TrippaSnippa

joined 1 year ago
[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago

My first was a Galaxy S1 back in 2010 which I rooted and flashed with custom ROMs almost immediately. I remember applying the various generations of Voodoo lag fixes because Samsung used cheap shitty flash storage and a slow proprietary file system. Once the Nexus S came out the dev scene took off because they had almost the same hardware. I had it running up to Android 4.2 or so before it was relegated to sitting in a drawer for good. Unfortunately I don't know where it is now, if I still had it I'd try to boot it up and see if it still works.

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 20 points 1 year ago

There are no men on the internet

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is why it should also be equally available to fathers/partners on a "use it or lose it" basis. The "risk" of parental leave becomes even between men and women, thus one reason for hiring discrimination is removed.

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 20 points 1 year ago

Institute of Public Affairs = Institute of Privatisation and Austerity

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago

That is a trickier question. My gut feeling is that while it makes sense for a person's likeness to enter the public domain after they die, it feels a bit morbid and disrespectful for it to become possible to start running AI generated ads of a celebrity the day that they die. I hate how long copyright lasts now, but I feel like there should be at least some period after someone dies before their likeness enters the public domain. I don't know how long that should be, but definitely shorter than copyright currently is (which should also be much shorter).

My other concern is that if studios can freely recreate dead celebrities then new talent won't get a chance to make a name for themselves. Hollywood would much rather milk existing celebrities for every cent possible with AI (which is part of the reason for the SAG/AFTRA strike I guess). I don't have an answer for this right now.

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes and yes imo. A person's voice is part of their likeness, and people should get to decide how their likeness is used and get paid for such usage.

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago

Not to mention that the bar for a referendum to pass is very high. For the non-Australians, you need not only a majority of voters nationally to vote yes, but also a majority of states to vote yes (the so-called "double majority"). Only 8 of the last 44 referendums before now have passed and partisan referendums have never passed, so this one was doomed the minute Dutton decided to play politics with it.

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I never saw any arguments against the Voice that weren't either simplistic ideology ("it's racist to have an advisory body for indigenous people!") or outright lies and conspiracy theories. Claiming that it wouldn't have gone far enough isn't a good argument to do nothing instead. Does anyone really think that a treaty is more likely now than if we had voted yes?

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then he just needs to appoint himself as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and become the President of the Senate to fulfill his dream of running the entire government.

Our former prime minister actually did something like this. He secretly appointed himself as health minister, finance minister, industry minister, home affairs minister and treasurer. It was quite a big scandal that only came out after the election that kicked out his government and threw a lot of ministerial decisions made during that time into legal doubt, though nothing ended up coming from it.

Morrison was a lazy shit and only used his secret ministerial powers a few times, he just wanted to have the power for himself. His stated reason was "in case the existing ministers became incapacitated by COVID", but we already have assistant ministers that could fill in if that happened.

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I look forward to fighting Clippy as a raid boss

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hot chips and potato chips if you need to be specific, for everything else there's context.

[–] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Essentially infinite" is a bit of a stretch. The minimum warranty period is 12 months but it is true that there's no defined maximum period. The reasonably expected lifespan of a consumer good generally increases with its value. Manufacturers and retailers are free to offer further warranties in addition to the guaranteed warranty period under the consumer law but this does not reduce or replace your rights under the law.

I will add that change of mind refunds are not covered by Australian consumer law and it is uncommon for retailers to accept them compared to the US. You can usually exchange something for another item of equivalent value or store credit, but you usually can't buy a phone to try out and return it after 30 days for example.

view more: ‹ prev next ›