Stuff I’ve Liked

Turns out I’ve had a bit of a problem with writing blog posts the last few years. Every time I look at my drafts folder in WordPress, this sense of overwhelm takes over – nothing is quite good enough to compare against some of the great ‘content’ I consume every day. So, I write nothing.

So I thought, fuck it, and instead here’s a list of some of that content I’ve enjoyed over the last month or two…

  • This video from the YouTube channel Climate Town about free shipping and free returns was an eye-opener. I really didn’t realise how big of a problem free returns are. It’s wild that we’re just throwing so much stuff away.
  • Nick Feik’s article on Why Albanese is in Trouble. It perfectly summarises how I feel about the Labor party in the world today: good, but not good enough.
  • My friend Tom has written a thought-provoking article on generative AI in the open source world. I really need to publicly share my own thoughts on AI some time. I’ve written an internal policy for use at Loop Foundry that might be useful for others so I should get around to that.
  • If you’re a fan of computer science, and you’re not already watching Dr Matt Regan’s Youtube channel, you need to subscribe yesterday.
  • Likewise if you’re a fan of retro PC and server hardware and haven’t already subscribed to Clabretro. They both deserve far more subscribers than they have.
  • Another friend Robin Riley has written a list of the sources they get news from, which I think is an excellent thing to share. I should share the same, but my list is nowhere near as comprehensive (it’s basically ABC News Australia, The Economist, and The Guardian). Still, an updated list of my RSS feed subscriptions could be interesting (I did write one 15 years ago, but it’s hopelessly out of date).
  • Lastly, Alan Kohler’s article on how Donald Trump has impacted the Australian federal election was a fantastic read.

The featured image at the top of the post is from a recent flight. I think the lights below are Midway Point and Sorell in Tasmania.

Hopefully I can do this more often!

My Vote in the Australian Federal Election 2025

I’m not one that usually shares my political views that openly. Generally, those close to me already know how I feel about things, and I don’t want to impose my views on others who probably don’t care. Those who are observant can probably pick it out from my Mastodon (and earlier, Twitter) reposts.

However, I feel a bit differently about the state of the world this year. And I’ve also reasoned with myself that I’m not going to tell anybody how to vote. But I will tell you who I’m going to vote for, why I’m going to vote for them, and why I’m telling you who I’m voting for.

I’m going to tackle that last point first. I’m well aware that as a mid-thirties straight white male living in the “global north” (a term I loathe with the power of a thousand suns, as a resident of Hobart and the Huon Valley the only place I’m north of is Antarctica) I have a lot of privilege in being able to share my views without placing myself in any danger. And I’d like to perhaps speak for others who aren’t quite so able to speak for themselves.

Secondly, who I’m going to vote for. It’s important to note that in Australia we have preferential voting, so you can put minor parties or candidates first, and go down the list in decreasing order of how much you want them to represent you until finally you end up at the party who you least want to represent you.

I said “want to represent” there, not “will be the best for me”. That’s critical. I’m already (relatively) well off. There are more important issues than my personal well being, and I believe that what’s good for society and the environment will be best for me in the end.

In my electorate of Franklin, there are five candidates (as I write this, anyway) and my ranking of them is as follows:

  1. Peter George, Independent
  2. Owen Fitzgerald, Greens
  3. Julie Collins, ALP
  4. Brendan Blomely, Independent
  5. Josh Garvin, Liberal
  6. Stefan Popescu, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation

“Five” candidates and yet the list has six? A demonstration of why, despite absolutely loving the Greens as a concept, they completely fail as a modern political party. This is basic stuff. Like white girl ordering pumpkin spice lattes kind of basic.

My first preference will be for Peter George. He’s running primarily on an anti-salmon farming platform, but has a complete policy platform that I quite like. And my take on the salmon farming issue? If you can’t run an industry for 100 or more years in the way that it’s currently being run, it’s an unsustainable industry. And we shouldn’t be taking from our children’s future just to make profits now. This is also why I’m opposed to generative AI / large language models (ChatGPT, Deepseek, etc) and cryptocurrency. Is there a way of running all of these industries in sustainable ways? Yes (although in the case of crypto I’m less sure). Are we doing so? No. So something needs to change.

My second preference will go to Julie Collins. Whilst I’d like the ALP to win the election, I believe that Julie Collins has been safe in her seat for far too long and is not representing or delivering results for the people of Franklin. She needs a scare, and I really hope that Peter George delivers her a scare (at the very least). I want to make her to work again.

My third preference will go to the Greens, but for what purpose I don’t know. But if I rank them below the others I couldn’t forgive myself.

After that it gets depressing. The Liberal party is probably more preferable to me than either One Nation or Brendan Blomely, but that’s hardly saying much. I have a lot of queer friends that I care about a lot, and any candidate that wants to make their lives harder is not a candidate for me. Then there’s the issue of migration. A lot of people are opposed to migration either because it’s “bad for the culture” or “increasing property prices”. On property prices, just change the law so only citizens and permanent residents (or companies majority owned by citizens and permanent residents) can own property, like most other countries do. Sorted. And on culture? The culture of Australia is by definition a multi-cultural one. My family are migrants, and just because I’m white doesn’t mean I should ignore that fact. Every single person in Australia either came from somewhere else or has ancestors who did. Every. Single. Person. Even the Aboriginal people.

That was a bit of a ramble.

I’ll be voting in the senate in a similar way to the house of representatives. Now that Eric Abetz is a member of the Tasmanian parliament rather than a senate candidate, I no longer feel compelled to vote below the line just to put him dead last, so I’ll be saving some time by voting above the line for the party groups.

Finally, I hope you can all join me watching the ABC election coverage on election night, for no other reason than that it is Antony Green’s last election. What a legendary man.

Photo of Antony Green from Wikipedia.

linux.conf.au 2014 – January 6

I’m (sporadically and with much delay) blogging my yearly pilgrimage to linux.conf.au 2014, this year being held at the University of Western Australia in Perth.

20140106_090002

Keynote

We begun the first day of the conference with the morning keynote, which was presented by Suelette Dreyfus. She talked about some of the statistics around people’s feelings towards privacy, whistle-blowing and government surveillance. The thing I found most interesting was that the ordinary citizen supports whistle-blowing and doesn’t support government surveillance. Which leads to one of two conclusions:

  1. The government will soon have to start actually listening to citizens and do something about all this.
  2. The government is actually entirely controlled by the spy agencies and we’re all screwed.

Yay for freedom and democracy! :/

Rocketry & Radios

The next talks I attended were from the open radio miniconf, where Bdale Garbee and Keith Packard talked about the hardware and software they are using for rocket to ground radio communications on their rockets, and which they are successfully selling through their fully open-source business. I found a few points interesting:

  • RF circuit board design is hard. There is some serious smarts going on with designing those boards to not have everything interfere with everything else (especially in such as a small package, with two radios within a centimetre of each other).
  • Here is yet another FOSS small business that is clearly surviving and not a complete drain on the pocket (one assumes, you can never be sure). That’s good news, as the world needs more businesses to cross that divide between open-source and the commercial world.
  • Rockets are fun!

The Sysadmin Miniconf

Between lunch and afternoon tea I sat in on the sysadmin miniconf (there’s a mantra at linux.conf.au: if you’re in doubt as to what to see, tend towards the left hand side of the schedule). The most interesting talk for me was from Elizabeta Sørensen on RatticDB, which looks a pretty cool password management tool that would have been amazingly useful in my last job (where I worked as a sysadmin rather than being a programmer like I am now). Despite being immature software, it has a lot of promise and I’ll definitely be trialing it for my own uses.

I also found the talk on Husk by Phillip Smith to be very interesting. Writing iptables rules is a pain, and writing them twice (once for IPv4 and again for IPv6) is a complete pain. So Husk looks great because it gives you extra power in simply being able to write-once for both network stacks and being able to re-use variables and rulesets. It’s basically SCSS for firewalls.

Modems

After afternoon tea I went to the talk given by David Rowe on modems and how they work in a basic sense. Unfortunately I was completely out of my depth and I had no idea how the modem algorithm fit into the stack of hardware and software. Is the mixer hardware or software? Where is forward error correction done? No idea. More reading for me to do!

Crash!

20140106_182003By this stage I was pretty exhausted, having not got much sleep the night before. I therefore retreated to the dorm room and had a quick nap, a cup of tea and a shower (Perth is hot!) before dinner. I went out with a few friends (new and old) to a great pub we’ve found nearby that does good pizza and amazing crème brûlée. Hopefully an early night tonight so I don’t get too exhausted before the week is out.

On Abortion

There’s been a lot of debate recently on the subject of abortion, both within the general Tasmanian community and within my circle of twitter friends (Anna and Michael especially). The following are my almost incomprehensible thoughts on the subject. This post is in response to this and this, and also to the vastness of the entire Internet.

Before paying me too much attention, know this: I’ve never been involved in abortion first hand, so I really have no idea what I’m talking about. This is important.

I think that the only thing most sensible people can decide on in regards to the abortion debate is that the subject is enormously complex. Unfortunately, everybody seems to have a different reaction to this fact. Some people decide to simply say that a blanket decision can apply (such as the pro-life movement takes, where abortion is always wrong, no matter the context). I, on the other hand, believe that because this subject is so complex, there are so many ifs and buts, so many different combinations of life story, there will almost certainly be a situation where abortion is the correct choice. It’s unfortunate, but it is true. Sometimes abortion is just the right thing to do (at least, that is my opinion).

I think because of this fact, it makes no sense to have a legal framework in which abortion is illegal, because if a certain set of circumstances requires it, then nobody should have to go through the pain of abortion and the pain of breaking the law at the same time – women (and men, but it is the woman getting the abortion after all) should be given all the support they need.

It makes no sense to deny this based simply on the fact that abortion does not sit comfortably in some people’s world view (specifically, their religion). I’m not a fan of abortion, but it is one of those things that we just have to accept. Firstly, people will get abortions anyway. Fact of life. Secondly, there will be pain caused to people. Because they have to go through illegal trauma. Because of your world view. Not a fact (I have no proof), but it’s not hard to imagine. Now imagine: you either cause pain and suffering to other people (which is bad, according to your own religion) or you allow abortion and other people get on with their lives – and you are in the same position as everybody else, you simply accept abortion for what it is and get on with your life.

The other thing I would like to say at this time is that I think men can certainly have a valid opinion on abortion – this blog post stands as a testament to that. However, women do have a final say here… simply because it is their body. Another fact. I’d certainly hope that if I was ever in the situation where considerations were being made, that I would be consulted. However I would always be aware that the final decision does not rest with me. Comfortable or uncomfortable as I might be with that, I have to accept it.

And here ends the rambling incomprehensibility. We now return to regularly scheduled silence.

On Julian Assange & Political Asylum

Within the last 24 hours, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has been granted political asylum by Ecuador. Earlier this week, the Ecuadorian embassy in London reported that British police had threatened to storm the embassy in order to bring Julian Assange to justice. ABC News report here. Here are my thoughts on the matter:

Whoever it was that thought up the idea to storm an embassy must be completely bonkers… a single prisoner isn’t worth an act of war. To quote M in the James Bond movie Casino Royale: “You stormed into an Embassy. You violated the only absolutely inviolate rule of international relations…” I never understood why that was so until I discovered that an embassy is actually the territory of the country in question, so British police would be storming into Ecuador, pretty much. Not a good look.

It’s interesting that out of all the embassies in London that Julian Assange could have taken refuge in, he chose Ecuador. I suspect this was because Ecuador is one of the few countries that isn’t in bed with the United States… unlike Australia. Julian Assange is a citizen of Australia, and the Australian government should have offered Assange a far greater degree of assistance than they have. In essence, Assange seeking political asylum in Ecuador is basically saying that putting himself in Australia’s hands would have put him in personal danger. That’s not a thought I feel comfortable with, as the freedom from political persecution is a right I believe everybody should have.

I suspect the reason Australia haven’t given Assange more support is Geo-political in nature. Australia cannot defend itself in the case of invasion from either Indonesia or China (who I have little doubt would love to invade Australia for the sheer landmass that would afford them). We need the United States to offer us defense support, which is why they have air force bases in the Northern Territory (much as we don’t like them, they are a necessity for national security). If we support Assange against the United States, we’re basically giving a big F-you to the United States, which they won’t like very much… and on it goes.

Of course, this presupposes that Sweden has ulterior motives in it’s prosecution against Assange (that it wants to prosecute him simply to send him to the United States for further question), which is debatable. Very, very likely is that the CIA and FBI would like to question Assange, probably in a dark room somewhere.I remember reading about debate amongst academics in the US as to whether Assange had actually committed a crime (the gist is basically that he didn’t actually leak anything, just publish those leaks; not sure how legitimate those claims are) and thus whether a civilian (I guess US Supreme) court would convict would be marginal.

Basically, nobody could ever predict the outcome of what all this will be… but the way things have played out so far makes perfect sense. With that said, I believe Australia should offer Assange more support, starting now. The more teeth Australia shows in this matter, the more we can stand up and say we believe in human rights.

And then we can do something about the non-illegal “illegal asylum seekers”… but’s that for another day.