Well, that was kinda me and my wife. Definitely nothing from any of our parents, plus we both walked away from a couple of shitty marriages with little to show for it.
The only real upside is that I have a good career with a good income, and we were able to get (back) into the mortgage market as we hit our 40s. Not where we wanted to be, but at least we're plugging away at it.
The bit that's bleak is that, according to our rates notice, our property's gone up 50% in the 8 years we've been here. Wage growth has been nowhere near that over the same period, if at all. So any dreams the next generation (our kids) are having about getting into their own property is getting further and further out of reach.
I'm resigned to the fact that it'll probably be a very long time before we're empty nesters.
This is just so damn bleak. I honestly don't know how my kids are going to rent OR buy in the future. I'd happily see the value of my house decline, if it was because the market became more affordable for the next generation.
If feel this is (unintentionally) stretching the use of the word cyberattack. Rightly or wrongly, most people consider a cyberattack a form of hacking/attack that's executed via a network or the internet.
I know its true definition any form of attack against data, network, or computing device (including smartphones), but this headline could easily lead people to think their phones could be set on fire by some anonymous l337 hAx0r over the internet.
While technically true, it requires physical exploit first.
I don't know your personal circumstances, but how feasible is it to look for another job? Is there something specifically keeping you there? Sounds like these cunts are putting your mental health at risk, and they're just not worth it, mate.
This isn't about journalism. It's about the fact that news orgs can only succeed if they can pay for themselves or be attached to larger money-making machines. That's why most mastheads are owned by large media conglomerates, and those that aren't have to charge subscription fees just to survive.
Yeah, sadly this isn't an option for everyone. Simply put, I work 65km from where I live, and PT just isn't an option for the locations I work.
This is not about the consumer - don't let big business' shady tricks gull you into believing otherwise. The stark reality is that successive governments haven't done anywhere near enough to curb industrial pollution or drive emissions reduction.
Consumers will buy whatever the market offers them. We're the end result - not the driver.
Oh, man. Both sides of this argument are so disingenuous.
The "traditional" car makers are being sooks, because they've clearly been asleep at the wheel (hah!) and steadfastly refused to make reasonable progress on emissions reduction, despite overwhelming scientific evidence that we're killing our planet.
On the other hand, the EV car makers stand to make the most money from the new scheme, with much of it arguably coming from a new revenue stream of them being able to sell the first group their emissions credits. Let's ignore the fact for a moment that, here in Australia, much of the power that charges these EVs comes from burning coal.
This is on the Australia government, particularly those fucked-up Libs with their noses firmly planted up big business' collective arse, for not taking meaningful action much sooner.
Important note: I'm not a green warrior by any stretch, and I drive a regular ICE car. I'm just fed up with all the finger-pointing and blame-shifting for an issue that threatens us globally.
Yeah - I read through this a couple of times, and I feel the headline is a bit misleading.
I reckon this problem has been around longer than Facebook. As the second professor put it, news orgs aren't in the news business - they're in the attention-grabbing business.
It's been many, many years (decades) since I remember my old man sitting down and reading a newspaper front to back, then back to front, on a weekend. He read every inch - news, sports, classifieds, public notices. When those things eventually started shifting to digital - in isolation - newspapers (and magazines) started feeling it.
Facebook is simply the newest face they can apply to the problem.
However, I have to disagree with the professors’ basic premise about the Media Bargaining Code taking money from a profitable business to prop up an unprofitable one. First, news should be viewed as a public service, not a business.
That wasn't the professor's point - that was the reporter's. But if you read on, another professor (of media studies) puts it quite aptly:
The reason for this was news organisations were never in the news business, Amanda Lotz, a professor of media studies at QUT, said.
"They were in the attention-attraction business.
"In another era, if you were an advertiser, a newspaper was a great place to be.
"But now there are just much better places to be."
I honestly can't recall how long it's been, but it's been at least decades since there was a newspaper dedicated to just news. It's always been all the other stuff piled in - entertainment reading, comics, crosswords, classifieds, public notices, etc - that made a "news" paper worth reading, as well as the news itself.
This problem is older than Facebook. Facebook is simply the newest face of it.
It's a bullshit headline. The real benefit is quicker access to new, native features in the OS. So, for that reason, I'm happy they're making the move. But making it about how a utility product looks just seems... unimportant to me.
I'm pretty sure my wife ran an empty cycle (no dishes, no detergent) with half a lemon in the cutlery basket. She seemed pretty happy with the outcome.
Well, according to the location details in the app, it was meant to handle electronic transfer too, so I assume they at least had a companion app that would scan the Scheme ID barcode in mine.
Well, that was kinda me and my wife. Definitely nothing from any of our parents, plus we both walked away from a couple of shitty marriages with little to show for it.
The only real upside is that I have a good career with a good income, and we were able to get (back) into the mortgage market as we hit our 40s. Not where we wanted to be, but at least we're plugging away at it.
The bit that's bleak is that, according to our rates notice, our property's gone up 50% in the 8 years we've been here. Wage growth has been nowhere near that over the same period, if at all. So any dreams the next generation (our kids) are having about getting into their own property is getting further and further out of reach.
I'm resigned to the fact that it'll probably be a very long time before we're empty nesters.