Auspost has once again said a delivery is at the local post office because "safe place not suitable". I was WFH and didn't even get a knock / delivery attempt.
To be fair this only occurs once in a while.
Not sure should whether I should
1. Complain b/c this shouldn't be happening
or
2. Not complain because postie is possibly under impossible KPIs
or
3. Passive aggressively put a sign on the door saying "Please knock for delivery"
Guardian reported: Angus Taylor says 25% gas levy would shut down industry
Better framing: 25% gas levy would shut down donations for fossil fuel politicians such as Angus Taylor
Adolescence (2025) Episode 3. I can't believe the entire ep was a single take and its the child actor's first job. Un-freaking-believable.
Dutton: gas lighting Australians to benefit him and his mates again
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-17/dutton-morrison-politics-power-energy-prices/104734970
#mastodon #misinformation
whats the etiquette/approach to calling out misinformation on mastodon / aus.social? Specifically information that can be objectively verified back to an authoritative source.
#uspol #auspol #warningwalloftextbutIputinparagraphsforyourreadingpleasure
Some musings on the adversarial nature of politics. With the aftermath of the US election fresh on mind, Australia has also been through something similar with Morrison (and going through something else now with Albo, with more surface level politeness, i.e. "business as usual").
Its very easy, and intrinsically human, to pin issues on the other side and vent, especially when everyone else is doing it, and its amplified by media & social media - even mastodon. And obviously venting gets ignored by the other side, whoever the other side is.
It is a lot harder to reach across the gap and find commonalities in the hope of a future agreement; it works against human instincts and there is often pushback from others within our own group.
I want to share that in the technical field I work in, we often create different perspectives to assess issues. If we look at a particular issue from perspective A, everything just looks messy as hell and there's no insight to be gained. In that case, perspective A is not particularly useful and it gets parked. We look to find another perspective (say B) which allows us to gain useful insights. And even then, we might look to perspective C to find another useful set of insights (which may be in apparent conflict with insights from perspective B). And so on. The issue hasn't changed at all, all that's changed is the viewpoint from which we see it.
That same approach works imo for politics - and for clarity, the other perspectives I'm suggesting here aren't different political parties or explicit political outlooks. e.g. rather than seeing X industry that fuels climate change through political lens, maybe its helpful to look at from the perspective of people needing to earn a living, from the perspective of ongoing job opportunities, perspective of availability of education/training for current employees and their children, perspective of relocation/being uprooted from community, etc.
And so I circle back to adversarial nature of politics. Here's another, wider, perspective: the existence of billionaires who are able to pull political levers that extreme wealth gives them access to, how voters get only limited voting options, and are encouraged to yell at each other and the clouds whilst ignoring the billionaires who benefits from status quo.
Unfortunately, I think Australia need to start looking at the US as a cautionary tale of what happens if we don't get inequities under control. Which of course won't be easy with the likes of LNP and cookers around. Wicked problem :(