Tau

It is a fair point that subsidies for the cars have often been benefiting those who could afford the expensive car anyway, but surely their idea of subsidising home and work chargers is also benefiting those with more money. The subsidies would after all be primarily going to those who own a house with enough space to put the charger (i.e. not much luck for renters or apartment owners) and those who have allocated parking at work.

What is really needed to drive uptake is both cheaper EVs (to the point where they reach price parity with regular cars) and a charging network widespread and obvious enough to give prospective buyers confidence that they can charge even on their less common routes. Significant progress has been made with this, we've come a long way from the early days where cashed up people would smugly advise buying a 90+k vehicle to save a few grand on petrol.

I think promoting electric motorcycles and scooters would be worthwhile too, they're more affordable, take up noticeably less space and resources, and still provide much of the personal transport requirements of our current road network.

I think just go with either Australia, whichever capital city is appropriate for the state, or even both.

We don't get that many posts that further separation is worthwhile IMO, that's a pathway to ending up with a bunch of communities that appear dead from lack of activity (which can be a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy - people only tend to post in places that seem alive). I think we've already fragmented discussion more than is ideal between splitting off news/politics/questions/environment/memes from the general Australia community, regional interests are more understandable but the existing city/state comms are already quiet enough with our current userbase.

I don't think the star system actually does much, particularly with how it operates per category rather than overall. For example the packet of chips I'm eating right now is apparently 3.5/5 stars. That rating both fails to reflect the actual healthiness of said chips and didn't play any part in me buying them (I'm under no illusion that chips are healthy, I just like eating them on occasion). In fact I can't think of a single time I've cared about the star rating when buying something.

Doesn't surprise me, the old website is a much better user experience for me.

The new one is noticeably slower, hides the info I want to see behind extra clicks/scrolling, made the radar view worse, and doesn't improve the only thing I'd want to improve from the old site (making it easier to find less commonly used information such as river heights or past observations). In fact they made that part worse because now it bounces between the new design and remnants of the old one for anything bar the most commonly visited sections - even for basic stuff like a synoptic chart.

I just exchanged contracts on an apartment so I'm not surprised they chose now to start cranking the rates back up again - I was waiting for something annoying to come along once I committed. Luckily I'm not a complete goose so I didn't borrow right to my max, should be able to handle a few rises without being overly stretched.

I think you're doing a fair bit of jumping to conclusions there yourself, pointing out a good bit of nominative determinism can be just amusing rather than necessarily being ill intentioned.

If she had a different name and was described as Dr Orca from the Marine Conservation Society that would also be amusing and a comment regarding that could just be that rather than a jab at her.

It's what you'd expect - we're not perfect but overall we do pretty well.

I just read the transcript though because I'm not going to spend 10 minutes watching a video when I can read the salient info much faster (i.e. like many things this should have been an article rather than a video).

Chokos also feel noticeably heavier, once you've seen and held both you can distinguish them easily.

They are pretty bland things to eat though, fine for filler amongst other things when cooking but I wouldn't buy one. They're one of these things you just find growing and proceed to end up with a surfeit of so you start trying to put them into your cooking to avoid wasting them.

It's a feeling based idea to assuage the public rather than a logic based one. If someone has four guns already there is little difference between what damage they are likely to be able to cause with those four vs what they could do with five, six, or seven (and the difference is less significant again if they already have ten). The limits seem rather arbitrary instead of evidence based and would not stop a repetition of the Bondi massacre, they appear instead to just be a quick decision made to show the government is doing something in reaction to a tragedy (something must be done, this is something therefore we must do it...).

"These are low-IQ individuals who don't actually understand the historic significance of the monuments that they are attacking," he said.

True, though I expect they'd still be the type to tell everyone else they should learn our history.

This sort of thing is why I'm less and less inclined to support changing Australia Day - why bother changing the date when it's clear the loudest voices against it will never support celebrating Australia. That this is happening in the state that went to the effort of a truth telling commission and a treaty is the icing on the cake.

Probably, I did find a copy of that as a kid but it's been long enough that I can't recall specifics.

That is something that could fall under the new rule though, as could watching youtube videos of people modding guns, or gun owners downloading a maintenance manual for the guns they own, or if particularly misapplied even things like getting an ebook that happens to mention an aside about weapons/explosive manufacture (pretty sure Jules Verne describes a way to make explosives in The Mysterious Island for example).