Still As Life

I have noticed over the past month or so that there have begun to be some more obvious changes in transport in response to the increasing fuel costs.

Over the past year there has been an increase in Camry’s/Aurion’s as taxi’s and police vehicles in place of some of Falcon’s and Commodore’s, and over the past month or so, I have noticed smaller 4 door vehicles such as Toyota Corolla’s and a few of the more expensive Toyota Prius hybrid car’s.

I have also noticed that freight and logistics companies like the Toll Group have been using small vehicles for smaller runs, such as the Hyundai Getz. In addition, during my travels up and down the east Australia over the past couple of months, I have noticed that there are becoming less single trailer trucks around, and the length of both trailers on dual trailer’s has been extending to the point where they are both getting to around the same length.

This is understandable given the prices of fuel, so this brings me to my title, some thoughts and observations about electric cars.

(more…)

Popularity: 35% [?]

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” (Benjamin Franklin, from Wikiquote)

Or, a more commonly known re-worded version, “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” (Wikiquote)

I’ve been reading in the news lately that with the push by Mr Rudd and his Labor ministers to censor the internet of Australians, that there have been pushes from other groups to censor more than the originally proposed pornography sites, including pro-anorexia websites and so on. Now that’s all well and good, I understand their reasoning for wanting to do so. However, once you start censoring content, the question myself and others have asked many times before, is where does it stop?

The above quote rings very true, give up a little liberty for a little security, and there is a good chance that you will lose both.

Popularity: 26% [?]

Not only are Labor disappointing federally, but they are locally as well.

Steve Griffiths is the local Labor councillor for Moorooka Ward, and with the upcoming election for Brisbane’s Lord Mayor and so on, he sent out an application for postal votes, which I filled in and returned to his office.

I received a letter, signed by Mr Griffiths last week to confirm that I had in fact applied for a postal vote through his office and that I should soon receive my ballot papers. It also said he had included his “how-to-vote” card that would show me how to vote to re-elect him in Moorooka Ward, and Greg Rowell for Lord Mayor.

It also went on to state that he (Mr Griffiths) has worked to:

1. Increase bus services on 120, 124 and 125 services along with extra air conditioned buses on the busiest routes.
2. Fund the Toohey Forest bikeway and park upgrade designs.
3. Fund major road upgrades.
4. Fund a buyback program for flood affected properties, flood mitigation work and an early warning system.

This is all well and good, great work Mr Griffiths.

Except, I take the 120 bus service regularly, and occasionally the 124 and 125. The only increased bus services that I have seen is the addition of the 119 on almost the same route as the 120, except that it skips my stop coming back from the city, and it doesn’t run at a time useful for me going into the city, and some additional runs during peak hours. Aside from that the service has gotten worse. So, his claim there is only partially true and his “work” has resulted in a worse service for me. That’s a great way to make me want to vote for Labor.

I received another letter today about a proposed mobile phone tower in the middle of one of the parks near here, Brittain Park. Now, mobile phone reception here is perfectly fine, so I see no need for this tower. The letter included a petition form to fill in. Cool, great, we agree, there is no need for a mobile phone tower in the middle of a park.

However, I still haven’t seen my ballot papers. If his office can send me a letter confirming my application, than surely they can send the ballot papers. Their inability to do something as simple as this is appalling. Then there is, as I mentioned above, their only part true claims about the buses here. I can’t comment on the other things except to say that if I can’t trust him and his office on one claim, how can I trust them on the others.

So my point is, if they can’t manage something as simple as sending me ballot papers, and they are more than happy to lie to me on paper, how can I have any confidence at all that they will do anything about the phone tower even if I return the signed petition?

I sent an email expressing my concerns to both of the email addresses provided on the two letters that I have received from his office. Hopefully I will hear something soon.

Popularity: 10% [?]

According to an article earlier today on the Sydney Morning Herald, the censorship ministers will be discussing giving an R18+ rating to games at the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG).

At the moment, the highest rating a game can have in Australia is MA15+ and there is almost no ID checking taking place to ensure that purchasers are over 15. As the highest rating is only MA15+, there are games that get banned, though if anyone wants them, they are always acquirable from overseas anyway, or, some games that really should have an R18+ rating get through under MA15+ even though they really shouldn’t be.

The Howard Government avoided this. So it intrigues me, that the Rudd Government, with their plans to attempt to censor the internet, are looking at removing the strict censorship laws on games. The strictest in any Democracy in the world.

I have no interest in the games that get banned, and for that matter, I have no interest in the majority of the ones that don’t, but as I’ve said to people before, if movies can have an R rating, why can’t games? They are effectively the same content, just consumed by the audience in a different fashion.

I’m all for the R rating on games, why? As I said, there is a lot that slips through under MA that should be under R, and by the sounds of it, ID checks will be required for them, so content that should not be available to minors will not be openly available to them like it has been.  In addition to that, the higher rating provides more for parents to go off of when choosing what to allow their kids to play and since things that should be in R, not MA will be in R, it will be easier for parents to determine what games are definitely not suitable.

Plus the hypocrisy of the government will amuse me. That’s just a bonus though, not really a reason.

It does of course have to be approved by the Commonwealth as well as all the attorney-general of each state and territory, so who knows what will happen.

Popularity: 7% [?]

It’s been a while since I’ve heard anything about Mr Rudd et al’s internet censorship schemes and so on, so I had been starting to hope they had realised that it would just be digging their own grave.

Apparently not.

It’s no big surprise that the Rudd Government claims the NetAlert software that was pushed by the Howard Government was a failure (from the Sydney Morning Herald website).

Of course they would say that. They want their scheme to take over and give them more control over what people have access to. Hey, I don’t want to see porn, but guess what, I don’t go looking for it, so I am not exposed to it. I see more on TV and in movies than on the internet, simply because as I said, I don’t try and find it. I don’t have to use filters, nor do I want filters.

Yes, sure, NetAlert was a $189 million program with over $15 million spent on advertising it, and  it was expected to be in use in 2.5 million homes, however it was only downloaded or ordered on CD 144,088 times, and it is estimated only 29,000 copies are still being used. So what, I’d rather my taxes be used on something like that than on a filter I do not want in place.

Sure, put the filter in place in schools and public access points if you want, though the majority of these places already have systems in place that work perfectly well for them, but leave private internet connections alone.

As the Liberal communications spokesman Bruce Billson was quoted as saying, “the Rudd Government was rushing to criticise the NetAlert program to set the scene for a “harebrained, half-baked policy dreamt up in the lead-up to an election”. I can’t agree more.

Following that he is also quoted as saying, “Proper supervision should be front and centre of any efforts to protect children from inappropriate material on the internet; supported by additional tools such as content filters, not some mandatory and ill-conceived ‘clean feed’ measure by a government that believes only it has the authority to decide what’s appropriate or inappropriate content for computer users.”

Again, this is very, very true. Mr Rudd et al, it is not your job to parent the countries kids, go look after your own and leave my parents to parent me. They did an excellent job of it, and I have been on the net since I could type with no content filtering.

I do have to admit I find it very amusing that the Tom Wood kid gets labelled as “The Porn Cracker”, is that a label anyone really wants?

By rights, that means anyone who bypasses nanny software is looking for porn and is thus a “Porn Cracker”. Wow. I really have nothing to say to how stupid a label that is, and how stupid it is to assume that he was the first kid to get around it.

While I am sure, at 16 and being able to “crack” a filtering program, Mr Wood is a real internet prodigy, I am certain there are better qualified people to help come up with a better idea than him. Given the current suggestions of your party Mr Rudd, I am also certain that there are better qualified people then you and your ministers. I know, as many people have already said, including myself, and I will say it again, leave the internet alone.

Popularity: 8% [?]