) - Magazine capacity up to 10 rounds
Cat C: Pump Action Shotguns up to 5 rounds, Semi Auto Rimfire Rifles with Magazine capacity up to 10 Rounds
Cat D: Semi Auto Centre fire Rifles and all other rifles/shutguns with Larger magazine capacity
Cat H: Handguns

1. Safe Storage
This in my opinion is the most important thing. Anyone can break into a Firearms Safe but is required for all owners and is inspected regularly by local police.
Does this stop someone steeling your firearms... not really. It does stop my kids and other people from getting at them.
Ammo and Firearms must be stored separately.
There are further requirements for Cat C,D and H above normal firearms safes.

2. It is very hard to get a Cat C/D licence here. You need to be a primary producer (Run a farm etc.) for Cat C, and there are even more restrictions on Cat D.
As much as I would love to shoot/go hunting with a Semi Auto Rifle, it really isn't a big deal. If you need a semi auto for hunting, then it isn't much of a sport.

3. You can't get a licence if you have had a Criminal Conviction within the last 10 years (Firearms, Drugs, Robbery etc.) or if you have had an Apprehended Violence Order in the last 10 years. So... don't give them to criminals and people that should not be trusted with a firearm. Most Australian Firearms owners are good citizens because they do not wish to loose their licence!

4. Permits to acquire are needed. You need to Apply for a permit to buy a firearm, and specify what type you are buying. The turnaround is around 2 weeks to get it back, but only once you have a permit you can walk in and pick up a firearm. They are about $30 a throw and are valid for 3 months.... This stops people walking in off the street and picking up a firearm, rounds and walking out to use it straight away.

We do have some stupid laws that prohibit gun owners from enjoying their sport.
If you only have a reason to hunt (Vermin control on a property etc) you can't just walk up to a shooting range and shoot, because you must be a member of a range and have that genuine reason too.
No Silencers


Are some of these things a hindrance? Yes, but nothing that stops me enjoying using my rifles, and stopping them getting into the hands of people that will use them for the wrong reasons, or do not know how to use them and could injure themselves or others accidentally.

The questions of personal protection? I guess if most people are not carrying and or using them all the time, then there isn't a problem. I think it will be very hard for America to reverse its stance on that... It would leave the honest people without guns and the not so honest (Read criminals) with them.
I don't have an answer for this, and not sure if the way our laws work would help or hinder this in the short term. Long term it could work.
Don't get me wrong, we have criminals with guns here, but they are much harder to get. Pretty much all guns used in crime are not registered and full automatic firearms (Such as AR15's etc) are going to be hard to find and very expensive.

More info from NSW Police
https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/...
https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/...

Does the US not have the equivalent of these?
http://periodicdisclosures.aec...
https://www.parliament.qld.gov...
http://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/

A recent ICAC investigation captured a sitting premier and forced his resignation over a bottle of wine...

Cue rabid mud-slinging between fossil-fuel addicted Morlocks and nuclear-power fearing Eloi.

I weep for the future.

You insensitive sod. Don't expect an outdoor heater from me this Xmas.

Sincerely, Tony Abbott - I'm the Prime Minister of Australia - didn't you know?
Buy more coal - it's good.

1. The version of fluoride they put in the water

Who is they? In my country we use different types of flouride depending on location.

2. Hexafluorosilicic acid is a product manufactured from industrial waste in the aluminum industry and is considered a toxic substance. If industry hadn't conned municipalities in to putting it in the water supply as a "fluoride source" it would cost them a good chunk of change to dispose of the stuff. (Look up ALCOA and fluoride).

Lies. It's only becomes an issue in gas form, which is going to be hard when saturated 1 ppm in water.

3. Consumption of unfiltered tap water, I'd say, is just about zero. I know no-one that drinks

Good thing that science uses techniques other than your personal experience. This research found at least 25% of bottled water contained tap water. How does that fit into your experience now?

4. Even if people were drinking only tap water, over 95% of the water used in an average municipality is very consumed by any living thing. It washes cars, waters lawns, bathes people, flushes toilets, cools industrial equipment, etc.

And?

5. When I had this discussion with my town a few years ago asking them to provide numbers they told my it cost $63,000 a year

You didn't mention how many people in your town. If $63000 save 60 people's teeth from rotting then I'd say it's a net gain. Average cost for fluoridation is $1 per person per year. Trivial when you consider the cost of dental care.

6. No-one, I mean I searched hard, has studied the rate of change in a community pre and post fluoridation of tap water

Ask and you shall receive: http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/e...

7. The Grand Rapids "study" was based upon Sodium Fluoride, which again is not what we put in the water today. So even if the result was positive the hexafluorosilicic acid used today has never been studied for prevention of tooth decay in municipal water supplies and is a very different chemical compound just like Carbon Monoxide and Carbon Dioxide are very different chemicals. Search for

So use another study instead, or better, conduct your own.

8. There is no version of any type of fluoride that is indicated by the FDA for the prevention of tooth decay. The municipal water companies are adding an non-FDA approved and unregulated drug to our water supply. The other substance added to water supplies (chlorine to be simple) is approved by the FDA for water and food sanitation.

As you can see, there is simply no supporting truth to the argument that fluoride in municipal water prevents tooth decay. It does cost a significant amount of money, and almost no-one drinks the fluoridated water anyway.

Do your own research. You will come to the same conclusion: municipal water fluoridation is based on lies, it's a waste of money, it doesn't work and it may actually cause harm to public health.

$1 per person is not significant. You probably spent more on your membership fees to the Tinfoil Hat Convention.

using Wikipedia as your source for anything isn't exactly a smart move. Go to any of the local motor registry sites. There are completely separate classes of licenses in Australia for commercial transport vehicles in most states. You only look like an idiot when you use Wikipedia as your source. the information isn't hidden and would have taken you all of 30 seconds if you had bothered to look at any reliable information sources. e.g
  NSW. http://www.transport.nsw.gov.a...
  ACT http://www.transport.nsw.gov.a...
  QLD http://tmr.qld.gov.au/Licensin...

using Wikipedia as your source for anything isn't exactly a smart move. Go to any of the local motor registry sites. There are completely separate classes of licenses in Australia for commercial transport vehicles in most states. You only look like an idiot when you use Wikipedia as your source. the information isn't hidden and would have taken you all of 30 seconds if you had bothered to look at any reliable information sources. e.g
  NSW. http://www.transport.nsw.gov.a...
  ACT http://www.transport.nsw.gov.a...
  QLD http://tmr.qld.gov.au/Licensin...

The thing that always amazes me in that story is they put Captain Bligh on a row boat in the Pacific and somehow he made it back to England.

And to keep on topic - he continued his log. http://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/disco...

Same goes for where you can fish in Australian waters... http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fish...

As to the increased friction well that will be caused by the lack of the oil! AKA the oil will be separated from the source of heat.

"Separated from the source of heat" by being sprayed all over the engine?

I don't have any documentation of transmission oil fires, though I can give personal anecdote of a vehicle with a faulty transmission oil hose that sprayed the stuff up into the engine compartment. Quite a mess and, honestly, lucky it didn't cause a fire. It happened in a driveway and was caught almost immediately (fluid even got up onto the windshield)... if that happened on the highway with everything nice and hot there would've been a fire no doubt.

However, I DO have documentation of a coolant leak leading to a fire (PDF) Coolant line failed, sprayed coolant everywhere. Engine overheated, evaporating water from coolant allowing the ethylene glycol to ignite. Fire spread and destroyed the entire (fortunately empty) bus.
=Smidge=

Did you know that most jurisdictions around the world bias sex assault laws in favor of women?

India just saw this get passed: Only men can be booked for rape

In NSW Australia the NSW Crimes Act requires that a vagina or anus must be penetrated for it to be considered "sexual assault". So if someone fingers a drunk women and then gives a handjob to a drunk man: (there being no legal consent in either situation):

- violating the woman = "sexual assault" (Section 61I) = punishable by 14 years prison
- violating the man = "indecent assault" (Section 61L) = punishable by only 5 years prison

Yeah a laser pointer would be really unacceptable.

In some countries doing that could land you in jail and/or paying a hefty fine. See here.

Some bits and pieces:

Looks like the City Council has spent two years and about $95,000 fighting resident Adam Bonner in tribunal after it used $150,000 in federal funding to install 18 cameras. One of the article's comments provides insight on why the opposition: CCTV cameras have shown time and time again that they do help immensely in solving crime, but the stats to determine whether they prevent crime are less clear."

An audit report has found that the council may also intend to stage its own small scale "security theater", by
* "Increase the perception of Nowra’s CBD as a safe place and reduce the fear of crime amongst business operators and the community" but
* "From the available statistics, it appears to be too early to judge if the system acts as a deterrent for potential offenders. Statistics for a longer period of time may identify a trend up or down but at present this is not observable from only a little over a year of compiling data."

Then again... stepping on the "conspiracy theory" tracks (aren't they juicy?):
* it also seems there's a new jail in town and some may want to fill it up or else the employment and stimulus money may go down.

I don't think your chainsaw will cut it, pun intended.

Just for the record, the land burnt or burning in the current outbreak is 368,940 hectares (~911,670 acres) in the State of New South Wales (with a few just over State borders) where most of the fires are concentrated. The largest single fire is approx 177,000 hectares (437,000 acres). (Source: http://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/feeds/majorIncidents.xml at 2013-01-09T21:10Z)

There does not appear to be "a whole lot in central Australia to burn" but what is present, not forests but grassland, is tinder dry and burns routinely and for extended periods. The last few years have seen abnormally high rainfall in large parts of the interior (result of cyclones) which has made the fuel load higher than usual. Take a look at the NASA Black Marble imagery: almost all light not on the coastal fringe is the result of a fire in this compound imagery (22 days in 2012). http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/NPP/news/aus-fires.html

Good question, so I googled it. Of Australia's 8 States/Territories, 4 have such restrictions and 4 don't:

New South Wales

Information here: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/downloads/p1p2_conditions_dl1.html

Victoria

Information here: http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/Licences/GetYourPs/RestrictionsOnPs/Pplatedriversandprobationaryprohibitedvehicles.htm

Some exceptions for certain classes of lower performance turbo/supercharged vehicles here: http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/Licences/GetYourPs/RestrictionsOnPs/Lowerperfomanceturbochargedorsuperchargedvehicles.htm

Queensland

Information here: http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Licensing/Getting-a-licence/Getting-a-car-driver-licence/P1-and-P2-restrictions/High-powered-performance-vehicles.aspx

South Australia

Information here: http://mylicence.sa.gov.au/p1_plater?fay=13&text=P-rules (you'll need to scroll down a bit and click the 'high powered vehicle restrictions' heading)

The remaining places (ACT, NT, Tasmania and Western Australia) do not have any vehicle power restrictions.

Note also that in most States, provisional drivers are also restricted as to the number and age of passengers they can carry. In many States they are also limited to a 100 km/h speed limit, even when driving on roads with higher posted limits.

While I don't know where you live, I suspect that there are fines that can be levied against you if the court was to decide so as well as court costs. For example the fines in NSW are up to 20 penalty units Road Rules for Pedestrians which equates to $2200.

In many places such passing is perfectly legal for cyclists. Not having lights isn't anywhere I've ridden though.

For example, http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fragview/inforce/subordleg+179+2008+pt.11-div.3+0+N - they drive on the left in Oz, so cyclists are allowed to undertake. If you pull out and hit them that would be entirely your fault (unless they didn't have lights at night). The rules might be different where you are, of course.

And if cyclists didn't do that I'm pretty sure you'd complain about that. Back when I used to ride to work there was a spike in complaints about cyclists not following all the rules (which they should) that also included such things as cyclists shouldn't be allowed to do that, etc.

So one day I didn't do that. There's a traffic light at the top of a hill that enters you on to the main road to the city - the bike lane starts on that main road. Usually I would slowly cycle on the inside of the stopped traffic and stop at the light then when it was green I cross and enter into the bike lane. So I didn't do that, instead when the car in front of me stopped I stopped behind it and waited for it to move again.

Since I'm on a shitty mountain bike and it's uphill I start rather slowly and it takes some time for me to pick up any speed. Hence no one behind made the light either. From the reactions I think the drivers prefer the rule allowing me to pass on the inside.

Errr... Does that mean when people are talking about grass-fed beef, they really could mean corn-fed? Grass has more than one meaning, depending on scope.

I suppose so but this may be a regulated term.

OBVIOUSLY I was not speaking of all plants which could be called grasses biologically, but was instead using it in the colloquial sense. In which corn is not grass at all.

If it was obvious I apologize for being dense but I didn't mean to seem like a condescending asshole

All semantic nitpicking aside, corn is a C4 plant, grass is a C3. Major difference in efficiency. Of course, sugarcane is even more efficient, but it's a bit hard to grow around here.

Uhhhh... what? Maize is a C4 plant, grass is not a C3 plant; the majority are, but near half are C4 plants. I'm guessing your trying to use grass in a similar colloquial sense, as you mention sugar cane and maize as c4 (and know they are grasses), but I dont understand how??

I mean heres from: http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/field/pastures-and-rangelands/native-pastures/what-are-c3-and-c4-native-grass

The presence of both C3 and C4 species can be desirable in a pasture as they can occupy different niches (e.g. C3 species are often more abundant in the shade of trees and on southerly aspects, while C4 species often dominate full-sun conditions and northerly aspects) and thereby provide greater groundcover across a range of conditions. It is not uncommon to find both C3 and C4 species in one paddock. This has advantages in providing a broader spread of production throughout the year for both grazing enterprises and native animals.



sorry if I seem to be obtuse or making this harder than it is but I'm just a bit confused .

See the numerous complaints of yellow lights

See the drivers not being prepared to stop at a traffic light.

Sorry, these complaints are ignored because they are pretty much proof of the drivers inability to control their vehicle.

Defensive driving is about anticipating changes in traffic, this means anticipating the light change and adjusting your speed or vehicle control accordingly. Any semi-comptent judge will tear you a new one after using that excuse.

Even if we assume that MOST speed limits are not being set for revenue-generating purposes, they are clearly in many cases set at arbitrarily low numbers,

Wrong

They have a great deal of research behind them (PDF warning)

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CGUQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.who.int%2Fviolence_injury_prevention%2Fpublications%2Froad_traffic%2Fworld_report%2Fspeed_en.pdf&ei=5cswUIyPN-SwiQfW4oH4Ag&usg=AFQjCNH2KK6RUWvl9iFwm61v6sm5DtVw2Q&cad=rja If you think they are arbitrary then you have no idea what you are talking about http://www.cga.ct.gov/2003/olrdata/tra/rpt/2003-R-0673.htm

to lump speeding, which does not inherently imply dangerous or discourteous behavior,

Wrong again.

Speeding is inherently dangerous behaviour.
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/index.html

In Australia speeding has overtaken drugs and alcohol (combined) to become the number 1 cause of road fatalities. It's a similar situation in the US where speeding accounts for 1/3 of traffic accidents.

You need to go have a long hard look at what you've said, it's so wrong it's not funny. You have provided no links and only posted hearsay with no factual value what so ever. Just because you want to believe it does not make it true. Sunshine, you need to hand in your license as all this woefully inaccurate post has done is show you have no idea what you're on about or how to be safe in a car (especially if you think speeding is not dangerous behaviour).

http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/scjudgments/2008nswsc.nsf/6ccf7431c546464bca2570e6001a45d2/ef4625a9db3003f1ca25751500066d48?OpenDocument

TLDR-

I tried to find court details for the Bart Simpson case when it was reported here in Oz but came up empty handed

According to this Wikipedia article, the case is McEwen v. Simmons & Anor [2008] NSWSC 1292: "In my view, the Magistrate was correct in determining that, in respect of both the Commonwealth and the New South Wales offences, the word 'person' included fictional or imaginary characters".

.

Correct, precedent is set and in any future case this evidence as well as precedence will be submitted. Note losers pays so iiNet got a major chunk of it's money back, this evidence could be used in a "Barratry, Maintenance and Champerty" case to gain further damages http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/DP36CHP2. Major case, major investment but a good chance of succeeding, another countries involvement especially a country with a clear reputation for threats of trade and military intervention will likely leave a vary bad taste in any independent Australian judges mouth.

Especially now with the US forcing thousands of armed and fully loaded marines Marines, in fact they will be the largest armed and ready for conflict force in Australia, so targeted at China or an independent Australia and it's resources (once in will Australia ever be able to remove them and how much larger will their numbers get).

Separation of powers works in Australia, and the high court routinely hands down judgements against the government http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_High_Court, strict literal interpretation of the laws and constitution as written and any changes to the constitution require a public referendum.

Or the occasional tree destruction: http://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/welcome_to_bgt/royal_botanic_garden/gardens_and_domain/wildlife/flying-foxes/Federal_Government_approval

While the government may "get the job done" as you say, I really think it is merely a matter of having the biggest budget to throw at a problem and getting the worst possible job done. Not saying that it is like this in every single case, but a lot of the time when I look at large government projects, they are bloated badly, implemented poorly and there are many obvious improvements possible that could have saved money or made a better solution - had the right person been there to say "Yes" or "No" rather than a "Project Manager" who knows how to use visio and project manager.

While I am in Sydney, here are two comparable examples: The M7 is a four to six lane motorway that was built completely from scratch. It is around 40 kilometers long (25 miles?). This included around 90 bridges so as to not interrupt current roads (The road sometimes goes over existing roads, other times, bridges were built over the motorway). The road was built in three years, came in six months ahead of schedule and cost around $1.8 billion.

Now, another major road project is the F5 widening. The project started in 2005 and is still running. While I have searched for a total cost, I can only find the cost of the current stage, which has cost $138 million to widen a single section of this project.

A private contractor could have done this much quicker (just ask anyone living in south western Sydney) and better and probably for a lot less money. While a government may "get it done" it's not the best or cheapest option the vast majority of the time.

There is evidence in the DNA record of some regional tribes of Australian Aborigines that there was interbreeding with:

* Malacca / Macassa (modern day Indonesian) fishermen who frequented the fishing grounds of the north-west of the continent from probably by the mid-1,500s and arguably earlier;

* Portuguese discovery of the Australian landmass in the early 1500s, and contact of Portuguese sailors stranded by ship-wreck from the early 1,600s with local tribes;

* disputed but arguable Portuguese 'discovery' of the east coast of Australia, including ship wrecks and habitation, and contact with Aborigines in various areas;

* documented contact between early British settlers and Aborigines in eastern Australia, after 1788 into the late 1800s, included many 'tolerated' inter-marriages due to the lack of suitable female partners in the early convict/colonial days.

Don't be an idiot. Someone "speeding" on an empty rural highway isn't a danger to anyone. A busy metro-area highway is a different matter.

A rural highway is empty right up until there is something on the road. The person going too fast may not be able to see it in time to react and avoid it. To turn this a bit personal, my sister was killed on a rural highway by a speeder who didn't see her till it was too late.

Helicopters are used as chase vehicles.

How often do you need to chase someone in the middle of nowhere?

They do chase people on highways near cities though.

The OP talked about painted stripes on the road to calculate speed; that can't be used on busy metro highways because there's too much traffic; it's a method only useful in more rural areas.

Why can't marks on the road and shoulder be used to time vehicles in heavy traffic? It is easy to spot a vehicle driving above the limit from the air and time how long it takes to go between two marks on the road. Have you ever watched a chase from the air. The only difference here is the use of a drone instead of an aircraft. Here are the specs for Australia

Nothing short of an armed rebellion will stop 'em

How quaint. Unfortunately, we Australians don't have a "right to bear arms". In fact, since some fool went on a killing spree back in the late 90's our ability to own firearms has been significantly curtailed.

The NSW Police website lists items that are prohibited in NSW, including:

  - flick knives
  - sling shots
  - blow guns / pipes
  - kung fu sticks
  - body armour

Now, IANAL, but I believe we can even be arrested for peeing with too much pressure. Better go empty my bladder now ...

I rated the article 4 stars because it used an interrobang in the article title

Based on your interest in interrobangs, you may like the State Library of New South Wales and Propaganda Against Recreational Substance Use.

I'm investigating the situation in Australia a little more to attempt to understand it, but their laws clearly state that if you warranty a particular good for service, you have to provide a good capable of that service.

It would seem to me that updating the product wouldn't negate that at any time in the future unless there is a specific condition to the update and agreed upon before the update is made. It would also seem to me that a console that runs Linux as well as plays Play Station games and connects to the Play Station networks, would have to continue doing so or it could run afoul of the bait and switch laws because the failure was specifically due to the companies actions. While I understand there was a warning on April 1st (which could be confused with a joke), regardless, both the linux ability and the removed access to their networks for playing games should be not allowed under the existing law. It's my understanding that the choice was to lose one ability and not retain both which makes the product something entirely different then represented when sold.

I wish I could find the supposed ACCC ruling clearing sony of wrong doing, but it seems to be a mystery right now.

You do not need "range" capability or rocket fuel to hurt people:
  http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA20080516011

"Crimes Amendment (Rock Throwing) Bill 2008
But rock throwing, which causes great harm to people—Nicole Miller, for example, suffered brain damage when a man threw rocks from a bridge at the car in which she was a passenger—gets no mention at all. - throw a rock from a height at a vehicle it could kill someone—in fact, it could kill many people if it causes a crash in which a bus is overturned -"

Where are these stastics that say ignoring the speed limit and driving the road for what it was built for is "fairly dangerous"?

From your article:

There are a number of road segments that cross the mountain ranges. [...] While many segments are posted at 90 km/h, few vehicles can safely be maneuvered near that speed.

I'll spell it out for you: If vehicles cannot be maneuvered safely at that speed then it is "fairly dangerous."

And of course, there is research showing that about 40% of road deaths were caused by speeding, which would account for 16,644 deaths if we go by my original numbers of 41,611 deaths in car accidents.

Also, your analogy fails, what I said is that driving recklessly could lead to killing someone. If someone wants to serve things with salt they can do it, if they want to force me into eating them, then we will have a problem. Or do you allow people in the street to force you into eating anything they want?

> You have to love Australia. That particular manoeuvre is illegal there. Also illegal is exiting a roundabout from the same road you entered.

You are wrong. U-turns are perfectly legal.

> Truth is everybody in Australia is a criminal.

Aha! A troll.

The two-second rule applies in NSW and Victoria

Actually I just checked the Victorian and NSW Road Rules and no such 2-second rule exists.

If the traffic lights or traffic arrows (as the case may be) change to yellow or red while the driver is stopped and the driver has entered the intersection, the driver must leave the intersection as soon as the driver can do so safely.

You can find the Victorian Road Rules linked from here and the NSW ones here.

After reading a bit more it looks like this is actually defined in the Australian Road Rules, here (p49).

Where I'm from the law is that you must do that. If you are turning across traffic as lights you claim the intersection by stopping part way across and go when it is safe. If there's lots of traffic you will end up turning on the red which is fine. There will be a red both ways for a short time and you are half way across the intersection so even though you are turning you have enough of a head start on the traffic.

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fragview/inforce/subordleg+179+2008+pt.6-div.1-rule.61+0+N

I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't a bit earlier. Around 1997 I can remember watching a program in the UK on how you could use your cell phone in Japan to pay for goods in a vending machine (see here), though I can't remember whether it was only in test phase. When I visited Australia in 2005 you could use your cell phone to pay for parking.

The truth is North America behind when it comes to what people can do with their cell phones. They are only now starting to catch up. I believe the Qualcomm CDMA / GSM divide wasn't helping things.

As for web sites with concrete dates that I could show you, C-mode appears to a compatible technology: http://eurotechnology.com/market_reports/imode/faq-cmode.shtml and that was field tested in 2001.

BTW As for what you can do with vending machines in Japan: http://www.photomann.com/japan/machines/

We have this in australia too it is called a statutory warranty, although most retailers in Australia will still try and sell you an extended warranty.

http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/pdfs/About_us/Publications/ft230.pdf

I think you're including the cost of having your vehicle inspected, and compulsory 3rd party insurance in your calculations. Neither of these go to government coffers.

Actual rates can be found here (for NSW, other states may vary): http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registration/otherinformation/registrationfees.html

Or you could complain to the Minister for Transport", David Campbell. Alternatively find your electorate by doing an Electoral District search, then look at this list to see who your state member is.

For all those in the U.S. - NSW is one state in a big landmass. Not all State governments do this sort of stupidity. NSW is in terminal decline at the moment, it's only a few years till us poor New South Welshmen get to kick them out of government. Unfortunately, my member of parliament is Joe Tripodi. Oops, did I type that into Google? Silly me.

Or you could complain to the Minister for Transport", David Campbell. Alternatively find your electorate by doing an Electoral District search, then look at this list to see who your state member is.

For all those in the U.S. - NSW is one state in a big landmass. Not all State governments do this sort of stupidity. NSW is in terminal decline at the moment, it's only a few years till us poor New South Welshmen get to kick them out of government. Unfortunately, my member of parliament is Joe Tripodi. Oops, did I type that into Google? Silly me.

Or you could complain to the Minister for Transport", David Campbell. Alternatively find your electorate by doing an Electoral District search, then look at this list to see who your state member is.

For all those in the U.S. - NSW is one state in a big landmass. Not all State governments do this sort of stupidity. NSW is in terminal decline at the moment, it's only a few years till us poor New South Welshmen get to kick them out of government. Unfortunately, my member of parliament is Joe Tripodi. Oops, did I type that into Google? Silly me.

and point out how bone headed Railcorp is being, and request that he force them to backoff. His email address is david@campbell.minister.nsw.gov.au and his name is David Campbell. An email to Nathan Rees, the Premier of NSW, at thepremier@www.nsw.gov.au wouldn't go astray either. Rees is also on twitter, so you can also pester him there.

and point out how bone headed Railcorp is being, and request that he force them to backoff. His email address is david@campbell.minister.nsw.gov.au and his name is David Campbell. An email to Nathan Rees, the Premier of NSW, at thepremier@www.nsw.gov.au wouldn't go astray either. Rees is also on twitter, so you can also pester him there.

No, not even sort of. There actually is a metric arse ton of idle fiber between Australia, Asia, and other parts of the world. Nobody is clamouring to lay more because it's actually not needed, at least not any time soon.

This page (below) gives a total fiber capacity of four terabits per second, and 4Gbps via satellite to the outside world.
http://www.business.nsw.gov.au/investment/infrastructure/

The figures they use are on the anal side of conservative for fiber, and probably only true of satellite if their hands are utterly tied - it's expensive, they don't pay for what they aren't using, so no guarantee it'll be available when it's suddenly needed. The telcos are rather secretive when it comes to the specifics of their infrastructure at the best of times, they do have quite a bit more than what they claim. (Ex DSD drone, this kind of thing was important to my work for a while)