It then law is written loosely enough they may just try to apply it however is politically convenient at the time. Don't like people using signal? Guess signal is social media lmao.

That's not to say the original intent is to harass software they don't like, but a law written ambiguously can be used for other things if desired.

Nevermind then. I wasn't giving them much credit but it was still too much it seems.

Thanks Bill! Really saving the taxpayer there.

The legislation does note that some services are “excluded”, but does not name specific platforms. For example, while services providing “online social interaction” would be included in the ban, this would not include “online business interaction”.

Looking forward to watching Facebook claim it's all a business interaction because they're selling the user data or something. Also surely this includes any and all online forums.

If they were rushing through the bill then any amendments in the senate would require the bill to go back to the house. Partially explains the reluctance to consider amendments (though why bother with debate then).

Depressingly

The ban is, however, backed by 77% of Australians, according to a new poll.

Most of whom probably don't care how it was passed or details on the amendments.

Honestly, reducing the teaching + publish-or-perish + the constant need to apply for grants would go a long way towards fixing the review process. Academics have to spend a lot of time doing a lot of non-academic work that peer reviewing properly sometimes gets pushed down the list of priorities.

Definitely not something a corrupt person would say.

You're assuming that they scouted this and carefully planned it to ensure they wouldn't cause damage. I doubt that.

Seems like they did:

The canvas of the painting is protected with a glass screen, a factor Just Stop Oil said they had taken into account.

The headline reads like an onion article.

While its true that there are open-access journals and conferences without such costs

To publish open access normally costs upwards of $3k USD as well. There's practically no point in the publishing chain where academics aren't getting screwed.

Let's also not forget that you have to review other people's papers for the journal for free.

They could have avoided a chunk of this by passing Zali stegalls bill on truth in advertising, but I guess abandoning your cornerstone policy on reconciliation is a small price to pay for being able to lie at the next election.

There's a lot of "it's probably concealed for a reason" type posts that I don't think I'd be seeing if this was the LNP.

Also how can Australians trust the government to make national security laws if they aren't informed on national security issues?