A look into Corporate fraud in Australia, Stranglehold of Monopolies, Telecom's Oppression, Biased Law System, Corporate influence in politics, Industrial Relations disadvantaging workers, Outsourcing Australian Jobs, Offshore Banking, Petrochemical company domination, Invisibly Visible.
It's not what you see, it's what goes on behind the scenes. Australia, the warrantless colony.
Note: Site has more info in desktop mode or 'web version' as seen at bottom of page, when on smartphone.
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (ABN: 122 104 616)
Australia's Prime Minister (CEO) Tony Abbott : "Australia is Open for Business"
This 'internet scam' that is delivered via Australia Post, and it's a scam, or a hijacking of your Domain Name Registration.
This type of scam has been going on for over 20 years where the authorities have done nothing to shut this scam down.
This scam is aimed at the larger corporations, whose accountants 'just pay the bills' presented before them.
Sure if you factually read this so called bill 'like' piece of paper, it does state that it is not a renewal notice or bill, but its sheer existence falls under unconscionable conduct, no?
A domain name registration can cost you $20, where they'll hijack yours for nearly 5 times as much.
See other registrations by 'Registry Australia':
Surely this cannot be an 'honest' business?
Anyone care to take them to court over unconscionable / deceptive conduct?
You’ve decided to use the messaging app called Signal in order for more private conversations with friends and family and the occasional group chatting about the New World Order, Bilderberg meetings and Zionist control over the world.
So, the only details the app acquires is the phone number you are using, where then you can put a username that you identify as for the day (e.g. Chief BigLongHorne) or entirety of the app.
For some reason (maybe) your conversation is noticed by a government plant, within the group, where as a result Signal Messenger LLC is served with a subpoena.
AS stated above only two forms of identification exist, where both may not be factually belonging to your ‘person’ or you (which are two different entities)
Governments are notorious for not housing the brightest sparks in the business, where most are just brainless order followers.
The example below is a classic case, where the FBI agent, whose name has been redacted, has less cranial matter than the below average human, as seen by his list of demands, for ‘items’ that do not exist within Signal.
See original 12 page subpoena within the Central District of California:
See the 3 page response given by Signal Messenger, LLC:
Over the past few weeks the internet or more accurately the platform YouTube, has been ablaze with regards to trash content creator Alia ‘Lia’ Shelesh better known as SSSniperwolf and more importantly Google's reaction to a very big no-no of doxing.
Taking online content and running with it offline is a violation of Ts&Cs, yet Google’s reaction was pitiful and basically a slap on the wrists for one of its biggest cash cows.
If a male would have done this to a female, then all sorts of accusations would fly where a lawsuit would surely follow, in the most litigious nation on the planet.
In one of her videos, Lia (or is it Liar?) states that you just cannot take someone’s content and re-upload it and monetise it, yet that is the entire purpose of her channel.
Just another trash content creator called out for what she’s being doing and more.
Windows 12 could see a substantial system redesign in order to include a
more AI-centric user experience. The start button could thus be
replaced with Copilot AI, which is already available as a preview
version in the latest Windows 11 update.
The next major version
for the Windows operating system is expected to launch sometime in
2024, and Microsoft has been dropping hints on possible new features
since late last year. AI is most likely going to get a bigger focus,
since Microsoft is already collaborating with OpenAI on the Copilot feature, but we could see some design changes that revolve around AI-based interactions, as well. This was suggested by MS CEO Satya Nadella during the Snapdragon X Elite presentation on october 24.
As the entire computing industry is shifting focus
to support an ever increasing number of AI-powered features, Microsoft
too intends to be on the forefront of the AI movement starting with
extensive software support integrated right in its hero product. The
latest Windows 11 version already supports a preview for Copilot AI,
but, given the beta state of the feature, this is still somewhat
sluggish. With better hardware support coming on processors like
Qualcomm’s Snapdragon X Elite or AMD’s Hawk point,
the AI interactions on Windows 12 should feel much smoother. However,
Nadella mentioned that this will require “a new system architecture.”
Furthermore, according to Nadella, the upcoming OS
could change the entire user experience, with Copilot somehow replacing
the Start button. “The Copilot is like the Start button,” Nadella
explains. “It becomes the orchestrator of all your app experiences. So
for example, I just go there and express my intent and it either
navigates me to an application or it brings the application to the
Copilot, so it helps me learn, query and create — and completely
changes, I think, the user habits.”
Right now, Copilot can launch most of the integrated
applications on its own, yet it cannot access the file explorer and
perform related tasks. Hopefully, Microsoft can expand the AI functions,
especially the vocal commands, to support even more interactions in
Windows 12.
Source:NotebookCheck.
If you value your privacy, then Microsoft products should not be loaded onto you computer.
Fresh report analysing total power usage of AI servers suggests consumption is through the roof!
The likes of the Nvidia H100 GPU consume up to 700W alone, let alone all the other components around it.
French firm Schneider Electric reports that power consumption of AI servers will total around 4.3GW in 2023, which is slightly lower than the power consumption of the nation of Cyprus (4.7GW) in 2021. The company anticipates that power consumption of AI workloads will grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 26% to 36%, which suggests that by 2028, AI workloads will consume between 13.5GW and 20GW, which is more than Iceland consumed in 2021.
In 2023, the total power consumption of all data centres is estimated to be 54GW, with AI workloads accounting for 4.3GW of this demand, according to Schneider Electric. Within these AI workloads, the distribution between training and inference is charcterised by 20% of the power being consumed for training purposes, and 80% allocated to inference tasks. This means that AI workloads will be responsible for approximately 8% of the total power consumption of all data centres this year. Schneider Electric recommends transitioning from the conventional 120/208V distribution to 240/415V to better accommodate the high- power densities of AI workloads. For cooling, a shift from air cooling to liquid cooling is advised to enhance processor reliability and energy efficiency, although immersive cooling might produce even better results. The racks used should also be more capacious, with specifications such as being at least 750mm wide and having a static weight capacity greater than 1,800kg.
See the full report here:
If corporations truly cared about the environment, then they's be using LESS resources and not more.
Over 8 years ago or on the 15th of June 2015, the colony’s state media aired on a programme called ‘Q&A’ the topic of the Magna Carta (‘Great Charter’ in Latin) from 1215.
Then Speaker of the House of Representatives Ms. Bronwyn Bishop stated (at 12m16s)
that “The first job of a government is to look after the safety of its people”
Also note that the Australian Government did not allow ‘Free Speech’ on this topic on the YouTube platform by turning off comments.
The government’s ‘people’ are those in the Executive that being the Monarch, Governor General, the Parliament that being the MPs, lawmakers and the Judiciary that being the Courts and police.
The general population/serfs/plebs are not part of the government’s ‘people’.
MANY people may have problems in comprehending Ms. Bishops statement, where a simple analogy can be made substituting the word government for a 'favourite' company or international corporation, e.g:
“The first job of Google is to look after the safety of its people”
That means Google’s customers are not on the radar, or of zero significance in relation to the policy.
So what could be the second job of those in government, or even a highly prioritised agenda?
To rort the tax pool to the maximum without any consequences?
To give money for mates jobs in falsified tenders, irrespective of any legal action?
To implement actions that punish people, which have zero legal and lawful basis to exist therefore let alone to be enacted upon?
To commit criminal actions when in office with the intention to get away with them?
Or why not to enact pain and suffering or austerity on the general population to a predefined level that is just below then rioting.
That is what is happening to Australians at this point in time, where the Australian Government is responsible for the housing crisis, rental crisis, job crisis, and high inflation ‘crisis’ where all these actions are carried out to a level just below people having enough and rioting, just like in Sri Lanka.
The people in the Australian Government, must really hate the (mums & dads) tax payers, the very people that afford those in government to have an exorbitant tax rorting lifestyle even after they have left office.
The product is stifled, the consumer is not obtaining the benefit of current technology.
Apple is also against you with regards to your lawful right to repair the product, where it goes out of its way to deliberately engineer components that when replaced will not work in your legally owned Apple device.
Last Wednesday, Thierry Breton, EU's Internal Market Commissioner, proudly announced on Twitter/X
that he had struck a deal with MEPs to create a European "digital
identity wallet," which would permit all EU citizens to have "a secured
e-identity for their lifetime." According to the European Commission's own website,
the European Digital Identity can be used for a whole range of
transactions, including providing personal identification on and
offline, showing birth certificates and medical certificates, opening a
bank account, filing tax returns, applying for a university, storing a
medical prescription, renting a car, or checking into a hotel.
Several people, including Dutch MEP Rob Roos, have raised concerns that a centralised digital ID could put Europeans' privacy and mobility rights in jeopardy. A letter
signed by over 500 "cybersecurity experts, researchers, and civil
society organisations from across the globe," warns that the proposed
digital ID regulations will reduce rather than enhance citizens digital
security. But one of its leading architects, Internal Market
Commissioner Thierry Breton, maintains that "the wallet has the highest
level of both security & privacy," while EU President Ursula von der
Leyen insists that this is "a technology where we can control ourselves
what data is used and how." So either critics are overplaying civil
liberty and privacy concerns, or the technology's defenders are
downplaying them. They cannot both be right.
In theory, a universal European digital ID could be programmed on a
permanent basis in such a way that the citizen has full control over
which parts of his or her "digital wallet" he shares at any given
moment, and which he or she does not share. We might have little to
worry about if a European digital ID was programmed now and forever by
people who took privacy seriously and were not inclined to exploit the
technology at their fingertips to "nudge" - or even "shove" - citizens
into complying with their policies concerning disease control,
non-discrimination, war propaganda, or climate change.
But in practice, it
would be highly naive to assume that a programmable Europe-wide digital
ID, controlled by a centralised bureacracy would not, sooner or later,
be exploited to "nudge" (or shove)
people into complying with the policies that happen to be favoured by
the "powers that be." And it does not require a wild leap of imagination
to envisage the sorts of ways a European digital ID could be leveraged
to erode the equality and freedom of Europeans, since the very same individuals
that are the public face of this digital ID initiative were the ones
who set in motion the most pervasive system of bio-surveillance in the
history of Europe, namely the so-called "Covid digital certificates."
The operation of the Covid digital certificates, which was approved by
both the European Commission (the same one now pushing for a digital ID
system) and the European Parliament, can give us a fairly clear idea of the uses to which European technocrats are likely to put a digital ID system, if given the chance.
The Covid digital certificate was used to compel citizens who had not
received a Covid vaccine within a certain time period to obtain a costly
and inconvenient Covid test every time they crossed a European border,
and was even used to deny entry to unvaccinated citizens at cultural and
recreational venues across Europe. In other words, the Covid digital
certificate served as a mechanism for coercing citizens into injecting a
certain medication into their bloodstream, and created a two-tier
society, in which the unvaccinated were treated as a new social and
political underclass.
Now, imagine if a centrally controlled European digital
certificate was offered to all European citizens as a tool for accessing
a wide range of services, from banking, air travel and hotel stays to
car rentals, access to recreational venues, and access to online digital
services. Initially, presumably the certificate would be optional and
citizens could use other methods for validating their identity. Then,
under the pretext of enhancing citizens' "security," the certificate
might very well become obligatory for an increasing number of
transactions.
The next step would be to gradually expand the information
contained on the certificate, and use the certificate as a way to deny
or approve citizens' access to certain services based on their spending
habits, their vaccination status, or their "social credit" score.
Of course, this is not something we can be 100% certain will happen.
But the recent implementation of vaccine apartheid in Europe should
disabuse us of any illusion that Europe's political leadership are
committed to respecting and defending our civil liberties or our equal
access to public amenities and services.
Politicans like Thierry Breton and Ursula von der Leyen, and those MEPs
and member state goverments that cheered them on during the pandemic,
were prepared to treat citizens like cattle or disease vectors to be
vaccinated and tested en masse, with scant regard for their personal
medical history and risk factors. It is surely only a matter of
time before people with this sort of contempt for individual liberty
would be inclined to take advantage of a technology like a universal
digital ID as a lever to control people's private choices with a view to
advancing their own careers and policy goals.
Quite a few citizens said "no" to an experimental vaccine, and quite a
few citizens still question the scientific and political rationale for
imposing burdensome carbon taxes, forcibly expropriating farmland based
on climate directives, living in "15 minute cities," making space for
transgender ideology in their hospitals and classrooms, or abstaining
from whatever the powers that be deem to be "hate speech."
What better method to induce public compliance with unpopular or
controversial public policies and laws than to reward compliance with
enhanced mobility and enhanced access to social amenities and services,
and punish non-compliance with reduced mobility and reduced access to
services and amenities? Isn't that exactly what the digital Covid
certificate, a brainchild of the same Commission, did?
Obviously, advocates of a European digital ID will publicly claim they
are only interested in promoting the security of our transactions and
protecting our privacy. But since these are the very same people who
dare to claim that medical segretation and coercion via vaccine
passports "reassures us of (the) spirit of an open Europe, a Europe without barriers,"their assurances regarding citizens' privacy and liberties have no credibility whatsoever.
According to the European Commission's own website, the European Digital
Identity can be used for a whole range of transactions, including
providing personal identification on and offline, showing birth
certificates and medical certificates, opening a bank account, filing
tax returns, applying for a university, storing a medical prescription,
renting a car, or checking into a hotel.
Digital ID is a means of population control. People dumb enough to
trust and believe in the ''authorities'' aka the sheep will go along
smiling until something they use to like is taken away. Gonna be too
late then to opt out. The sheep will open the doors to the wolves in a
manner of speaking. Meanwhile, the day when those with open eyes will
have to chose between cooperating or ''hiding in the woods'' is coming
ever closer.
Apple has been caught lying in a privacy policy. So say the now-notorious security researchers at Mysk.
Apple promised that the “device analytics”
sent to its servers were anonymous. But it turns out that’s not true,
according to the researchers. Everything you do in Apple apps, such as
the Store, transmits an analytics row, containing a field that directly
and uniquely identifies you. This field—the DSID—is linked to highly
personal information in Apple’s databases.
Everything you do is logged and permanently linked to your identity. In today’s SB Blogwatch, we ponder moving to Android.
Your humble blogwatcher curated these bloggy bits for your entertainment. Not to mention: Who/Trek cross-references.
“Findings are especially damning” The
privacy policy governing Apple’s device analytics says “none of the
collected information identifies you personally.” But an analysis of the
data sent to Apple shows it includes a permanent, unchangeable ID
number called a Directory Services Identifier, or DSID. … Apple collects
that same ID number along with information for your Apple ID, which
means the DSID is directly tied to your full name, phone number, birth
date, email address and more. … According to Apple’s analytics
policy, “Personal data is either not logged at all, is subject to
privacy preserving techniques … or is removed from any reports before
they’re sent to Apple.” But … the DSID, which is directly tied to your
name, is sent to Apple in the same packet as all the other analytics
information. … The company hasn’t said anything publicly about the
apparent contradictions in its privacy promises. … The findings
are especially damning given the years Apple spent rebranding itself as a
privacy company. Apple’s recent marketing campaigns suggest the
company’s privacy practices are supposed to be far better than other
tech companies. … But Apple is making strides to build an advertising
empire of its own, built on the personal data of its billions of users.
“A very big deal” As
the old saying has it, “Never ascribe to malice that which can be
adequately explained by incompetence.” I’m pretty confident that
Hanlon’s Razor applies here, and that the reason Apple’s assurances
appear to be false is down to error rather than a deliberate intent to
deceive. The company simply has too much to lose and too little to gain
by any nefarious behavior. … However, as incompetence goes, this
does seem pretty high up the scale. Privacy has become a huge part of
Apple’s marketing message, so to fail to protect privacy in not one but two major ways is a very big deal. Apple needs to fix this—and fix it fast.
“No way to stop it” Apple’s
analytics data include … the “Directory Services Identifier”, an ID
that uniquely identifies an iCloud account. Meaning, Apple’s analytics
can personally identify you. … Apple states in their Device
Analytics & Privacy statement that the collected data does not
identify you personally. This is inaccurate. … DSID is associated with
your name, email, and any data in your iCloud account. … The DSID
is also sent by other Apple apps for analytics purposes. … Analytics
data are directly linked to you. … There’s no way to stop it.
What will Apple do about it?devslash0 has no problem predicting:
It’s
fairly easy to predict what their response will be. … Their line of
defence: … The data contained within the payload sent to the server does
not contain any personal information because the dsId field contains
jibber-jabber. … They will attempt to completely downplay the fact
that it can still be correlated with other data sets and lead to the
same result. In other words, “We’re not sending any PII in the
traditional sense but don’t try to tell us what we can do or not
afterwards.”
Apple
is basically loopholing all the ****ty adtech engagement surveillance
BS that plagues the rest of the industry through the app store,
pretending like it’s any other app. Of course they can, but a lot of the
hard-line privacy stuff goes down the drain with the hypocrisy.
What
bothers me is that Apple really doesn’t have to move in this direction.
… They’ve been uniquely positioned to basically do things that nobody
else can, because they sell so much expensive hardware. Instead, all
mega corps seem to blend together and follow the same playbook. It’s
sad.
Company
lied to take advantage of some bad press for their competitors,
choosing to use “privacy” as their holier-than-thou advertising
schtick—film at eleven.
Of course every company is
collecting your data. The only difference between Apple and Google is
that Google admits it. Apple lies about it so that gullible millenials
can pretend to be better than everyone while sipping their
venti-soy-mocha with “sustainable” coffee beans.
Is there really a big issue here? YES, argues solq:
This
is a complete failure of anonymization and a specific breach of trust. I
refer you to [the iOS Device Analytics privacy policy]. Right at the
top, 2nd sentence in fact, you can read the following, which we now know
to be untruthful: “None of the collected information identifies you
personally.” If the collected information identifies your iCloud account
then it also identifies you personally. … Apple is trusted on privacy and security in excess of their execution record and this issue adds to that.
