Rather than having my All feed spammed with walled gardens I’d rather mods who don’t want outside participation to be able to stop their communities from showing in All.

there’s this really cool alternative to streaming, called you buy their shit directly.

Wow, mind blown! I had no idea money could be used to buy things directly! /s

Seriously though, buying music from artists you already know is easy for artists that actually provide this as an option, but it doesn’t help when trying to find new artists and songs to listen to. Spotify is brilliant for discovering new content and can’t be replaced by ‘buying shit directly’.

Spotify.

An open source music streaming service where I can financially support artists but where I’m not forced to put up with annoying advertisements (even when paying membership fees!), and which allows me to use whatever app I want to play the music I listen to. It is annoying AF that I need to switch between apps to listen to music because Spotify’s shitty native app is inferior in every possible way with the single exception of offering more content.

My sister got a job with a primarily LLM-written cover letter. When trying to sway someone to your side, how you say something can matter more than what you say.

For people who aren’t good at articulating themselves, noting down key dot points about their skills and job history alongside a job description, then asking a LLM to write out a cover letter can be very helpful, even if only to get a rough draft.

As an aside, out of curiosity, I asked ChatGPT 3.5 to rewrite my comment above and got the following, not sure which is better TBH.

My sister landed a job using a cover letter mostly written by a language model. When persuading someone, the tone and style of your message can outweigh its content.

For individuals who find it challenging to articulate themselves, outlining key skills and job experiences alongside a job description, and then seeking assistance from a language model to compose a cover letter, can prove highly beneficial, even if only as a starting point.

I support policies that grant less temporary and permanent visas and restrict student visa and temporary graduate visa holders from applying for permanent residence. I fail to see how this ‘harms immigrants’. Adding and strengthening these caps is not harmful to immigrants. At worst, this is harmful to prospective non-existent immigrants. To study in Australia each and every student visa holder must make a declaration and provide supporting evidence that their intention is only to study and be a ‘genuine temporary entrant’.

The government already has caps on migration, but they have been actively loosening and removing caps over the past few years. I want them back, and I want them strengthened for the wellbeing of everyone in Australia, including permanent residents. People here don’t give a shit about the actual logistics and just have a hard-on for migration.

FFS, does anyone read? I think there should be fewer permanent visas granted, not that permanent residents shouldn’t be able to buy a home. You people just want to call someone racist. Not sure if there’s a word for that.

Who said anything about denying them the right to a home? I said Australia should grant less permanent visas not strip rights from existing permanent visa holders.

If you got ‘I hate immigrants’ from the content of my posts then you have shit reading comprehension.

Immigration improves lives for natural citizens. Look it up.

You’re the one making this claim, it is your responsibility to back it up, not mine.

What? Who said anything about denying them the right to a home? I said Australia should grant less permanent visas not strip rights from existing permanent visa holders. I am not sure you fully understand what permanent residency is; it’s hardly creating second-class citizens. Permanent residency is a transition towards citizenship or an alternative for those who wish to maintain their other citizenship (for countries that won’t allow dual citizenship). People who have never travelled to Australia in their life can be granted permanent residency, it makes no sense for these people to immediately be granted citizenship when they don’t even know if they like Australia.

My father was a permanent resident for over 30 years before he became a citizen and I honestly don’t think he ever experienced an issue.

The government should focus on improving existing Australians rather than making new Australians. Boosting migration during a housing crisis is irresponsible. It isn’t only permanent visas as well. The government is doing everything it can to increase the amount of people competing for housing in Australia.

Everyone who is leaving a house empty at this time should be penalised. This is just another nonsense move by the government that will have nil effect on the crisis they created.

Considering that the government is simultaneously boosting migration so that we’re granting 200,000 permanent visas every year I don’t see this as having any real positive effect. Permanent residents are exempt from this fee.

Edit: adding because I keep getting replies that assume I think I loathe permanent residents. The reason I stated they were exempt is to add context for those unaware. To be clear, and to stop annoying people with shit reading comprehension calling me racist, I think everyone regardless of migration status should be penalised for leaving empty houses.

I have never smoked in my life, but I am one hundred percent against the government deciding that I am not permitted to take up the habit should I choose. Seriously, fuck you. People framing the scrapping of this as being ‘right-wing’ clearly have no understanding of what the ‘right’ and the ‘left’ stand for.

Yeah, it’s much healthier to buy a packet of cigarettes from the g̶o̶v̶e̶r̶n̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ supermarket than buying those scary vapes.

Was he happy the next episode?

Edit: Sorry, that wasn’t really called for… Go Zoidberg!

Yeah, I’ve said enough. Not wasting my time on this nonsense any more. Feel free to read my other comments if you want some counter-arguments to your ‘points’. You haven’t said anything particularly original (apart from your strange belief that ‘enshrining’ must have a religious basis, which doesn’t warrant a response).

it requires a power dynamic to be in play

Tell that to every major dictionary.

You using an out-of-whack definition of the word that almost no one outside of the liberal-arts agrees with is not me being ‘misled’. Language is owned by the masses.

race ‘cultural group’

Oh, it was backed up by ‘a recent comment’? Thank goodness that’s cleared up. /s

Also, note that my original comment that you replied to explicitly used the wording from the proposed amendment that it was an advisory body that would make representations to parliament. Using the actual wording is hardly a misrepresentation. If my wording upset you, then maybe you should have voted ‘No’.

Rather than sharing a useless link, why not specifically say which part of what I wrote was a ‘lie’? I’d be very interested to see which part, considering I specifically tailored my comment to adhere as much to the proposed wording in the amendment to avoid sanctimonious people coming and claiming with their noses 10-foot in the air that, ‘I was lied to’.

Sharing my personal experience that I haven’t personally been lied to is not a logical fallacy. Also, the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, not the one negating it. You and other ‘Yes’ supporters can’t go two minutes without claiming that, “THEY’RE SPREADING LIES!!!”, yet can never seem to back it up. You’d much rather wave your dick in the air calling everyone but your reflection a moron.

The only people I have personally seen lying are ‘Yes’ supporters. For instance, I’ve seen none of this ‘veto’ nonsense that is allegedly being spread everywhere. The only ‘No’ pamphlets I received were pretty bloody accurate representations.

In your two replies to me you’ve created three different straw men; I don’t think you need to worry about other people lying.