10 June 2023

User reviews useless compared to tech reviews, eg. Western Digital SN350


MANY people base their purchase decision on ‘consumer’s’ opinions, where in reality there is zero way of knowing whether or not they are fake.

The mainstream media jumps on this as well, using this as a huge promotional point, in their click bait advertising model.

One of the worst places an electronics ‘consumer’ could go for advice is to a mainstream media ‘news’ site, for example Rupert Murdoch’s ‘news’ empire from some tech flog using a pseudonym, trying to convince you that Apple’s newest features are worthy of your attention or most importantly your hard earned dollars, in these times of government created austerity.

Even a website’s so called reviews on a particular piece of electronics equipment would not be the best place for reference.

They could be false, they could be bots or even the company's webmaster faking reviews on the orders of the CEO.

In this instance the under the spotlight is a SSD (Sold State Drive) from WD (Western Digital), in particular the SN350 model range.

From the reviews of a tech warehouse one would be of the belief that this is a great product to purchase.


Even from another tech warehouse that touts itself as "Australia's Largest Online Tech Retailer" the technobable they give you sounds impressive:

Well, that's all fine and Dandy, but you (the 'consumer') are missing some vital pieces of information about the product, that being its longevity which is typically given to you in the form of acronyms that being MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures, in hours) and TBW (Tera Bytes Written, in the unit explained).

SSDs failure rate is in the millions of hours, where the WD Green is rated at 1,000,000 hours.

A drive with a 1,000,000 MTBF will equate to being switched on 24 hrs per day for 41,666 days or 114 years of continuous use.

If one was to argue that the drive would be used for only 8 hours per day, then the duration would theoretically quadripple  to over 456 years, where that is yet to be proven.

While this may sound like an eternity ore more like 18.25 (human life) generations, this is by far the lowest in the industry, where 1.5 - 2.0 million hours are more prevalent or acceptable.

Another measure of longevity or 'wear factor' is the Terabytes written figure.

In the above screen capture that all important figure is missing, where one would have to go out of one's way in order to obtain Western Digital's Product Brief to check out the rest of the important specifications, eg:


One company though went to a bit more effort giving the Australian consumer more disclosure as seen in their product advertisement:



WD offers 100TBW on its 1TB drive or approximately on sixth of the industry standard.

It also offers only 3 years warranty instead of a more acceptable 5 years.

Irrespective of your use case, quite simply put this is a drive one should stay away from!

On a side note, WD decided to forgo the industry standard acronym of MTBF to MTTF.

See screen capture from a credible tech review site, ServeTheHome:


Where the full review can be seen here:


 
Or another in depth review by Linus Sebastian:


Will colony's law makers tighten the screws on manufactures / advertisers ripping Aussies off?

After all this IS in the 'public interest'.

08 June 2023

How real estate agents get away with lying


The age old question of how do you know a politician is lying, is quite simply put when his (or now her) lips are moving.

Fraud in the real estate industry in Australia costs consumers dearly, every year and the government has very little intention to remedy this, as it is a 'stakeholder' in the fraud, raking in the dollars.

While the same may apply to realtors as it does to politicians when it comes to lying, there is another way to lie, and that is by staying silent.

MANY realtors keep quiet, when asked about a premises that they have been seconded to sell.

They know about the property, its faults and even structural issues, yet they claim they know nothing.

How can you prove it?

It's very difficult, but not impossible.

According to Consumer Affairs Victoria, the following is stated about silence.


Silence

A business can break the law by failing to give relevant information to a customer.

Silence can be misleading or deceptive when, for example:

  • one person fails to alert another to facts known only to them, and the facts are relevant to a decision
  • important details a person should know are not conveyed to them
  • a change in circumstance meant information already provided was incorrect.

Whether silence is misleading or deceptive will depend on the circumstances of each case.

05 June 2023

Police Speed Equipment Manuals

Here are some of the colony's police force's manuals for the equipment used to measure a driver's velocity.

If a device has been used to ascertain your vehicle's speed, where you are contesting this, then in the full brief*, the manual to the device must be included.


See:

Gatsometer MRS Type 24 Slant Radar: 

Gatsometer Radar 24-GS11 (Sep 2013) v3.0:

NSW Silver Eagle Radar:

Pro Laser 3:

Stalker DSR 2X :

TruCam (By Laser Technology, Inc):

Victronic PoliScan:

* full brief:-

In Victoria, a Full Brief is described at law, from the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 Section 41:

 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2009 - SECT 41

Contents of full brief

    (1)     Unless earlier disclosed to the accused, whether in a preliminary brief, at a summary case conference or otherwise, a full brief must contain—

        (a)     a notice in the form prescribed by the rules of court—

              (i)     explaining this section and section 83; and

              (ii)     explaining the importance of the accused obtaining legal representation; and

              (iii)     advising that the accused has the right, if eligible, to legal aid under the Legal Aid Act 1978 ; and

              (iv)     providing details of how to contact Victoria Legal Aid; and

        (b)         a copy of the charge-sheet relating to the alleged offence; and

S. 41(1)(c) amended by No. 81/2011 s. 5.

        (c)     a copy of the criminal record of the accused or a statement that the accused has no previous convictions or infringement convictions; and

        (d)     any information, document or thing on which the prosecution intends to rely at the hearing of the charge including—

              (i)     a copy of any statement relevant to the charge signed by the accused, or a record of interview of the accused, that is in the possession of the informant; and

              (ii)     a copy, or a transcript, of any audio‑recording or audiovisual recording required to be made under Subdivision (30A) of Division 1 of Part III of the Crimes Act 1958 ; and

S. 41(1)(d)(iii) amended by No. 68/2009 s. 49(a).

              (iii)     a copy or statement of any other evidentiary material that is in the possession of the informant relating to a confession or admission made by the accused relevant to the charge; and

              (iv)     a list of the persons the prosecution intends to call as witnesses at the hearing, together with a copy of each of the statements made by those persons; and

Note

See section 47 for requirements for statements.

              (v)     a legible copy of any document which the prosecution intends to produce as evidence; and

              (vi)     a list of any things the prosecution intends to tender as exhibits; and

              (vii)     a clear photograph, or a clear copy of such a photograph, of any proposed exhibit that cannot be described in detail in the list; and

              (viii)                 a description of any forensic procedure, examination or test that has not yet been completed and on which the prosecution intends to rely as tending to establish the guilt of the accused; and

              (ix)     any evidentiary certificate issued under any Act that is likely to be relevant to the alleged offence; and

        (e)     any other information, document or thing in the possession of the prosecution that is relevant to the alleged offence including—

              (i)     a list of the persons (including experts) who have made statements or given information relevant to the alleged offence but who the prosecution does not intend to call as witnesses at the hearing; and

              (ii)     a copy of every statement referred to in subparagraph (i) made by each of those persons or, if the person has not made a statement, a written summary of the substance of any evidence likely to be given by that person or a list of those statements or written summaries; and

              (iii)     a copy of every document relevant to the alleged offence that the prosecution does not intend to tender as an exhibit at the hearing or a list of those documents; and

              (iv)     a list containing descriptions of any things relevant to the alleged offence that the prosecution does not intend to tender as exhibits at the hearing; and

              (v)     a clear photograph, or a clear copy of such a photograph, of any thing relevant to the alleged offence that cannot be described in detail in the list; and

              (vi)     a copy of—

    (A)     records of any medical examination of the accused; and

    (B)     reports of any forensic procedure or forensic examination conducted on the accused; and

    (C)     the results of any tests—

carried out on behalf of the prosecution and relevant to the alleged offence but on which the prosecution does not intend to rely; and

              (vii)     a copy of any other information, document or thing required by the rules of court to be included in a full brief; and

S. 41(1)(e)(viii) inserted by No. 1/2022 s. 10.

              (viii)     subject to section 32C of the Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1958 , a copy of any information, document or thing that is relevant to the credibility of a witness for the prosecution; and

Example

The witness' criminal history (including pending charges), or the giving of a letter of assistance to the witness, the reduction of criminal charges against the witness, other favourable treatment in a criminal proceeding, or any payment or reward provided, as a result of the witness' cooperation with police.

        (f)     if the informant refuses to disclose any information, document or thing that is required to be included in the full brief, a written notice that the informant refuses disclosure under section 45, identifying the ground for refusing disclosure.

    (2)     Section 48 applies to information and other material supplied in a full brief.

Notes to s.   41 amended by No. 68/2009 s. 51(n).

Notes

1     See section 416 as to the prosecution's general obligation of disclosure.

2     Section 39(4) enables an informant and an accused to agree to the provision of less material in the full brief than is required by section 41.

3     If the Magistrates' Court hears and determines a charge in the absence of the accused, section 83 provides that certain documents in a full brief served on the accused are admissible in evidence.

4     See section 86 as to proof of criminal record in the absence of the accused.

S.   41A inserted by No. 1/2022 s. 5.

See reference:

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/cpa2009188/s41.html

NOTE:

There is a problem with point c:

"(c)     a copy of the criminal record of the accused or a statement that the accused has no previous convictions or infringement convictions; "

as this can ONLY occur with your CONSENT, something they DON'T want you to know.

See post:

Police criminality hidden in all court cases, right to a 'fair hearing' impossible!

The court or 'administration of justice' will deceive you the moment you attend to front desk or clerk with regards to your matter.

When you've decided to contest the Infringement Notice, a preliminary brief will be sent to you with regards to the alleged criminal offence.

It is with this preliminary brief that you see the court clerk.

The clerk will then ask you how you wish to plea, guilty or not guilty, deliberately misinforming or rather no mentioning that you have a third option, that being a "No plea".


"The 3 pleas"

One should not make a plea until one has legal advice, and one should not obtain legal advice based on a preliminary brief but rather a full brief as described at law.

Police deliberately omit crucial documentation in the preliminary brief that is vital to the defence of the accused.

Please note that the above point (4) can be replaced with the words: 

full disclosure.

The police prosecutor will also try to extrude what line of defence you will take in the court in order to prepare his brethren in their case against you, which can also include falsifying evidence, where you should say that you’re uncertain until you get the full brief.

The corrupt Australian Defence Force tampering with evidence

People in government departments commit criminal actions every single day where most if not all go unnoticed.

The ADF is on organisation that commits criminal activities, not only within the colony but also abroad.

There is no ousting of this criminal activity nor any real court time for the age old excuse of ‘national security’, which can almost be alleged to anything.

‘Persons’ within the ADF have committed the crime of tampering with evidence with regards to Ben Roberts Smith’s killing of civilians overseas in Afghantistan.

They have altered photos to suit a false agenda.

 The photo on the left is the original untouched displaying the Crusader's cross, while the one on the right is the official one the ADF released.

The problem now is will there be any criminal charges against the persons involved?

Will the victims of Ben Robert-Smith's actions get any real remedy?