You could read David Leigh’s book, in which he published the full decryption key: https://www.amazon.com/WikiLeaks-Inside-Julian-Assanges-Secrecy/dp/161039061X
That’s literally how he leaked it.
The wikipedia article on it has the whole “he said - she said”:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:_Inside_Julian_Assange’s_War_on_Secrecy
Including the lie that is frequently parroted about Assange not caring about people dying.
That was an editor at The Guardian, David Leigh.
This didn’t happen, Wikileaks vetted information before releasing it for exactly this reason.
Name one person.
Its technically US soil, so he could enter his plea there in a US court, but its the closest place to Australia, because he obviously refused to step foot on the American continent.
Yes, the threats worked and the corrupt won.
Now he gets to see his kids.
I’d choose that too.
You can call it cowardice, I’d call it pragmatism.
The US get to show just how tough they are on whistleblowers and their associates.
Assange gets to go home.
If I was him, I’d keep my head down and try to get to know my kids.
the cheapest and most widespread nuclear reactor design
Can you share this knowledge, please?
That source doesn’t have a link to their paper that works.
Yeah, link rot.
I did some googling for you: https://www.ceem.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/Low Emission Fossil Scenarios.pdf
But as far as I know we can’t build anywhere near enough hydro in Australia.
A study at the Australian National University (ANU) identified about 3,000 low-cost potential sites around Australia with head typically better than 300 metres and storage larger than one gigalitre (see Figure 3). The sites identified have a combined energy storage potential of around 163,000 GWh. To put this into perspective, a transition to a 100% renewable electricity system would need 450 GWh of PHES storage. The potential pumped hydro energy storage resource is almost 300 times more than required. Developers can afford to be very selective since only about 20 sites (the best 0.1% of sites) would be required to support 100% renewable electricity generation.
Emphasis mine.
Let me paraphrase the LNP here:
“Private companies have researched Nuclear and decided it’s not cost effective.”
“Financial institutions have investigated Nuclear and decided they WILL NOT INVEST.”
“But our financial backers at the Mineral Council and the private companies dragging the last of the profit out of their end of life coal power stations are insisting that we continue with our current market AS LONG AS POSSIBLE, so we’ve decided to announce an extremely long term plan, to scare private investment out of renewables short term.”
“Don’t worry, between NIMBYs in the target areas, laws surrounding nuclear energy, lack of local expertise and the general unsuitability of Nuclear for our widely dispersed yet small population, we won’t actually build more than one of these things.”
“Jokes on them, we were only pretending to be retarded.”
And thank you for modding.
I didn’t want to call you out by name.
You’ve already noticed that I’ve transferred here as my official instance.
“Be the change you want to see in the world”.
Then a moderator was unhappy with my posts, so I stopped.
.308 is 7.62, civilian measurement vs military (there’s actually implications related to pressures, sidewall thicknesses, machining tolerances, but yeah same same)
This requirement is designed to be hard, and as such is a major red flag to me.
What else is this company going to be difficult with?
Can i only get customer support or cancel my account in person, between 9-4 on the 2nd Friday of the month?
I would consider alternatives, if possible.
TOTP is a defined standard, specifically RFC 6238.
But I still have 3 different apps on my phone so that I can get on to various customer VPNS. 🤷♂️
Can’t tell if you’re joking, but a Request For Comments is effectively a proposal for how a process should be performed.
Some of them are eventually ratified as internet standards by the IETF.
Plenty of them remain useful as defacto standards even without formal acknowledgement.
Sure I read it, but Simon’s premise is incorrect.
Even his tangential commentary is incorrect.
Neither Kevin Rudd or Tony Abbott were booted for making “captains calls”, they were booted as fall guys by their parties before going to election.
Oh, I thought we were talking about “bad people who shouldn’t be anywhere near political levers”, not “egotisitical idiots”.
We elect “Donald Trumps” all the time.
Clive Palmer.
Craig Kelly.
Barnaby Joyce.
Bob Katter.
Pauline Hanson.
Jacqui Lambie.
They only differ from Trump in degree, not in tactics.
This “article” is a thought bubble, not even a fully fleshed out one.
It isn’t the crimes that Trump is accused of committing that are evil, it’s the lieing, manipulating, etc that got him in position to do it.
The shit that Palmer did to get elected were basically strong arming an entire electorate to support him.
The shit that Hanson has done through funneling electoral funds through friendly advertising companies SHOULD be considered fraud.
Whilst I didn’t always agree with their pronouncements, having a fact checker at this time seems to me a very important thing.
They include reference to “a new in-house verification reporting team, ABC News Verify”, but that sounds like they’ll only be verifying their own news, which is nice, but not the point.