

I didn’t realise the Botanic Gardens had one of these, wonder if now they know it’s viable they’ll put it in a more public area (given how much interest that one in Sydney gets each time it pops out).
I didn’t realise the Botanic Gardens had one of these, wonder if now they know it’s viable they’ll put it in a more public area (given how much interest that one in Sydney gets each time it pops out).
Baby red bellies are indeed pretty cute, can confirm as I got to hold a live one in a jar once when I was a kid (some other kids caught it and were showing it off). Would definitely prefer they be cute somewhere that’s not my backyard though…
That is unfortunately true, for example I find it sadly impressive that one has a decent chance of getting classified info simply by starting an argument on the War Thunder forums…
I’m not familiar with them, though I did just have a quick browse of wikipedia and their privacy page. From that minimal impression I’d rate their online service as better than DeepSeek (they do claim your data is not used for training, stored in Sweden, encrypted, and deleted after 30 days) but ultimately it’s still got the same problem as other providers in that you have to just believe they’ll actually follow what they say they do. For use with your own personal info this might be an acceptable risk if the company seems reputable otherwise, on the other end of the scale for anything security classified it’d be way too much risk.
You’d have to be mad to put important information into any AI model unless you’re hosting it locally and know it isn’t sending info anywhere (the latter being the hard part to verify). All of the online AI services really should be blocked if departments/companies are taking security seriously.
Sounds like Coles has been eyeing off Aldi and wants to also get into narrowing the range down to products they have more direct control over (bet their prices don’t follow Aldi though).
We don’t do them anywhere near as much as America apparently does but since I believe you’re around Brisbane I can pretty much guarantee you’ve driven on concrete roads (it’d be a lot less likely if you lived in Woop Woop). Look for it on primary routes that get a lot of heavy vehicle traffic - for example head south on the Pacific Highway and you’ll find large sections of concrete.
My point was that if you’re writing an article talking about how much Australians spend on cycling/walking infrastructure you should at least mention that federal numbers are not the whole picture and that federal is not the level of government that is going to cover most of said infrastructure. Omitting this smacks of the author just looking for a low number to draw attention/outrage.
Why are they focussing on federal funding only? I would expect federal funding to go largely to the sorts of roads which are important on a broad scale but less desirable for cycling or walking - freeways, highways, major arterial roads, and so forth. State and local government are the levels I would expect to find the majority of cycling and walking investment, it seems odd that these are omitted.
Yes, it’s not the easiest space to find other uses for. I could see some options for it on Saturdays as a bookable space for displays or events that can come up and down quickly (e.g. it would make a nice space for a car club to show off their vehicles) but not much is coming to mind for weekday activities.
The properties in question can be found on the page labelled as 24 (page 26 overall) of this document if you’re curious - if you know anyone listed it would be a good idea to make sure they are aware of this issue.
It really shouldn’t be, but there has been a lot of money and effort expended over the years here to make people believe speed is the root of all evil. Combine that with the fediverse attracting a larger proportion of who are ideologically against any form of personal motorised transport and anything involving cars or bikes can become surprisingly contentious even before you bring speed into the mix.
I mean I won’t disagree with this, I am definitely of the opinion that people should be taught more driving skills.
I do doubt though that we’d end up with a useful course even if further training was mandated, so I am dubious as to the outcome of such a scheme. I say this as someone who’s been through a few licencing courses with a motorbike licence, MR licence, and forklift licence (and various other high risk or work related training courses). The truck licence didn’t really teach me anything new and was just a case of driving around making it look like you’re checking blind spots etc, the forklift licence practical was incredibly basic, and the theory part of stuff like the forklift and goods hoist license was basically served up to us on a silver platter rather than requiring learning. The motorbike courses at least tried to explain a bunch of basic concepts and handling but was stymied in practice by only being allowed to go 20km/h max in a carpark (after which feel free to head out out and do 90km/h on busy roads…).
About the only thing on that front that’s changed since the 70s have been improved breaks
Actually the biggest difference there is modern tyres. These are considerably better than those in the 70s - for an easy visualisation compare MotoGP lean angles and cornering speed from that era to what even consumer sport touring motorcycle tyres can handle these days (they weren’t cornering so comparatively slow for no reason, the tyres were the main limiting factor).
You also have modern suspension making a marked improvement on road handling, ABS making it so a chimpanzee can get the best braking without skidding, and in the last decade or so ESC has been making a notable difference to stability under braking and swerving. All together the average modern car will outbrake and outhandle an average 70s car by a long shot, particularly when not driven by an expert.
The claim that vehicles are newer and safer because they have new technologies is also pretty shaky
A significant proportion of cars do have the mentioned features though, blind spot monitoring is a nice easy one to notice and you’ll see a lot of cars do have it when you’re driving around.
Even without these specific features though modern cars are much safer than cars were when our speed limits were set. This even applies to cars now considered old - my own car for example now qualifies for historic rego and can drive quite safely at 130km/h (and is both less likely to get into a crash and much more survivable in the event of one than any 70s car).
Back when the 100km/h limit was set this was actually a fast speed for the cars and roads of the era. Now it is not - speed limits have become a recommended speed rather than anywhere near the limits of safety (assuming average car and normal conditions). Highway/freeway limits in particular are well due for an increase rather than the decreases (literally and effectively) they keep receiving.
do you even know about your own history, and the history of this so-called country? Invasion Day celebrates the anniversary of Cook’s invasion of these lands.
My irony meter just overloaded…
but also knocking off Rudds head? That doesn’t make much sense.
We are talking about the sort of people who both think vandalism like this will reflect well upon their cause and continue to attack a statue of Cook around Australia Day when there’s a much more relevant statue of Arthur Phillip just a bit further down the road. I think you’re giving them too much credit to expect they’d differentiate Rudd for doing the National Apology.
They were becoming a pest up on the mid north coast 20 years ago when I was a kid, used to sneak up and nibble at stuff in the house paddock at night time (as an aside they make a weird noise when disturbed). Hate to think how many must be in the bush up there now.
More recently I’ve seen a few bouncing across the road heading through the forestry areas on the way to Bega. Hope they don’t become too common as hitting one would be even worse damage/safety wise than collecting a large kangaroo and I do go up and down that way reasonably often.
I think that is another reason why articles like this always choose examples that everyone will agree are frivolous (along with the obvious answer of these being the attention grabbing ones). Mentioning something closer to an actual emergency could well do as you say and put off someone with a problem that sounds similar but is actually important.
Publicising the non-emergency number more would be a good idea I think, it’s around but is not something that will come to most people’s minds without looking it up. I’ve never had to call it so I’m not sure how well staffed it is but making sure people ringing the non-emergency line can get answered by a real person in reasonable time to discover what their problem is would be important (even if it’s a triage like situation where you get put back on hold for low priority things).
Sounds like there was quite a few people after the tickets given the article says all 990 tickets got snapped up in less than 24 hours, I’m impressed that that many people both knew it was happening and were enthusiastic enough to head out to see it (guessing the gardens sent out an email about it and social media posts etc).
Was the smell as powerful as these articles always say it is?