|
Vahtooch posted:Absolutely stunning op. Now I'll just go back to sipping lattes and not wanting to work hard, and you know, crying into said latte since I just read this. Oh yeah I forgot you can't get a shot of whiskey after midnight. Pathetic. I hate this city.
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
My god, that boomer article is depressing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:So. lovely little government down under. Ive got a question for you. Why do foreigners always drop in here to ask gloating questions about whatever lovely economist article they read this week? Have they been harboring miserable jealousy since the GFC and now they're trying to spread it globally?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
They're just getting him off the TV for a couple of months. He'll have a nice holiday and do nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
quote:Mass arrests part of NSW pill testing program proposal http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/mass-arrests-part-of-nsw-pill-testing-program-proposal-20160229-gn6d4o.html NSW Liberals: Definitely not a bunch of small minded moral wowsers.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
open24hours posted:Do those disposable testing kits you can buy actually work? They could just hand those out. I doubt a little kit could test for every dangerous impurity. That plan sounds like a great way to get sued.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
I don' t think it's stupid. It's an interesting experiment.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 09:49
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:It goes beyond them just liking bitcoin; the blockchain is an inherent part of the proposal. Blockchain has proven to be an excellent method for distributed authentication.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
Mr Chips posted:Trading away or accumulating votes, what could possibly go wrong with that. It will be, at most, one vote in the senate. I think it's reasonable to experiment on that scale. People have been speculating about voting alternatives for a long time and I think if you're interested in politics at all you should be able to see the value in this as an experiment.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:What does that add to the political process though? If you read the plan closely, they have an idea to recruit specialists to craft policy proposals. People vote on the policies proposed by the specialists. And yeah, it's techno utopianism, but I still think it will make an interesting experiment. Look at other "wisdom of crowds" experiments, like prediction markets. It's worth it to satisfy intellectual curiosity, at the very least.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 10:20
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:Sure, it's reasonable to experiment on a small scale, and it's not inherently a terrible idea (although its execution might be). But one actual vote is the worst place to do it, because at that scale it's impossible to show that representative democracy. It ultimately means that only the majority position is going to actually be put forward, making the whole thing meaningless. I don't follow. Why is it impossible to show representative democracy if they have a system for citizens to register in the system?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
Seagull posted:what if democracy... was an App lol hahahahah, excellent smarmy dismissal. Reminds me of that time goons epicly owned the poo poo out of the idiots behind bitcoin by correctly predicting it's implosion within the first year.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 10:26
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:Because it's all working towards defining a single vote in the senate, meaning that anything less than a majority will have absolutely no effect. It doesn't matter if a policy vote on Flux comes down to a 51-49 split, or a 97-3, it will come out exactly the same. Any flaws with the actual idea in a 'real' context are irrelevant, because it's fighting for total control over a single vote, which likely won't come into play. An ideal 'test' of the idea would instead be total control of a smaller system; a local council, a university student body, something like that. These are all perfectly valid critiques, but I don't see them as fatal. Depending on the results if flux ever manage to get a single senator, I can see them resolving these problems. You could come up with rules on how much of a majority is needed for certain types of legislation, for example.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:So is it editorial policy at every Australian newspaper that journalists have to mention twitter drama at least once somewhere in a story? Journalists are all twitter addicts. They all follow each other and it's a huge, nauseating circle jerk.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:https://twitter.com/David_Speers/status/705544569144737792 Lol housing tax. gently caress off.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Is the anarchist's cookbook still banned here?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:Secretary of the department of Australia for Australians Goddamn.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
He announced his support for marriage equality a long time ago.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Can someone explain precisely what's going on with the greens and the voting reform thing in the senate? At the moment there are a bunch of terrible stories going around about it which don't really explain the machinations behind it
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
The Narrator posted:Just going to copy some stuff from yesterday first: Thanks. It looks like the media are lazily playing along with labor and the cross benchers, since almost all of the headlines I've seen on this are along the lines of "GREENS VOTE AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE" without any explanation of the wider context.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2016 01:00
|
|