Don't have an account? Create one!

News Stories

AuthorMessage
kayles
Bleeding on the Floor
kayles
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 1078
November 7th, 2008 at 12:41am
in terms of research, its the governments ploy to make sure we become dumb and dont have an opinion for ourselves on something important. its the same with the new terms for fee help, having to pay $950 per year you loan money compared to when our parents had the opportunity to go to uni for free.
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
November 7th, 2008 at 01:07am

Hang on, what's this about fee help...?
I haven't heard anything about it changing, I've only heard about having to pay $250-odd per year for uni facilities.
Which I also think is stupid.
kayles
Bleeding on the Floor
kayles
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 1078
November 7th, 2008 at 01:52am
i heard it was $950 a year maybe i heard wrong?
no idea but i think its crazy because it just means its harder for people who arent born into money to get into uni n whatevvs because theyre financially unable which is why they get fee help in the first place
sez
Bleeding on the Floor
sez
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 1416
November 7th, 2008 at 02:36am
Do you mean like HECS? Not that it's called that anymore. Actually it is called Fee-HELP. I think? Something like that.

I heard of the bringing back of compulsary unionism. I'm not sure how I feel about it tbqh.
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
November 7th, 2008 at 03:19am

It's gone back to HECS (in NSW at least), I bought the 2009 Course book when I was finding which unis have the course I want to do, and yeah it's HECS again lol.
When I was in year 12 it was like CSP or something like that.

Apparently it's not compulsory unionism in that they aren't making students be a part of the unions, but they are making students pay around $250 a year for the upkeep of services.
Ha, it's exactly the same, they just don't want to call it that because of negative connotations.
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
November 7th, 2008 at 03:35am
When I started Uni we had $400-odd fees, but that was abolished by the following year. Thank goodness, I didn't wanna pay that much for services I don't use.
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
November 7th, 2008 at 03:44am

^ that's the main reason I'm against it tbh.
I realise a lot of people need those facilities, but I never use them, so I don't see why I should have to pay for them.
And I realise I probably sound like an idiot when it's only $250-odd per year, but for uni students that could be better spent on textbooks, travel expenses (like, to and from uni), or even put into savings seeing as students generally aren't working full time.
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
November 7th, 2008 at 03:55am
In total agreement. That stuff should ALWAYS be opt in. Hell, I can't even afford textbooks given that they're like $150 each and I barely use them. Like I can afford that much for more Uni shit I don't use.
kayles
Bleeding on the Floor
kayles
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 1078
November 7th, 2008 at 09:39am
im not liking it either, its just adding more money onto the money im going to be working my ass off to pay when i finish uni. i hate the idea of having a debt to pay before i even start living just so i can get a decent job to pay for shiz.
what is the $250 even for?
asha shake.
Devil's Got Your Number
asha shake.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 36414
November 8th, 2008 at 01:00am

It's not like it's that bad to pay off when you finish really, you just get a bit extra tax taken out, so you don't even really notice it tbh.

The $250 is for the upkeep of student services, like study areas, the actual uni cafes (as opposed to the privately owned ones), childcare facilities etc.
Rh!annon
Salute You in Your Grave
Rh!annon
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2281
November 13th, 2008 at 07:51am
I liked this one:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/12 ... ewall_row/

ISP boss pledges to undermine Great Aussie Firewall

Stupid plan is stupid


By John Oates •

Posted in Government, 12th November 2008 10:37 GMT

The Australian technology industry is starting to fight back against the government plan to force all ISPs to filter everyone's internet access.

Michael Malone, boss of iiNet, an Australian ISP with 700,000 customers, said his firm would take part in the trial, but only in order to show the government how stupid it was. Malone described communications minister Stephen Conroy as the worst minister in the internet's 15-year history.

The scheme would force ISPs to offer two types of internet access - one filtered for children and one filtered for adult Australians.

Conroy did not help his cause with a muddled performance in the Australian Senate. Conroy said the pilot would filter a blacklist from the Australian Communications and Media Authority as well as "other unwanted content". ACMA's blacklist includes 1,300 web addresses and another 10,000 would be added to this list. But he failed to answer Senator Scott Ludlam's question as to what "unwanted" meant.

The trial will test the impact on internet speeds as well as costs for providers.

Conroy said the government was aware of technical concerns and happy to have an open debate. He urged the industry to step forward and engage with government.

For his part Malone said he would join the "ridiculous" trial only in order to show the government that the filter would be simple to bypass, would not check peer-to-peer traffic and would slow network speeds.

Malone told the Sydney Morning Herald: "They're not listening to the experts, they're not listening to the industry, they're not listening to consumers, so perhaps some hard numbers will actually help.

"Every time a kid manages to get through this filter, we'll be publicising it and every time it blocks legitimate content, we'll be publicising it."