Who voted for Howard?

When I talk politics with Australians, they usually go to great lengths to explain that they do not support the Howard government. Yesterday at the cricket, most of the spectators booed loudly when Howard was shown on the big screen to attend as well.

So tell me: who was it that voted this government into power? Somebody must have done so...

IT use in Australian Households

The Australian Bureau of Statistics recently released their report on household use of information technology. I just want to quote some interesting statistics.

• Only 60% of Australian households have Internet at home. For comparison: the Netherlands 78 percent, South Korea 93 percent.
  
• In Tasmania, 6 out of ten people have a computer at home; in the ACT this is 82 percent; similarly, 49 percent of Tasmanians have home access to the Internet but in the ACT this is 72 percent.
• Of my age group (35 - 44 year old), more than 20 percent never uses the Internet. This one really amazes me no end -- am I such a geek?
• The main reasons for not getting Internet at home were: "No use for the Internet" (24 percent) and "Lack of interest in the Internet" (23 percent). I really must be a terrible geek...
• Even more interesting: in the previous survey, three years back, the main reason given was "Costs too high" (about 25 percent), while only 18 percent thought the would have no use for the Internet. Would this mean that actually less people think the Internet useful now than three years back? Perverse.
• Remember that difference between Tasmania and the ACT? Apparently, 29 percent of Internet-deprived Tasmanians aren't interested in the Internet, but in the ACT this is only 13 percent. All that gorgeous scenery must be really distracting...
• About 50 percent now has broadband access; in 2004 this was only 16 percent. However, they defined broadband as "an 'always on' Internet connection with an access speed equal to or greater than 256 kbps", which does not satisfy the definition of broadband by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). In fact, I can barely get real broadband were I live, which is less than ten kilometres from Melbourne's CBD. I would guess that the percentages using broadband by the ITU's definition would be much, much smaller.

Now draw your own conclusions...

More smoke

Yesterday and this morning, Melbourne was shrouded in smoke again. This can be seen very well on the picture above, originally from NASA's Earth Observatory again.

What keeps amazing me is the sheer scale of the whole thing. Just imagine: we are talking of a cloud of smoke that stretches hundreds of kilometers in every direction!

Our buggy knowledge of firebugs

I wrote yesterday that I could not understand arsonists. Apparently I am not the only one. In an article in today's The Age, criminal profiler Rebekah Doley is quoted as saying that interest in profiling of firebugs in Australia is so low that we "...are beginning to to find out more about bushfire arsonists but there's no determination yet about what is an affective way of managing or funding the whole issue."

Actually, rather incredible for a country that has so many bushfires each year -- and is slated to experience even more of them, due to climate change effects.

I find it quite interesting that most Australians I talk with seem to think of bushfire arsonists as early and mid-teenagers (and that most arson intervention programs seem to be targeted at juveniles), but that in reality they are mostly people in their mid-to-late 20s -- at least, according to Ms. Doley in the newspaper article mentioned above. I wonder where this apparently skewed impression is coming from?

A river of smoke

What makes this picture (originally from NASA's Earth Observatory) so amazing is the sheer scale (see the left hand bottom indicator): 250 kilometers wide!

Today is relatively okay, but the last few days Melbourne was covered in a thick pall of smoke. The most striking thing (apart from feeling each breath going down your windpipe) was the difference in temperature: at least five degrees lower than on clear days, just caused by the smoke-cloud cover. One hell of a proof for the credibility of nuclear winter.

We have just had the first casualty from the fires: a firefighter who fell of a trailer in the path of the next tanker. Apparently they were rushing to a fire that was lighted on purpose. Police are looking for the people who were responsible; judging from earlier cases they will be charged with murder. I really don't understand these people... especially not in a country where everybody knows about the dangers.

Edit (December 16): apparently the first reports about the firefighter's death were incorrect. It now seems the trailer he was in overturned on top of him, crushing him to death.

Spooning it

The British Medical Journal can be a gem when it comes to original public health research. Consider this longitudinal cohort study researching displacement. Highly recommended original Australian work!

Rosarian section

A quick explanation: federal health minister Tony Abbott is a practising catholic, and a staunch pro-life (or contra-abortion, depending on your political alignment) activist. When a bill was introduced in parliament late last year to strip Abbott from his responsibility for approval of Mifepristone (also known as RU486 or "the abortion pill"), YWCA Australia printed and distributed these t-shirts as part of their input into the ensuing (very heated) discussion.

Recently, a contra-abortion campaigner asked the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal to rule that the shirts vilified catholics and should be banned. The case was struck, so for the moment Abbott's rosaries can stay on those ovaries -- or rather, on the t-shirt.

Uluru should be closed

So, that is one statement.

Two Irish tourists had to be airlifted yesterday from Uluru (better known as Ayers Rock). They paid for the cost of the helicopter (AU$ 600), and "bought Uluru's rangers a slab of soft drink to thank them for their trouble". The rangers would be really happy with that, I guess, especially the one who had to be treated in hospital for injuries on his leg sustained during the rescue.

Uluru contains several sacred places for the local Aboriginal tribe, the Pitjantjatjara, and they have asked repeatedly that people do not climb the rock. In 1983 the Australian government actually promised to do so; however, when two years later ownership was returned to the Pitjantjatjara, it was under the condition that Uluru would remain open for whoever wants to climb it.

According to the SMH article referenced above, Uluru was closed off after 8 AM because of the heat; so closing it off is a possibility. In my view this should be done indefinitely, definitely to redeem the 1983 promise, but also (and much more importantly) because continued access remains a sore point for the Pitjantjatjara -- who are in the end the original owners, and whom are now hurt continuously in the name of tourism.