Jump to content

CaptainJess

Members
  • Content Count

    2,139
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

About CaptainJess

  • Rank
    Club Captain
  • Birthday 17/07/1991

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location:
    Bay 26

Supported Teams

  • AL Team
    Wanderers

Contact Methods

  • Twitter
    @jessmoran13

Recent Profile Visitors

1,781 profile views
  1. Firstly - border** Secondly - Closing the border isn't a simple process and would have devastating impacts for border towns like Albury-Wodonga. The closure up on the Tweed border has had terrible repercussions for a lot of the population up there. Also, it isn't air tight. You can still move across the border on foot and there's also plenty of back roads still open for those in 4WD's. The border to the ACT has also been open this entire time and there hasn't been any spread from NSW into there. Just because there's a border closure, doesn't mean we're going to be better off. Finally - That isn't what your good mate ScoMo wants. It's apparently completely fine for the borders to be open. Shouldn't we trust what ScoMo says because according to you, he's just taking advice from his experts? To be clear, I don't care one way or another about the border. It won't affect me directly. But I find it hypocritical that we (on the forum) were scolded for saying schools should remain closed and branded one-eyed lefties because ScoMo's experts said it was safe. Now we've got a situation where ScoMo is saying having the borders open is safe, and it seems like the shoe is on the other foot.
  2. It's pretty clearly set out in the Constitution the exclusive and concurrent powers the Federal Government (Commonwealth) has. Maybe check it out. The states retain legislative powers over matters not specifically listed in the Constitution. This sort of stuff really needs to be taught better in schools. If it was, we wouldn't have these "many people" being surprised over something that literally underpins our entire country. It's not something that's just been decided in the past couple of years. We're talking 1901 here.
  3. I'm lucky to have had mainly positive experiences with Uber both here and in the US. However there have been a few standout douche-bags. One thing that's interesting between here and the US is that they don't seem to have the same quality restrictions on their cars. Balks and I got in some shockers in Hawaii. One was a 30 year old Lincoln town-car and another was a beat-bomb that didn't have working seat belts. We tried Lyft too, but got an equally dodgy Jeep, so it was really just hit and miss. Back here though, the two worst ones were while we heading to or from the airport. The first one I'm still not sure on, but I didn't like how he went about it. We order an Uber at 5:30am, dude rocks up and then "accidentally" cancels the trip on his phone (not sure if it was on purpose or not). Then proceeds to physically snatch Balk's phone out of his hand and request and cancel three trips on the app before it gave our ride to this driver again. We weren't pleased but we had a flight at 8:30am, so didn't want to argue. The second one was the worst. We had just got back from a holiday and booked an Uber to take us home. It's late and we've just come off a long flight with lots of luggage. The guy confirms the trip and we start walking towards the pick up zone (which is about a 5 min walk away from the terminal). As we get to the pick-up zone, I noticed he hasn't moved and then I get a call. The guy says he doesn't want to take us that far and that he needs me to cancel the trip, then hangs up on me. Now it's become clear to me that he doesn't want to cop the penalty for cancelling and wants me to do it instead. So I call him back and tell him that if he doesn't want to take us, he's the one that needs to cancel. He proceeds to abuse me and then Balks. I end up telling him that I'm happy to play chicken and that I've just ordered another Uber on my partner's app so if he wants another ride, then he will have to do it. Waited another 10 mins and he finally gives up and cancels the ride while we hopped into another Uber. Most drivers I've had have been pretty quiet and respectful. I've had a couple of retired or semi-retired people and quite a few mums as well. I can understand not wanting to take huge trips to the other side of the city, but short trips I don't. If it's in the area, what does it matter?
  4. Read both parts of it. It was very interesting and a comprehensive look at what went on over those key couple of weeks in Feb/March. I will admit though, it was rather "fluffy" in parts. However, while reading it I think it really hit home how well it was managed and how the correct decisions were made in a timely manner. It was interesting to read about who was advising who on decisions and how they lent quite heavily on business leaders for many issues. I also thought the section on Qantas being asked to run the repatriation flights was fascinating. It's funny how you think something like that should be simple - fly a plane to Wuhan, pick up passengers, fly them back. But then you read what Qantas had to do. They had never flown there before so they had no flight plans, no fuel contracts, no handling staff and that it usually takes months to set that sort of thing up. They did it in days. People in all areas really stepped up, both in Government and private business. Makes you thankful to be living here. When the CMO says the only thing he would have done differently was to hotel quarantine returning travelers earlier, that's not terrible at all. Part 1 - https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/inside-the-crisis-that-changed-australian-government-20200608-p550hl.html Part 2 - https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/i-see-the-full-horror-show-how-australia-navigated-the-twin-crises-of-covid-19-20200609-p550tn.html
  5. Facebook, Woolies and Google don't have access to a police force, don't have the power to enact retrospective legislation and don't really have a reason to track you beyond simple commercial/$$$ reasons. There are many reasons why a Government might want to track the movement of it's citizens and not all of them are for "the greater good". A website placing a cookie on your computer is a lot different to this app. If you're getting ads on your Facebook page for products, then you don't have your privacy/information permissions set up correctly. Use a VPN, educate yourself on privacy permissions and only give over the information you absolutely have to. I would suggest everyone have a look at this article and follow the instructions if you're worried about advertisers and your data - https://www.cnet.com/how-to/facebook-can-see-your-website-activity-heres-a-new-tool-to-stop-it/ But as I've said before, I'm not really fussed Facebook know I like puppies and Kmart. In fact, I often appreciate that they're serving me the content I want to see. The source code should have been released before the big push to download it. Too late now that four million people have downloaded it. They also should have had proper legislative protections in place beforehand. They didn't. If you want to convince people like myself and marron abut the safety and mechanics of the app, then those two things alone would have made a huge difference to my point of view.
  6. Or they do what they have been doing already and release information about where particular cases have been found. I've heard several announcements regarding people being confirmed positive and that people who have visited those particular stores have been told to self-isolate. I know off the top of my head there were two at supermarkets in Penrith/Glenmore Park, one in Costco Marsden Park, multiple at universities including one at WSU who visited the library. They do it all the time with measles and Legionnaires outbreaks. With the amount of cases we currently have, I think this would be quite manageable. I can imagine if we were in the US right now it would be a different story, but here at this moment in Australia, a diary would suffice. At the risk of re-igniting the debate again, I would also be very low-risk for spreading it if I went to Aldi or the doctors because I wear a mask whenever I leave the house (very rarely these days) and wash/sanitize my hands religiously. I also spend as little time as possible in these places too.
  7. Haha came here to post exactly this article. Liked this line below too. "Bureaucrats inside the Government's Digital Transformation Agency voiced concerns about the awarding of the contract to an overseas provider when several wholly Australian-owned cloud storage services had been security vetted for precisely such high-level contracts." So they have several Australian companies who have been vetted for this precise reason and yet they chose to go with a supplier who is major overseas conglomerate who has had previous issues with data integrity and hacking? Several security concerns have been raised about their Alexa device and just this morning it was revealed that they have been using third-party vendor data to compete with and profit from the development of their own private-label products - https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2020/04/report-amazon-uses-marketplace-seller-data-to-make-its-own-competing-products/ If this is going on, can you imagine what else is?
  8. Not sure how to take this response Wendy? Why is a diary a bad idea? I have been doing it in a basic form for a couple of weeks. I note where I go in the calendar on my phone. If I have a personal log that says I went Aldi on Monday, my doctors on Wednesday and Petbarn on Thursday, how is that any different to what this app is doing? If I can pinpoint my movements, it will make it super easy for someone to contact trace if I do come down with something (knock on wood). Our contact tracing is some of the best in the world already with the app and they have announced they are investing in more capability for it. If everyone kept a basic log, I think it would be almost as effective and less intrusive. I don’t have those apps either. If I need to use one of those services, I will access it via the web using a VPN. I’m also very specific in what permissions I give apps too. I don’t care if I seem a little paranoid, but I think we give away too much data unnecessarily.
  9. Oh Ed, I'm so sorry I'm glad I got to meet your brother once. He seemed like a genuinely kind person. We'll raise a toast to him at our trivia night when we eventually return.
  10. Yeaaaahh.. Nope not touching that with a ten foot pole. While I understand that many companies and the Government already hold some information on me, I can at least have certain control over things (i.e app permissions) or it's otherwise necessary or very basic info. However, with things like this and the digital MyHealth Records I don't trust them one iota. If you let these things just happen without proper privacy protections in place, then they will take advantage. And let's be honest, they aren't just going to go "oh well, corona is under control now, we're just going to stop monitoring everything". With the MHR, I didn't trust their systems could securely store my sensitive medical information and I don't trust slimy politicians not to try and monetize it. I don't care that Facebook knows I like dogs and Kmart and serves ads to me about them, but I sure as hell do care that my personal health information isn't sold to insurance or pharmaceutical companies without my knowledge. And I sure as hell do care that an app will have permission to certain aspects of my phone that they would have normally needed a warrant to acquire. I know people will say that if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to worry about. But I think that's a cop-out for slowly eroding our rights. First it's little things, but then those little things just get used as justification for bigger things until you're way too far down the slippery slope. You see it with NSW Police. We have become a nanny state because we didn't care about tiny allowances that they were given. But those powers were never reigned and just increased further. The AFP illegally raided the home of a journalist after she published a story on their plans to expand surveillance on Australians. They are already planning on doing this sort of stuff. People are now just voluntary going to hand it over. If they have nothing to hide, they should release the source code so that independent people can verify nothing suss is going on. If I hear from genuine third party people the app is okay, then I might consider it. However, If you want one last piece of evidence, have a look at what our Government wants and what Jacinda Ardern wants. For everyone playing along at home, she wants New Zealanders to - wait for it - keep a diary. Pretty sensible and safe idea in my opinion.
  11. Balks and I were discussing this the other day. Can you imagine if this was 10-15 years ago? Even maybe 5 years ago. Nothing we have today was around then or if it was, it was nothing compared to what we have today. Video conferencing was in it's early stages with Skype, the internet quality was worse (despite what some may say to the contrary ) and a large majority didn't have access to a cost-effective mobile device. Laptops were ridiculously expensive, phones were nothing like they are now and software has come along in leaps and bounds. I have no doubt that the ability for a large portion of people to effectively pick up and work from home has drastically improved the current situation. This wouldn't have been possible years ago. For better or worse, the internet has had a huge impact on society and the way we function. It may not be ideal in certain circumstances, but it's meant our country hasn't just ground to a halt.
  12. You didn't read the article I posted. Please do - https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6700020/the-not-so-dirty-secret-the-covid-19-panel-wants-to-hide/ The problem with your statement is that it is impossible. Any decision made on the running of the country is a "political" decision. The word political by definition means "relating to the government or public affairs of a country". I think what you're referring to is an ideological bias. And as far as I'm concerned, nobody has shown overwhelming bias for or against anyone in this thread. People are assessing the issues and decisions on face value. I guarantee you that if Labor were in power and made the same decision, we would be questioning it. You can't also totally disregard a party's overall strategy or position. The Libs being economically more conservative IS a factor in a lot of their decision making. You can't just pretend it isn't. Our whole debate here is whether economic or public health concerns should prevail in a decision making process. Also, people can be against a certain decision but agree with an overall approach taken.
  13. Not from my perspective. Good friends of ours have two young girls aged 4 and 10. The father is in IT for a major business and the mother is a frontline worker. Both classed as essential. If anybody was clamouring for schools and childcare to be open, it’s them. However they’re making it work. Father works from home three days a week, mother’s roster is different week to week but can generally take the other two days. Two weeks ago, they call us in a panic because they both have to work and they didn’t want to send the girls to their grandmother’s place (their usual babysitter if required). They reluctantly sent the younger one to pre-school because they only had a handful of kids attending that day but need someone to look after the older girl for the day. Balks and I are working from home and have been for multiple weeks. We’ve also been self-isolating as much as possible and we’re fairly low risk, so we looked after her. She sat in our lounge room for the day on her computer and iPad. Did a couple of hours of school work, played some games and FaceTimed her friends. We played some board games in the afternoon and went outside and played with our dogs. Overall she had a positive day with plenty of stimulation and learning in a SAFE environment. Had she been forced to go to school, she would have been exposed to dozens of other students and teachers who all pose an increased risk compared to her immediate family or people like Balks and I who are taking all precautions. School was a last ditch option for her parents. And these are the people ScoMo is urging to send their children to school. The older girl is showing no issues with the online learning and she’s managed to pick up other skills along the way. We taught her to play chess and she’s learning cross-stitch. It’s certainly not the doomsday scenario particular people are forecasting.
  14. Midi, I don’t get where you think everyone in this thread is bashing Morrison. If anything, people like myself who have a pretty strong negative opinion on him and the Libs, have been positive about the steps we’ve taken so far and generally how the situation has been handled. But we’ve got some pretty well-educated members on this forum who are able to think critically and use deductive reasoning. Most are coming to the same conclusion that it seems to be an economic decision rather than a health based one. One thing to remember is that the CMO is a politically appointed position. While I have no doubt that Dr Murphy is acting responsibly in his role, he can’t be immune to some political pressure. I can imagine a conversation going something like this - Scomo: So, schools... What’s the risk like if we keep them open? Murphy: Well there’s a risk, but it doesn’t affect children as much. Scomo: So if we kept schools open, the kids would be relatively safe? Murphy: Technically yes. Scomo: Well if we were to close schools, it would mean that a large portion of the workforce would be required to stay home to look after their children. That could have a major impact on the economy and the availability of our frontline workers. So I think if you say it’s relatively safe and low risk, we should keep them open. What’s Murphy or the AHPPC going to say to that? If Morrison has a set agenda, then he is going to get his advisors to find him the information he wants to support that. This opinion piece I think sums up more succinctly and poetically the point I’m trying to make - https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6700020/the-not-so-dirty-secret-the-covid-19-panel-wants-to-hide/ Please have a read. Nobody is bashing the medical advisors. But it seems very weird that the one issue that seems out of step with every other measure we’ve taken is schools. And it’s probably the issue that could cause the biggest headache for the economy and our workforce if they were forced to closed. I can’t go and get my eyebrows waxed (which by the way I successfully managed to do myself the other day without serious bodily harm ) because of the risk of transmission but Marron or Wendy can be forced into a small classroom with 30+ kids for hours on end and it’s all okay and dandy. Even you have to admit this doesn’t add up. I think Morrison went too hard on the schools issue first up and now it would like too much of a backflip if he softened now. From the start, schools should have been shut. Each LGA should have had a small amount of schools remain open for kids that have no other option (kids of medical professionals etc.) And the advice should have been, keep your kids at home if you can but we have options if you can’t. Most kids will handle missing a few months of structured schooling. Balkanite literally fled Bosnia as a primary school aged child after missing years of school due to the war. He arrived in a foreign country not speaking a word of English but has successfully managed to put himself through his remaining education, went on to higher learning. He now has a senior level IT management role in the largest Government department in the State. The kids will be fine.
  15. The interesting thing from a legal perspective is the High Court overturning a jury verdict. To put this in perspective, in 2018/19 there were 565 special leave applications. You must apply for special leave to appeal to the High Court. Only 43 of these applications were approved and heard. Less than 8%. So firstly, the fact that he was granted leave to appeal is quite something in itself. Futhermore, High Court judges have always shown a marked reluctance to overturn jury decisions. Most judges have always upheld the important fundamental constitutional function that a jury performs. A jury is generally seen as a reliable and valuable part of our justice system. I don't have specific stats on this point, but there have been many past judgments that infer what I have said above. A number of barristers have also come out in the past week or so to reinforce this observation as well. So now we've got Pell and his defence team who have seemingly achieved a remarkable legal feat. I can't help but think this is clear case of privilege and influence, and I'm disappointed as someone who has studied the law that our High Court could be swayed in such a way. Not sure if it's related, but it seems there has been quite a turn over in judges over the past 3-5 years. Many HC judges (Kirby, Haynes, McHugh etc.) in the late 90's and early 00's sat for over decade or more and there was a fair amount of consistency in decisions (apart from the odd dissenting judgment from Kirby ). The HC seem to have waves where you'll have years of a consistent bench and then 3 or 4 of them will leave within a couple of years of each other and new ones come in. We seem to have just had another wave recently. I could be talking out of my ass though
×
×
  • Create New...