This was such a bizarre interaction.

El Sayed seems brilliant at responding to these gotcha questions.

I think Trump has a lot more to lose in this fight, and he only has a few months to make something happen.

A "low population phase" is a nice way to say "post apocalypse".

I really enjoy this genre of fiction, but I don't think I would enjoy it IRL.

I don't get the hate for Wong?

I understand that labor is not left enough for fediverse users.

She's a diplomat though, she represents Australia to the world. It's not her job to say mean things to the people you don't like.

Hmm... No most post apoc fiction is mindful of these issues.

My main concern is that most novels have a token nerdy / accountant type who's role is to demonstrate how useless our skills are in a post apocalyptic wasteland. That's me really. An accountant.

I thought so. No answers just criticism because she didn't show up with a "Free Palestine" shirt.

I wonder how the foreign affairs minister from a liberal, national oor ON government would handle this?

chatbots always seem to be like this. Yesterday it was a specific website (for a paid service) with help offered by a chat bot built in to the UI. It was telling me where to find settings with specific instructions that just didn't match the UI.

One of it's answers was longwinded instructions on how to build an app that would change the settings via their API. There were a few sentences at the end suggesting a "low code" option where I could change the setting in the web ui.

I think what I was doing is a fairly common use case, a guide explaining how to achieve what I wanted would have been much quicker.

LOL.

It's the way I say it is because reasons and any contrary information is a fabrication.

Indeed.

That's what diplomats do?

As a diplomat, how would you like Wong to address this?

It seems that claim is not really true:

https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/penny_wong/policies/1

Besides which, do you want politicians to vote according bro their constituents wishes or according to their own interests?

I'm surprised there was that much interaction with him.

edit:

someone linked the wikipedia page, and someone else quoted this:

Trump has cited it as one of his proudest accomplishments and his second-favorite book (after the Bible).[5][6] Schwartz called ghost-writing the book his "greatest regret in life, without question," and both he and the book's publisher, Howard Kaminsky, have said that Trump had played no role in its writing. Trump has given conflicting accounts on the question of authorship.

Really though?

Trump just wakes up every day and does whatever thing he hopes will distract everyone from hi, being a pedo rapist and his ongoing harvesting of the wealth of the American people.

I don't think there's an actual plan to start a war. Surely that would be a huge self-own?

Exactly. The gaping hole in the judicial system exposed by both Trump and Musk is that it takes forever for any consequences to arise, and you can just delay and appeal and delay until you get a buyable judge.

Musk is winding up to meddle in another election. Like oh no, oh golly gosh, he did something naughty last time. What the fuck are you going to do to stop him doing that again? Fuck all.

Well, what were the US objectives?

I guess everyone stopped talking about Epstein so maybe that was the win.

Or at best, just not vote.

re-queefing

The surcharges suck, and in another month they won't be allowed, but it's not as though everything is going to be cheaper in the long run.

What we want is for the list price to be the final price, instead of this plus this plus that nonsense.

Yes, by carrying cash things might be 1% cheaper, but most people are happy to pay an extra 1% for the convenience of not carrying cash.

That said, as a card-only person for decades, I think I'm old and grumpy enough to start carrying cash again just because I don't like my bank being all up in my stuff.

Banks have always charged the vendor.

You seem to be laboring under the misconception that people don't want to pay for things by card.

Card payments are more convenient than cash.

They rely on a network, which costs money. Yes, the fees exceed the cost, which allows the network provider to make a profit. However, if the profit was excessive there would be alternatives, and most Australian's will be invested in that payment network through their super anyway.

In summary, consumers are enjoying convenience in exchange for a fee. You personally might find the fee unreasonable but you're the minority.

You seem fixated on the idea that when paying with cash you will be burdened with the card fee even though you're not availing yourself of that service. I'm a self employed consultant. The vast majority of customers pay electronically, by bank transfer. A few times a year someone wants to pay with cash, so I have to make a special trip to the ATM to deposit it just for them. Handling cash has a non-trivial cost.