In Montreal Australia won only one silver and four bronze medals. That was very embarrassing. A modern economy should be able to do better than that. As a result Malcolm Fraser set up the Australian Institute for Sport.

Now we are at the other extreme with Australia ranking fourth amongst all countries for gold medals behind the USA, China and Japan (although for total medals we also rank behind France and Great Britain, but ahead of Japan.

Most of the countries we are beating have significantly larger populations, so this is huge outperformance. But what does it say about us as a nation?

The USA is 15 times larger than us and China is 54 times larger, but they've only won around twice as many gold medals each.

We might be beating them in sport, but everywhere else they are handing our backsides to us.

This wouldn't be the case if we put the same energy and ambition into economic pursuits, using the same meritocratic and evidence-based approach we use to produce world class athletes. Instead of that we are increasingly living in a world where merit and hard work are dirty words and everyone expects a gold medal with the Albanese government being the epitome of that.

The federal government will bask in the glory of the Olympics at the same time as they take us down the low road of decreasing national wealth. Ultimately we'll end up with no gold in the economy, and no gold at the Olympics, because only rich economies do well there.

Maybe Australia will become like East Germany, poor but with a high medal tally. Wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?

Medals for playing sport don't impress me. Sport is one of the things that makes Australians dumb. If they took more interest in the things that matter: politics, economics, defence, mass immigration and multiculturalism, along with Western values, we wouldn't have the dumbest of the dumb, Albanese, as PM.

The Olympics are a spectator sport. Life and reality is also a spectator activity for the average Australian, who just sits back and lets it happen.

While Albanese is smirking and squeaking about a few medals as though he had some part in the winning of them, ASIO has lifted the terror alert to ‘probable’.

With a sustained and growing 10-month campaign against Australian Jews led by a violent, well-organised protest movement and inadequate responses from a politically conflicted government, why the hell is ASIO only now raising the warning?

This is just one of the things being ignored in favour of bloody childish games.

Graham,

I understand where you’re coming from with the comparison between our Olympic success and how we approach economic management, but I think there’s more to consider here.

You’re right that Australia’s Olympic results show what we can achieve when we’re focused and driven. But when it comes to the economy, the Albanese government isn’t exactly ignoring merit or hard work. They’re dealing with a different set of challenges. Economic decisions involve juggling a lot of priorities, like social fairness, sustainability, and long-term growth. It’s not always as straightforward as applying the same approach we use for sports.

You rightly point out that our sporting success is driven by an evidence-based approach. To be fair, however, the Albanese government has also been relying on evidence in their policymaking, particularly in areas like renewable energy and health. For example, their investments in renewable energy projects are expected to generate tens of thousands of jobs and reduce long-term energy costs, positioning Australia as a leader in the emerging green economy. These projects are supported by extensive research and are designed to make the country more self-reliant and resilient in the face of global energy market fluctuations.

In the health sector, the government’s handling of the ongoing effects of the Covid pandemic has been guided by expert advice, contributing to Australia’s strong economic recovery. The country’s unemployment rate is now among the lowest it’s been in decades, a testament to the effectiveness of these evidence-based strategies. While the benefits of these policies might not be as immediately visible as Olympic medals, they are setting the stage for a more robust and sustainable future.

To add a bit of perspective, the lack of investment in public infrastructure over the past few Coalition governments has led to long-term challenges like congestion in cities, strain on public transport, and the deterioration of essential services. The economic costs of these infrastructure shortfalls have been substantial, and subsequent governments have had to play catch-up. Then there’s the problems now faced in the housing sector…

No government is perfect, and missed opportunities can happen on any side of politics.

It's with great joy and pride that our country with a
smaller population than many others has concluded its
Paris Olympic campaign with such remarkable achievements
finishing with 18 Gold Medals and 53 overall.

Australia came 4th in the tally after the United States,
China, and Japan.

Australians have competed at every Olympic Games in the
modern era and hosted the Games in Melbourne in 1956 and
in Sydney in 2000.

There's so many stories of the athletes, the immense
training they go through, the sacrifices they and their
families make, and what drives them to succeed for us.
All we can say with pride and joy is - THANK YOU!

It is with pride that the green and gold image of our
nation is carried onto the international stage every
4 years.

May it long continue with equal pride.

Let the Brits have their riots. Let us instead continue winning
Gold Medals.

The outward bounds from the exchequer is the preserve of the King who wears no clothes.
Always the same exchequer, always the same naked King, irrespective!

I don't watch the Olympics.
I don't like the 'win at all costs' attitudes.
It is like watching a war.
Instead of watching friendly competition.
I don't mind if our athletes win no medals at all.
Provided they take part in a friendly, healthy, and meaningful way.
Then they will have demonstrated we are a sensible and practical society.
There could be no better statement made about us.

Only a sour grapes conservative with an axe to grind would write such rubbish denigrating the efforts of a small group of young Australians in their sporting endeavours. Its not all about politics and whether Labor is running the country or a party led by a Mr Potato Head. BTW Mr PH was lavish in his praise of Australia's achievements at the Paris Olympics. Your party chief doesn't agree with you Graham.

.

It was 100 years since the Summer Olympics had been held in Paris.

In the 1924 Olympics, the US came first with 45 gold medals and France second with 14. Finland also had 14 golds, but France had 15 silvers and Finland only had 13. So, Finland came 3rd.

Australia came 11th with 3 golds, 1 silver and 2 bronze. Our population that year was 5,811,145. The US population was 114,109,000 (almost 20 times ours). China did not participate in the 1924 Paris Olympics.

Our 3 gold medallists were :

• Boy Charlton - 1,500 metres Freestyle,

• Dick Eve - Plain High Diving,

• Nick Winter - Triple Jump,
.

Our silver medallist was :

• 4 × 200 metres Freestyle Relay,

[Boy Charlton • Moss Christie • Frank Beaurepaire • Ernest Henry • Ivan Stedman]
.

Our bronze medallists were :

• Frank Beaurepaire - 1,500 metres Freestyle,

• Boy Charlton - 400 metres Freestyle,
.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) highlights the role that sport and the Olympic Games play in fostering healthy and active lives.

Scientific research has evidenced the fact that sport and mind interact with mutually positive effects not only physically but also intellectually and psychologically.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that children and teenagers engage in at least 60 minutes of physical activity per day, while adults should do at least 150 minutes throughout the week.

As the IOC President Thomas Bach points out : “Sports participation is an extremely low-cost, high-impact tool to foster active and healthy lives 365 days a year.”

I should add that sport doesn’t just build muscles, it forges character, willpower and self-confidence. It teaches team spirit, the respect of competitors and the acceptance of defeat graciously.

More importantly, it helps realise that the virtue of all achievement is victory over oneself.

The Paris Olympics came as a breath of fresh air in a persistently anxiogenic atmosphere of political, cultural and sociological conflict – not just in France, but worldwide.

That has been extremely positive.

.

Hi BP,

Those Kiwi's must be on steroids they won 10 gold medals (my wife tells me often enough) more than 50% of Aussie. BUT! with a population of about 25% of ours!

SEE those B's took gold, silver and Bronze in the sheep tossing competition! The poor Aussie competitor got knocked out when a belligerent ewe kicked him in the head, STONE THE CROWS! The American kept demanding fries with his sheep, and the Chinese competitor said; "it all taste like chicken when cooked", DISGUSTING!

You're right Paul, the Kiwis are even worse at substituting sport for useful output. We have a lot in common as former British Colonies settled at the bottom of the world mostly in the late 19th, early 20th centuries.

BTW, has anyone else noticed our latest contributor John Daysh is actually an AI Chatbot? Or has he been passing the Turing test? John Daysh is a New Zealander who invented the milking machine, so I guess we've all been being milked.

If you doubt me, copy his text into some AI detection software and see what you get.

So the AI believes that this Labor government is following established principles of how to make a society rich? Interesting, because we know how societies get rich, and that is by increasing productivity, and everything they have been doing since they arrived in government is to reduce productivity, and there are graphs that prove that, along with commentary from the Reserve Bank of Australia.

Seems AI has its limits.

Would not be at all surprised about John Daysh, to whom I took an instant dislike, with his robotic posts - more like lectures actually - haranguing everyone and assuming that we would all admire the way he clips his second hand information from “reliable sources”. He is a pain in the nether parts.

As for “this Labor government”: it seems to be introducing tyranny from within, as Aristotle described over two thousand years ago.

Thanks Graham.

Graham,

I didn't think much of John's justification of his belief that a normally operating nuclear power plant slowly poisoned/harmed people living nearby. I thought the justification to be so poor as to be insulting, but on presenting reasons that his claim was highly unlikely, he simply moved to other claims, shifting the goal posts if you will.

There are a number of posters here that go to great effort to justify their views, like AC and Banjo. They don't lecture and I've always found discussions with them to based on ideas and the importance given them. The goal posts are always solidly founded.

Graham,

I can assure you that I am no bot. I am John Daysh, 45, from The Gap in Brisbane.

AI detection tools can be too sensitive, particularly when the author writes to a professional standard. Nevertheless, I will dumb things down and get more emotional if it will satisfy you.

Either way, it shouldn’t matter if you have for facts correct. I note that you could not counter what I actually said (LoL!)

Productivity is economic growth, you need to look at the full picture. There will inevitably be dips in short-term productivity numbers might show some dips, but that doesn’t mean that a long-term strategy is rubbish.

The current government’s focus on areas like renewable energy, infrastructure, and skills development is about laying the groundwork for productivity in the future. It may produce immediate boosts, but they’re essential for ensuring an economy that is competitive.

Yes, the graphs and Reserve Bank commentary valuable, but they’re also just one bit. Short-term figures can fluctuate due to a range of factors, and it’s the long-term trends that will ultimately show whether these policies are successful. The goal isn’t just to chase immediate productivity gains but to build a more robust economy that can sustain growth over time.

Increasing productivity isn’t just about quick fixes. (LoL!)

{"dataPath":"null\\data","gamePath":"null","isDirectMode":false,"isDryRun":false,"isPreExtractedData":false,"mergedPath":"null\\mods\\D2RMM\\D2RMM.mpq\\data","outputModName":"D2RMM","preExtractedDataPath":"C:\\Windows\\SMDD\\data\\"}

I just ran an old law essay of mine through http://quillbot.com, and it came out as 88% AI generated. Hahahaha! Good writing ftw! LOL!

Fester,

If you go back and re-read what I said regarding nuclear power plants causing harm to locals, you will see that I addressed your rebuttal directly. It was you who dropped the matter and moved on. I then moved on, too, but without accusing you of shifting any goal posts.

I find Banjo Paterson's posts and now those of John
Daysh's of a very high standard. Both raise the bar
in the discussions they choose to comment. Their
views are always presented in a rational non-insulting
and informative way.

A pity we don't have more contributors like them. Were it not
for people like them - online - opinion - would take a severe
drop in intelligent discussion.

Gentlemen, Keep it coming.

Hi John,

The hard right might accuse you of AI but there are those here suffering from NI. I never thought of you as a Robbie The Robot type, just someone contributing with a well presented argument. The hard right hate people like you showing them up the way you do.

Now this name-on-a-screen wants to “assure” us that it is not a bot.

Impossible, of course. Warm blooded human or robot, it is impossible to prove anything about yourself online. If true, the age of 45 claimed puts him in the brainwashed, dumbed-down generation.

John Daysh, real or imaginary, has been one of the more insistent blow-ins who show up every now and again. He/she/it is no better than the rest of them, though. And, I'm amazed that some posters have kept giving him, her or it oxygen. I'm glad our moderator has spoken out on the nonsense.

This poster, calling himself John Daysh, mentions writing “to a professional standard”, then a couple of sentences later writes “if you have for facts correct”. OK, even after editing, I make mistakes like that, but I'm not a “professional” like the pain-in-the-butt thinks he is.

If I had to describe Poster Daysh in one word, that word would be BORING. Apart from that, he is probably a harmless crank whom nobody listens to in real life.

Thanks, Paul1405.

ttbn,

I'm not a professional writer, either, but that typo was deliberate. Try running it through AI detection and you may see why...

I look forward to the day when you can be civil to even those with whom you disagree, rather than directing hate in your thinly-veiled attempts to control the course of discussion and your attempts to set the tone of new article discussions by getting the first word in with poorly thought-through comments.

While we are on cranks, weirdos and liars, have a look at https://www.joannenova.com.au/.

A group of university “geniuses” have ‘discovered’ what Joseph Geobbels knew in the early 20th Century: that repeating things often enough makes them true to the masses.

Of course, being university types and under the age of 50, they apply it to climate “denial”: not the repeated propaganda of governments, rogue scientists, carpetbaggers and motley Marxists and their lies.

Speaking of cranks, weirdos and liars indeed, ttbn!

Right, so this article on Joanne Nova's site is basically sayin' that if you keep hearin' the same rubbish over and over, you might start believin' it, yeah? She talks about sumpfin' called the "illusory troof effect," which basically means that just 'cause sumpfin' gets repeated loads, don’t mean it’s true, but it can start to feel true.

Now, the article’s kinda makin’ it sound like the media and scientists are in on some big con, just repeatin' stuff to fool everyone. But that’s a bit dodgy, innit? Scientists ain’t just repeatin' stuff for the sake of it – they got proper research and facts backin' 'em up. Just repeatin' sumpfin’ over and over don’t make it true, it just makes it sound like it is, and that’s where this article gets a bit twisty.

It also kinda suggests that since these climate denial claims are gettin’ more airtime, maybe they’re onto somethin'. But nah, just 'cause sumpfin’ gets repeated, that don’t make it legit, you get me? The article needs to be clearer about that, or it might make folks think there’s more troof to these dodgy claims than there actually is.

The article bangs on about the media havin' too much power, repeatin' climate change stuff like it’s the same as repeatin’ denial claims. But that’s not right, 'cause real scientists and proper news are tryin' to tell people the troof, not just blowin’ hot air.

In the end, the article’s takin' a real thing – how repeat stuff can seem true – and twistin’ it to make climate denial sound more credible than it is. It’s a bit iffy, and people should be lookin’ at proper science, not just goin’ by what they hear over and over, especially from dodgy sources.

I trust this speaks more to the level of education we’re dealing with here.

Innit?

I fully understand Graham's point that in an ideal world, Australia would put equal efforts into fostering and nurturing our entrepreneurs as we do our sportsmen (or are they sportspeople these days?).

Achieving this or that victory at the Olympics is hardly an achievement for the nation and really tells us nothing about the quality of the national environment or its people. Its the victory of a few naturally blessed, highly motivated and spectacularly well subsidised folk rather than a victory for the nation, most of whom 'participate' from their couch.

Spectacularly subsidised? Well getting exact numbers is rather difficult but it seems that various governments around Australia collectively spend somewhere north of $2 Billion per year on elite sport alone. Then there's the various corporate sponsorships and we are talking real money that might, one would have hoped, been spent in more fruitful ways.

In looking for these numbers I continually saw governments calling their spending on sport an "investment". (Everything the government throws money away on these days seems to be an investment according to them). But as an investment is as bad as it gets. $2 Billion per year and the return is $147.39 in gold, silver and bronze every four years. That's a Return on Investment that only government could achieve or maintain.

At least when Alcibiades spent lavishly to win first prize in the 416BC Olympics, it was his own money.

Then we have all the other ways money is lavished on these pursuits. We now have people doing a PhD in breakdancing FFS. If you wonder why our education expenses (or are they 'investments'?) are out of control, look no further than that.

The Olympics were supposed to be an arena for individuals to compete and for prowess to shine. Now its a form of proxy national warfare - a bit like city-states sending forth their most courageous warrior to do battle with the opposition's warrior rather than having open warfare. Achilles breakdancing anyone?

As to John Daysh being an AI bot, I think the theory fails at the outset. Indeed, while his insights might be a tad A (as in Artificial) there is precious little of the 'I' part of that equation.

So I'm putting it down as just another shrill for the left as opposed to an AI bot.

Jo Nova is a scientist, and well enough educated. She is known; a public figure. You are just a keyword warrior, with no qualifications you can prove.

You will probably rabbit on as long as other people take notice of you.

However, the fact that this site's two brainwashed Marxists leapt to your defence really finishes you off as far as I am concerned, and I will not be one of the 'other people' taking notice of your nonsense in future.

Never any mention of the Carbon footprint from any such events or is it that any pollution created by having fun is not polluting ?
Like that idiot who once told that industrial noise is very bad but heavy metal 'music' is ok because it is a good noise.

mhaze,

Thanks for your words of support, and I look forward to the day you make good of your assessment by showing me to be “just another shrill for the left”.

--

ttbn,

Jo Nova has no qualifications in the relevant fields of science, so they mean as little as mine. I note that you are unable to defend her garbage and have instead resorted to an ad hominem fallacy as your response. Face it. She’s nothing more than a crank if even I can discredit her claims.

John,

"If you go back and re-read what I said regarding nuclear power plants causing harm to locals, you will see that I addressed your rebuttal directly. It was you who dropped the matter and moved on."

No, you presented a claptrap insulting argument, namely radiation is known to be harmful, normally operating nuclear power plants release radiation, therefore nuclear power plants harm people living in the vicinity. I did relate arguments about the minuscule amount of radiation emitted and a study showing that higher background radiation correlated with lower rates of some cancers and longer lifespans: Not an argument for higher radiation exposure, but certainly evidence against your contention.

So what did you do, you changed your argument to the murky risk to people and the environment from waste and accidents, effectively moving the goalposts, and then later claim to have addressed the criticisms.

From what I've seen of you, that seems to be your mo: Keep repeating the same claims in great volumes of fluff and announcing that you have addressed criticisms when you have done no such thing.

All very tedious and pointless.

Fester,

I’m afraid your memory has failed you. I suggested you re-read that discussion.

It begins here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=23028#395906

Unless you’re thinking of another discussion of ours? Please link me to it if you are.

Who would have thought that a discussion about Australia's
Olympic medal haul would resurrect the Cold War terminology
of "Marxist".

Perhaps "Kraut" and "Jap" will also do a
come back - or even "Fascist" or "Goose-stepping Nazi?"

It's dog whistling tactics that try to rile up the ignorant.
They don't know what it means but it sounds nasty to them.

Hitler was the first to use the term "Marxist" or "Bolshevik"
as a means to label political threats to be eliminated.

The Cold War has been over for over 30 years but it seems
that the use of "Marxist" for enemies has lasted.

It has certainly "riled up the ignorant" in this case, too.

Not a bot John Daysh, but definitely using AI to write your posts. I didn't bother answering your arguments because they were the sort of nonsense AI puts out.

Take the claim that the energy transition is going to increase productivity. This is demonstrably wrong. The energy transition will increase the price of electricity, in fact already has. Just a few years ago the average wholesale price was $50 a MWh and now it is more like $100. So that's a decrease in productivity across the economy. We measure productivity as the total output in dollar value divided by the number of work hours required to produce it. This is only going to get worse as the price of power continues to go up as electrification proceeds.

AI doesn't think, it just grazes through information and puts associations together. It also hallucinates from time to time. This claim is an example of the first.

At least now you've stopped using AI it's easier to read your posts, as in less annoying.

What next, medals for watching these weirdo Games ?

"Weirdo" seems to be the 'in' word at the moment. In the U.S, Harris and Waltz are calling Donald Trump a weirdo.

A "weirdo" is a person whose behaviour is considered odd
and unconventional. And calling the former US president
a "weirdo", is not insulting but honest.

Graham,

In John's defence I would argue that even a bad argument makes you think and seek information.

Dear Fester,

What a lovely thing to say.

And so true.

Fester

There is no defence for someone lacking opinions, but just regurgitating Artificial Intelligence. It's even worse than repeating what the ABC puts out.

Robotman is not worth dealing with. There is no common sense or humanity in AI or the people who have to use it because of their personal inadequacies.

ttbn,

People come here for all sorts of reasons and that is their business. For all you know John might be treating us as a bunch of lab rats for a psych experiment.

Myself, I'd observe that for all the annoyances and disagreements we have with one another here, we keep coming back, and that suggests that the experience is purposeful. Perhaps it might even change your outlook on one thing or another?

Graham,

The fact that the conservative side of any given argument is always right, coupled with the broad range and diversity of data sources that AI engines get their data from (especially with their preferencing of empirical data), it seems unlikely that I could be using AI for my responses. If I were, my responses would all have a conservative bent.

That said, how do I know you’re not using AI? Your last reply to me scored 34% in one of the checks I did, after all. I think your suspicions are flawed.

Regarding energy transition and productivity, I think you’re overlooking the broader context. Yes, electricity prices have risen. But, again, productivity is not just about the immediate costs; it's also about future gains, efficiency, and long-term stability; carefully and strategically implemented renewable energy sources offer these.

It’s also worth noting that productivity, as you defined it (i.e. total output divided by work hours) can benefit from technological advancements and infrastructure investments that renewables bring. For example, more efficient energy use in manufacturing and service industries can reduce costs over time, even if the initial prices of electricity are higher.

Anyway, I’m glad you prefer my new style of commenting. I’ve learned that, to avoid false-flagging, I need to avoid good grammar and flow, sound less objective, be less polite, and include the occasional tiepo.

Personally, I’m hating it. I feel terrible about my choice of wording this morning in the article comments section, and I spent half of yesterday contemplating whether or not I should apologise to ttbn for my tone and the directness of my wording when I explained to him what a crank Jo Nova is and why.

ttbn,

Nice try, but it’s time to let that one go. It doesn’t prove much, other than maybe helping you ease some cognitive dissonance.

Nova's still a crank, by the way.

--

Fester,

Thanks. I love your perspective there! I knew I liked you.

Fester

I think that he's having a loan of you, mate. He is of no further use or interest to me. He appears to have problems that are his and his alone. A bit of a SteeleRedux type. The almost obligatory pain in the arse that other posters can argue with if they can be bothered.

If he hangs about, he will make a great mate for the two Marxist know- alls.

Calling someone a 'pain in the arse' for encouraging critical thinking and challenging assumptions is an almost cartoonish way to justify ignoring them to protect one’s own views and avoid any self-reflection. I don’t think Fester’s the one ttbn is trying to convince here.

Fester,

Could you tell ttbn that devaluing others rather than engaging with their ideas is a textbook example of how we avoid the discomfort of cognitive dissonance?

Could you also tell him that by suggesting I might make a great mate for “two Maxist know-alls", he’s projecting his frustrations and unresolved tensions from past debates onto me in an attempt to reinforce his own biases?

Goddam! Just how dumbed-down and offensive to I have to make it?!

http://ibb.co/MDL85nY

John Daysh, your posts scored 100% on the likelihood of being AI. If I scored 34%, and given I am a good writer, that tells you a few things.

One is that AI doesn't produce good writing if it is only 34% likely to write like someone like me. The other is that you've got to be awfully like AI to get 100%. Either that or you are using AI.

Something else you should know about AI is that it hallucinates from time to time. Don't ask me why as apparently the programmers aren't even sure. Yours must have been hallucinating when it said AI skews "conservative". Any AI I've had anything to do with skews left and I have to make adjustments for that, and ignore the quaint little sermons it makes about what I should be doing or thinking.

You also seem to be good at word salad. I couldn't make any sense out of "But, again, productivity is not just about the immediate costs; it's also about future gains, efficiency, and long-term stability; carefully and strategically implemented renewable energy sources offer these".

But as renewables become more dominant in the system there is higher cost, lower efficiency and greater volatility, so your second clause is just a logically disconnected assertion.

It's easy to see why renewables are so expensive. They require multiple redundancies for when they are not working. So wind and solar need wind and solar elsewhere to back them up, as well as storage in the form of batteries or pumped hydro, and then they need a whole fossil fuel generation system standing by just in case. The capacity utilisation factor for the whole system is extraordinarily low, which is another way of saying its productivity is extraordinarily low.

BTW, chance this is generated by AI? 2%.

Graham,

The most advanced AI engines are impressively accurate. Sure, they make the occasional mistake, but you can usually get them to correct themselves by questioning them further. I once had ChatGPT correct itself simply by replying with, “Um, you wanna rethink what you just said?”

The claim of a “liberal bias” is nonsense for the reason I mentioned in my sarcastic jab about AI supposedly having a conservative bias (among others).

Depending on the topic, of course.

For instance, try getting an AI engine to support a socially conservative viewpoint when the majority of social research and data rarely back such a perspective. Similarly, try getting one to deny evolution or the science behind AGW. At best, they might act like fence-sitters to appease, but they generally don’t support junk science.

I’ve re-read my so-called “word salad” a few times now, along with the comments leading up to it, and I honestly don’t see what’s so confusing about it, sorry.

//But as renewables become more dominant in the system there is higher cost, lower efficiency and greater volatility, so your second clause is just a logically disconnected assertion.//

I have corrected this oversimplification ad nauseum in other threads, but will do so again for you in another comment because I don’t want to risk contaminating something I just noticed…

http://ibb.co/jyBNbLM

72%! I win!

Looks like you’re gonna have to improve thems writin’ skills!

ttbn

Arguments can reveal things about the participants as well as the subject. Plenty of proselytising and borrowed lines I'm sure, and the "I've already addressed that point" line made me feel like part of the Monty Python argument sketch. They're a window as well as a mirror. You see them, they see you.

Graham,

After having had a full night’s sleep and another read through our conversation, I think I can safely add this thread to the threads I mentioned last night.

In short, you’re assuming transitional challenges are permanent when there is no reason to believe that they are, and every reason to believe that they’re not.

Feel free to ask me to expand on any of this.

Thanks for the information GY about the balance between Sport and Economic performance, as well as the information from John Daysh. I did think that John Daysh was a bit weird, and now I know what to watch for. The fact that John Daysh claims to have used ChatGPT before puts him with the right skill set for "the crime" (means, motive, opportunity).

Canem Malum,

Now that's what I call 'digging your heels in'!

Kudos.

Canem Malum,

Guilt by association is a logical fallacy. So, it hardly establishes means, motive, and opportunity. There isn't even any overlap there!

Get yourself an education. You should start by looking up "Marxism" in the dictionary. You wouldn't make very good criminologist.

Kudos.

Make kindness & respect a medal earning discipline ! A NMNS would be the perfect starting point !

I agree, Indyvidual.

But it can contribute to the triggering of false positives with AI detection software. I'm not exactly enjoying the new me.

You moron. :)

I don't understand what all this fuss about AI is
about.

Perhaps people should take the time to learn about it,
its benefits, and its limitations before jumping to
any conclusions.

AI is developed and programmed by humans, and it
operates within the parameters set by its developers
and is regulated by laws. As I understand it, its
supposed to make our lives easier and more efficient
and it doesn't have malicious intent.

Why all this fuss?

ttbn- Yes John Daysh does seem a lot like SteeleRedux- you might be onto something. Kudos.

But the most important thing to remember is- "don't feed the narcissist trolls" let them fall under the bridge admiring their own dark distorted reflections

Foxy,

That's actually a really good point. I hadn't thought of it that way.

--

Canem Malum,

ttbn, wasn't suggesting I was this SteeleRedux. And, after perusing their posts, I can see why. Their style of writing was very different to mine. (Please don't get into criminology, will you?)

Further to their writing style, SteeleRedux didn't seem inclined to feel the need to create a different persona they could hide behind, given that they appear to have been csteele before that. (Hence the Redux, I'm guessing.)

Hm, maybe *I* should become a criminologist?

Perhaps people should take the time to learn about it,
its benefits, and its limitations before jumping to
any conclusions.
Foxy,
Wouldn't it be more beneficial for people to think ? Grammarly is a perfect example of people who opted to stop thinking & it's rather obvious by a lot of the spelling on the Forum.
Typos can happen however, they're not due to not thinking !
AI will prove a success for the manipulators because like all technology throughout history it too will be more misused than used.

Indyvidual,

Had you taken Foxy's advice there, you would have realised that thinking for oneself and using AI as a tool are not mutually exclusive.

Ironically, you've actually helped to make her point by arguing against it.

More gobbledygook I'm afraid John. "Every reason" but none cited. There'll be a good piece up tomorrow showing how renewables destroy productivity. To borrow from another discipline it is "dose responsive". The more you have the worse it gets. There is no real world experience that shows otherwise.

If you want cost effective, low emissions electricity then you go the nuclear and hydropower root, or occasionally geothermal, but there is not a lot of that around. Australia has used up most of its hydropower.

That leaves nuclear. Works for France. And Sweden. Even Ukraine. No reason it won't work in Australia. Ontario is 59% nuclear and lowest power in Canada.

Graham,

I was hoping my last response would provoke something that would give us a bit of a reset. So, rest assured that my failure to cite reasons was not done in the hopes that you’ll just take my word for it in an absence of any actual reasons, but to instead inspire a challenge from you. My reasons were the:

- technological advancements in energy storage, grid management, and renewable technology efficiency;

- economic diversification and resilience from the creation of new industries and job opportunities;

- long-term cost benefits of savings from reduced fuel costs and maintenance, and reduced environmental and health-related expenses;

- regulatory pressures and consumer demand resulting from countries and corporations increasingly committing to renewable energy.

Beyond the initial construction costs, nuclear power requires significant ongoing expenses for fuel, waste management, safety measures, and the eventual decommissioning of plants.

France and Ontario are dealing with significant ongoing expenses related to maintaining and upgrading their nuclear infrastructure. The costs of extending the life of existing plants in France have ballooned, and Ontario’s Marxist subsidies for nuclear power are a major factor in keeping their prices down.

The cost of renewables, on the other hand, has been steadily falling. Renewables can also be deployed faster. With no fuel to buy and minimal maintenance, they're also cheaper.

The rises in electricity prices - before you ask - are due to the integration of renewables, along with increases in global fuel prices, and ageing fossil fuel infrastructure.

.

So far as I can judge, AI is still very much in its infancy.

Nevertheless, it has probably already been integrated to a certain extent into some if not all the computer programs I use regularly. So far as that improves efficiency that's fine with me.

However, I am not inclined to consult it for writing or research until it systematically indicates full details of the source of its information.

I say "consult" because I see AI developing into an additional (secondary) source of information - not as a primary source.

So far as I am aware, my personal vision and creativity are not to be found anywhere on the internet. I prefer them to remain my primary source of information - in so far as they exist and continue to exist.

.

Graham,

"There'll be a good (propaganda) piece up tomorrow showing how renewables destroy productivity." Glad to hear everything is fine with nuclear power in Ukraine, and even in Ontario, no war there, that's a plus. I like other Australians are more interested in what can be expected here with nuclear power under the "Dutton Plan", so far all I have read indicates its an impractical, un-costed, thought bubble, from a political party which has no real energy policy, and never did. Is there anything that shows the Coalition policy has merit in Australian terms?

John Daysh,
Ignoring the last sentence in my post doesn't make reality go away ! Ignoring reality might keep Foxy happy but ignoring doesn't make it go away.
It is a very sad reality that we enable too many humans existing in Dreamland by letting our bureaudroids wasting our funding on them.
There's already too much AI generated illusion bombarding us. AI is very good if operated by NI (natural intelligence) alas, taught stupidity is in charge & I don't think we can expect any positive change soon.

I'm finding it rather difficult to try to discuss
issues with people who attack everything.

I can see that this where new comers to this forum
like John Dash - this is where they come in - to try to
bring some rationality into the discussion.

We could use Miriam Margolyes here. She sees this country
in a very positive light. Plus she has the ability to laugh
at herself. We need more people here with those abilities.
A sense of humour would definitely help here.

How are personal attacks going to help anyone?

Hi Foxy,

We have 2 kinds of posters here, the upbeat positive folk like you, and the downcast negative old farts, not worth a cracker.

BTW sitting in the Mater PH with my wife today, she's having heart tests. AND 90% of the staff are young people many from non English backgrounds. Great mob, imagine how it would be if all the staff were 80+ year old male Old Farts. Oh the pain of it all with their blood letting and leaches!

Dear Paul,

Father's Day is only a few weeks away. I've invited the kids
over for a "pizza afternoon." Hopefully they'll all come.
Last night - hubbie and I had Mexican food. Tonight - it's
going to be Chinese.As you can see - no complaints about
multiculturalism. (smile).

Indyvidual,

I didn't ignore your point. The fact of the matter is that AI, much the same as any tool, is able to be used responsibly or misused.

Your concern that this technology can be used to create illusions or replace genuine thought is valid, but it is not an inherent flaw with AI itself. It is about how we use it. Writing off AI altogether based on possible abuses is akin to not creating any technology whatsoever out of fear for its potential downsides.

Speaking of critical thinking, for decades now universities in Australia have required all students to begin with a compulsory unit on how to assess what they read critically. So, the idea that the educated have been brainwashed is just plain silly.

the idea that the educated have been brainwashed is just plain silly.
John Daysh,
Of course not all educated are brainwashed only the majority. Look at it from another angle. Parliamentarians are largely made up of educated as are the majority of any outfit that rely on public funding. Now, look at how inefficiently they operate & how little if at all of any use they are to society.
Why aren't the education-leaning/preferring ever satisfied by the doings of the educated in Govt for example ? The Woke for example are literally besotted with awe for anyone educated & declaring themselves 'intellectual'. I'd have thought the real educated would have distanced themselves from these pointless hangers-on just from the shame of association alone.

Indy,

You know nothing of education, having none of it yourself. Your attacks on education stem from your own failings in life, not having the academic "brains" to think logically, you mindlessly attack others who are clearly your superiors in that department. You no longer repeat that ridiculous claim that 95% of public servants should be sacked, but still peddle your fanciful notion of national service for young people.

You no longer repeat that ridiculous claim that 95% of public servants should be sacked,
Paul1405,
no need to repeat myself as most decent & thinking folk can see that themselves. The next Federal Election is likely to prove that !
America was on the same track until sleepy Joe opened the gates for voters via the end of that wall !

Indy,

Interesting that you should mention "that wall". Ask yourself, why does the US require a well to keep people out? What have they got that these people want? When you answer that, ask yourself, how did they get it, and was it justly obtained. Then if you are honest you might understand where I am coming from when I say, the crime is not being committed by those wanting to enter, but by those wanting to keep others out.

how did they get it, and was it justly obtained.
Paul1405,
A good point up to a point. Untouched resources were just that. Now the people who walked for thousands of years on those resources want a share of the rewards without the effort !

Hi Indy,

"Now the people who walked for thousands of years on those resources want a share of the rewards without the effort!" GEE! they must have sore feet. And to think they did all that without a pair of shoes to their name. I assume you are banging on about Australia's mineral wealth, and Aboriginal people, GOD! there's those upperty black fellas at it again!

In your case, you get a big chunk of Aged Welfare, hummmm! and have so for years and years and years, a slice of the snout money is provided for by, correct me if I'm wrong, resources royalties, hummmm! Why are YOU entitled to, "a share of the rewards without the effort!" Hummmm!

BTW, Didn't you blow in from some sh!t hole which your relos managed to blow to kingdom come, in wars etc? That's why YOU came here, correct? So don't bang on about Aboriginal people, they are far more entitled than a blow in like you.

One old bloke says to the other:

I sure feel my age.

I ache all over.

The other replies:

I feel like a newborn.

No hair, no teeth,

And, I just peed my pants.

Have a great week-end!

Paul1405,
You surprise me. You came back with just a dumb reply rather than your standard totally stupid replies. Unfortunately & going by past performance we can't realistically expect any improvement in your mentality !

Hi Indy,

I asked you to justify your entitlement to the wealth of Australia, you say native born people with a long attachment are not entitled. You claim you are entitled, based on What? Its people like you, a small minority, who unfortunately come here and chose to live off welfare, without making a contribution, said you were booted from the PS when Whitlam came to power 1972! What are you doing now, exactly, living off aged welfare. I suppose its far better here than from whence you came, instead of collecting a fat pension today, you'd be dodging bullets, correct!

Kudos Indyvidual.

Paul1405,
You're really something ! None of what you say has an ounce of fact to it. You're going from totally stupid to utterly sublimely idiotic.
I really think you shouldn't wear your underpants on your head because it looks like you're taking through the orifice which underpants are designed to conceal.
Stop being such a moron & say something factual & useful for a change. History is full of examples of stupidity never achieving anything positive !

It's only by looking at where we've been that we can understand
who we are, what we stand for, and and why things work or
why they don't.

We're still struggling to seek our place in the world - but
as we saw from the Paris Olympics - most of us are liking
what we're seeing us achieve.

If we look at our history - there were many who helped make
our nation great - as well as the ones who stopped us from
being as great as we could have been. However lets put our
focus more on the positive achievements - on those who found
fame by dedicating their lives to others - and not concentrate
on whose lives and archievements have really been insignificant
in the general scheme of things and whose contributions have
been minimal over all and don't really matter.

The nay sayers and haters have existed for centuries. And yet
despite them - the achievers have risen - and will continue to
rise. It's the great thinkers and achievers and activists who
who have helped put Australia on the cultural and political
map.

Its the positive leaders who set and follow the path to success
and achievements.

Its the positive leaders who set and follow the path to success
and achievements.
Foxy,
It's the competent & caring who do what you wrongly attribute to those who don't ! idealism has caused wars through stupidity not the sober thinking of those whom the former malign, again through stupidity !
Intellectualism goes hand in hand with theory, Common Sense goes hand in hand with pragmatism & it is pragmatism that builds & achieves & not mere theory !

Foxy,
How well do you think the Olympics would do if they were to be privatised ?

Indyvidual,

There's already EUR 7 billion in private funding that
comes from media rights, sponsorship, and ticketing.
Also - private investment in long-term infrastructure
projects which include an IOC contribution of USD 1.7
billion in cash and services.

An independent study reveals that olympic games are
beneficial for host regions.

There's more at the following:

http://olympics.com/ioc/news/independent-study-reveals-olympic-games-paris-2024-economically-beneficial-for-host-region

"This wouldn't be the case if we put the same energy and ambition into economic pursuits, using the same meritocratic and evidence-based approach we use to produce world class athletes."

I find this interesting, given that China is beating the West at capitalism.
China subsidised certain industries and made themselves a world leader with a monopoly on renewables.
There were once many many startups in renewable energy and EV's in China.
There was fierce competition which drove innovation, many went out of business and the industry consolidated into a handful of large companies.

China understood that if you mass produce something, you can do so at a lower cost.
Now the rest of the world is complaining that their countries can't compete with China's cheap EV's which are now cheaper to make than cars with internal combustion engines.

It seems to me their country has something ours doesn't.
A simple plan and a strategy?

Foxy,
copied from "TheConversation"

The financial contribution made by taxpayers to the Sydney Games was in the vicinity of $2.2 billion, or approximately $3.0 billion in today’s dollars. This figure represents approximately $420 per Australian household. It is instructive to observe that our estimate of the real consumption loss from the Sydney Games of $2.1 billion is very close to the total taxpayer contribution to the Games of $2.2

An independent study reveals that olympic games are beneficial for host regions.

Just like the substantial increase in building and infrastructure projects is beneficial to my community.

The increase in traffic finding alternative routes to save time using my street, the increase in the death of local wildlife.

Like the dead 6mth old joey I found with it's guts ripped open and dangling all over the place at the bottom of my driveway this morning, people trying to save 2 minutes on the way to work in now overcrowded communities and congested roads.

Or the brick I ran over this morning that had fallen of some work ute, or the damage to my car from the extra traffic and trucks that leave huge potholes in the road which the council leave for about 2 weeks before they fix them, or the shoddy quality around roadworks, they can put in a $100K temporary bus stop in the middle of a traffic island, but they can't level off a piece of bitumen in that roadworks that is so bad it's probably wrecked the steering and suspension of everyones cars that have driven over it these last 4 - 5 months.

Whats really pissed me off is that dead joey.
I'm not sure yet if it's the one I've watched grow these last few months in my back yard and which I've watched since he was a grey hairless ball of skin in his mummas pouch.

I'm so sick and tired of seeing new blood stains and splattered dead animals along my street every single day.
I wish I knew who did it, so I could dump it on their doorstep.

I'd love to see how these same people who speed along my road would freak out if their own kids were faced with the same kind of day to day carnage on their streets as they create on mine.

China subsidised certain industries and made themselves a world leader with a monopoly on renewables.
Armchair Critic,
If they are so good at renewables, how come they have to keep producing them ? I haven't heard of China taking back past their use by date items & 'renewing' them for reuse, particularly with zero emission ? Shouldn't it be the more commodities etc are 'renewed' the less raw materials should eventually be needed ?

Hi Indy,
They were taking everyone's used plastic and scrap metal?
They took all our shite, and turned it into something they could sell back to us.

Hi AC,

The Old Man told me 50 years ago, "The Chinaman waste nothing, not even his own sh!t" he knew them from the Sydney Chinese market gardens. Did you see how in China they are turning waste from restaurants into useful food. Big shed, cockroaches fish in moat feed them cockroaches eat fish. One end trucks enter with waste, other end trucks leave with fish, no high tech.