It's a shame that what was a good idea of having a space and community for all men really just turned into the space for that 5-10 year window for guys that are retired but not yet ready to spend their day in a nursing home. At least where I am they have a reputation for being filled with oldies that are a little slow and not friendly to plain hostile.
Hopefully all of them around Australia aren't like this, but I have heard this same view from many people independently
Could never get a job anywhere. Never knew how to get a job, turned down by almost everything, then I heard one of the men's shed was doing some charity bike repair thing.
I figured I had nothing else to do, and chatted with one of the blokes, who had a brother that needed some IT help, and from there I was able to build up.
Have worked a long time in a company that does $5k referrals. Have referred 4, 2 successful so $10k. One of them landed in my lap so treated the money as guilt free "buy whatever I want" money. The other was a very good friend so set up the beer fund so I'll cover drinks until that runs dry.
However the most I've seen was a new grad. He's a lovely bloke, was head of all the societies at uni, knew everyone studying CS at a very good uni. In his first year he referred all his uni friends, think he got around 15 or so successful referrals in that first year. My friend in HR processing then said it was more than her salary.
It helps that it is a good company where you'd tell little to join even with no referral, but the incentive makes you seem it that little bit more
Love Dalibor's work. I have the Puri clock, and it is a real statement piece that wows people. I didn't get it for that, I just got it half because I loved the aesthetic and half I wanted to support someone doing something that unique (one of those things I would personally like to do in a life after software).
On the plus side, Dalibor himself has been extremely helpful in answering questions and resolving minor issues with the clock (both software issues, both quickly resolved).
It is undoubtedly a hard to justify luxury item, but if on the fence you should buy it. It is more impressive in person than I imagined.
Often the new strategies top level players test on anonymised accounts are subtle tweaks in lines deep into / slightly beyond opening theory. Often these lines are slightly inferior to mainline but come with an edge due to the "surprise factor" making it harder for opponents to prepare. Each of these subtle tweaks will only arise in a small proportion of games (as only some of the time your opponent will play the line you want to test), so I imagine fingerprinting based on play style will still work relatively well.
Anecdotally, my uncle did this back in the late 80s to 2000s. Towards the end he would make AUD$400-800k a year (depending on how many jobs he took on) which was great money for someone who got into it in his early 20s after dropping out of high school.
The catch was the pressure of the environment, needing to be physically in peak shape (my uncle was an anomaly in lasting in the job until his late 40s), and the danger as he had several colleagues die on the job (worst I heard was due to the operators giving the wrong gas mix to the chamber). My uncle also definitely is a crazy man with a few screws loose, so that part checks out
I have neighbor that did deep commercial diving after he left the military. He was special ops so he was in top physical shape. I never asked how much he made, but he implied it paid extremely well.
But it was extremely dangerous. He didn't develop any long term issues, but he told one story where they suddenly lost a man. There was a quick shadow and then a man was gone. They found a piece of dive suit in the area. They believe it was a giant squid that got their buddy.
For me it's not paying that's the issue, but rather having to sign up to an individual service and pay a monthly fee for every piece you read on every different website.
There really needs to be a Spotify for journalism and similar content. I know there are some attempts (apple news for example) but they haven't cracked it yet.
The average person skips paywalls for the same reason the average person used to pirate movies. It isn't about cost, but about the most convenient means of access
We recently had an SLA request to them that was for a paltry amount, nowhere near the damage they caused, less than 0.1% of our monthly spend. It was really just to gauge their process and how supportive they would be. Despite our account manager saying they would sort it, it was denied. They agreed we were impacted, they agreed they caused it, they agreed it met the duration, but the service team used a technicality in the wording of the SLA to get out of responsibility. I won't say much more to keep things somewhat anonymous.
Our account reps were on our side and are helping us escalate a complaint through on this.
We have several ex AWS folks in my team, and they said they weren't surprised. No one at AWS admits to mistakes as it costs promotions and puts you potentially on the chopping block. That's why the request was denied, that's why support is hard to deal with, that's why the status page is never updated quickly. They do a lot of things well and can be decent to deal with provided you understand they won't own up to their faults going into things
It looks like the article got the Australian implementation somewhat wrong.
Under cons, it says that voters have to rank all candidates on the ballot paper.
In reality you have a choice. You can either rank all, or if you are lazier you can just select your favourite candidate and then your first choice candidate's preferences will be used instead.
Also for some larger ballots (usually the senate with nearly 100 options) there is now a requirement to only rank say the top 10 or so for the ballot to count, so you don't need to number all 100.
This is one of the best features of the Australian system. If you want to do the basic effort you can just tick one box, but if you care about the ordering you can also make your preferences count if you so choose.
As an outsider looking in to American politics, I feel changing to preferential voting is the best bang for buck change to move away from extreme politics. Hopefully this catches on elsewhere.
In reality you have a choice. You can either rank all, or if you are lazier you can just select your favourite candidate and then your first choice candidate's preferences will be used instead.
This is not true. In the elections for the Australian House of Representatives (single-member electorates, comparable to the mayoral election under discussion where there is a single winner), you must number every box for your vote to count.
In elections for the Australian Senate (multiple member electorates) you don't have to number every box, but you have a choice: you can either vote "below the line" for individual candidates, in which case you must number at least 6 boxes for your vote to count (the ballot paper advises you to number at least 12); or you can vote "above the line" for groups of candidates (in which case you only have to number one, but the ballot paper advises you to number at least 6). A vote "above the line" for a group is equivalent to numbering the candidates in that group in order from top to bottom, but it doesn't imply a vote for a candidate in any other group.
The voting systems in Australian states and territories vary from the above; some of them do allow only numbering a single candidate in single-member elections ("Optional Preferential Voting" or OPV) and some still have group-ticket voting in multi-member elections where you can assign your vote to the preference ticket submitted by a candidate (though hopefully the last few jurisdictions to still have this will be getting rid of it, because it is being gamed).
This is a very interesting story that is (at least claimed to be) part of my family history.
My family stems from a group of travelling motorbike stunt riders back to the 20's. They did the wall of death and later the globe of death, and had to solve this problem in their bikes.
The family story is that we helped win the battle of Britain, as Miss Shilling read the about the idea in a motorcycle magazine that covered my families show. There is a lot of evidence on what Miss Shilling did, and that my family did the same modification to their bikes prior, but the lack of a link between the two leaves this as a half truth / half myth story
I'm sure there are challenges in a wall of death / globe of death situation, but I'd think that negative-g would not be one of them? Quite the reverse, I'd have thought...
The “orifice” was not for making fuel flow at negative gs, but for limiting the fuel after (once normal forces returned? The article is not clear) so there wasn’t too much fuel causing a rich-cut.
So possibly motorcycles could have the rich cut from bottoming out in the sphere of death?
Hopefully all of them around Australia aren't like this, but I have heard this same view from many people independently