Not all e-rideables are the same. Legal e-bikes are much safer than e-scooters due to wheel size and centre of gravity, and both are probably safer than e-motos because of the higher speeds involved.

FWIW I’ve seen plenty of kids hooning on e-motos and e-scooters, but yet to see it on a pedal-assisted bike.

Also, what about those kids who use pedal-assisted bikes to get to their friends’ places, go to school, or leisure rides with family? Frankly the idea of banning this is ludicrous in my view.

I tend to notice that people less confident ride the footpath instead of on the road. I was thinking about this and I think this should be a choice, as footpaths tend to be better for a slower, leisurely pace. Of course a bike lane would be great here and would be a middle ground that might allow slightly faster riding without having to veer around pedestrians or pay close attention to driveways (the real reason why a lot of cyclists avoid footpaths).

The video doesn’t quite capture the extent of Greater Brisbane’s shared path network of unofficial bikeways that will technically also requires e-bikes and e-scooters to ride 10km/h.

It’s simple math, but slow speeds like 10km/h would obviously double the time for the trip which is the real killer here.

I’ll be at the mass ride tonight to show my support, as a regular cyclist and likely future e-bike owner who would like to ride on shared paths > 10km/h.

Yeah I feel you there. I’m not on Facebook so I just attend these sort of public events. I’ve mentioned it to BQ and South BUG before but the impression I got was that Facebook works for the majority.

There is a mass-ride event to protest the e-bike laws in Qld being held on Wednesday starting at 5pm from Raymond Park. Event being organised on the blue site: https://www.facebook.com/events/26438874392465778/

What about riding distances further than one would be capable or willing to ride without a motor?

Many people wouldn’t be interested in riding, say, 10-15km each direction especially in a hilly area, but a motor could be a game changer.

The idea that you’re not tough enough if you don’t pushbike it is just ignorance and ironically more likely to push people into driving or other modes of transport.

Yay!

Can’t make many comments on Chermside but the biggest issue with Upper Mount Gravatt is how car infested it is. Both kids and cyclists have been hit on Klumpp Road. It is near the V1 Veloway (the noisy, less pleasant part compared to the Woollongabba-CBD stretch) but otherwise has pretty poor cycling infrastructure.

My high level suggestion are:

• More bike lanes and bikeways. Connect up the Bulimba Creek bikeway to the Veloway - either needs a new bridge over the motorway or bike lanes on and around Kessels Road.
• Walking access to the Upper Mount Gravatt busway bus stop should be improved. Wider, flatter footpaths with more trees, reconfigured traffic lights. Do some user testing.
• The Griffith University stop on the busway should be moved southbound to the Park ‘n’ Ride at Klumpp Road, especially now that Mt Gravatt campus has closed. This would benefit Hibiscus, the local schools and sports club as well.
• Dunno what to do about the hellscape that is Logan Road and Kessels. Kessels Rd is a major arterial road that trucks use to get to the Gateway Motorway/Port of Brisbane. Maybe long term improvements to the rail network so that freight have separate tracks?

The outcome was already predetermined when the legislation was passed, and the report is being written with that in mind. The report basically has to push it forwards. If this had been done by the ALRC it would have looked quite different.

Your work computer likely contains personally identifiable information. Microsoft very likely has a significant profile on what you do at work and could conceivably link that to your other identities outside of work.

Are they actually doing that? It’s hard to say. Microsoft does have relationships with data brokers like Snowflake Inc. and SCUBA plus its own internal capabilities like Xandr Inc.

Cross pollination is more than possible when employees use personsal devices to login to work accounts. Most of the people that I work with login to Slack on their personal device using Microsoft Entra SSO.

My previous job, yes! A few people had that fight years before I started and won. It was decided on the basis that we’re Linux sysadmins who already operate a sizeable fleet of Linux systems and running our own desktops would be beneficial and self-supported.

Sadly my current employer doesn’t share this view. We used a crippled Linux desktop through Apache Guacamole which is a bit average to say the least. I have to put up with the constant bullshit that is Windows and all of its ads, news headlines and trash that I don’t want on my computer at work. I hate it but I have very little influence in that space.

Will Signal block Australian IP addresses, or nix accounts that have a +61 phone number? I’d assume the former but if Signal and other social media platforms go for the latter it will be painful for Australian netizens.

I wonder if they’re planning road diets on the surface. Maybe some bike lanes, bus lanes and wider footpaths.

(For the record I highly doubt that, but if such a wasteful project were to go ahead that would be the best concession IMO).

yggmail specifically, probably not. yggdrasil uses TCP/IP and the Meshtastic latencies to perform connections would be too high AFAIK. It would probably only work in a fairly well-connected network. yggdrasil could be used directly over a WiFi protocol but it would need fairly good reception to function.

N.B. I haven’texperimented with this myself.

yggmail is a fairly obscure and experimental take on email on a mesh network: https://github.com/neilalexander/yggmail

https://forums.debian.net/ exists for Debian

Graphene shills have been banging on this point for donkey’s ages. Reality is that many people use phones that are out of OEM support and many OEM ROMs are bundled with questionable software (Oppo, Samsung etc.) There are some decent criticisms to be made about LineageOS, but others to be made about Grapheme, like its Google-suggestive configurations, which is quite bad for security and privacy. Graphene says this is all optional and not part of the OS, but doesn’t include any equivalent F-Droid installer.

My original reply to the OP’s question, thoughts and experiences with GrapheneOS, was along the lines of “I think GrapheneOS is Google-centric” and you disagreed saying that GrapheneOS was a “blank slate”. Honestly I think you’re being a bit defensive and maybe a little gaslighty which is why I downvoted.

GrapheneOS provides fairly prominent links to a Google Play installer or the relatively obscure Aurora Store. The Aurora Store client app is FOSS but the store is quite literally a proxy for the Google Play Store. The apps in the screenshots on Ausora Store’s homepage are mostly apps that use or require Google Play Services. This is all very Google-centric.

If Google Play wasn’t an important part of GrapheneOS, it could just not contain a prominent link to the Google Play installer. Or it could contain a link to install a fairly prominent app store that offers an ecosystem outside of Google Play. But it exclusively steers users to the Google Play ecosystem as a part of the default, packaged experience, hence my original reply to the OP.

But it is Google Play-centric. There is an option to install Google Play. There is not an option to install other app stores like F-Droid, unlike some of the other AOSP clones.

Screenshot for you. Google is explicitly linked to for easy setup. F-Droid is not. “There is nothing” is simply disingenuous.

I use GrapheneOS but I don’t like how Google Play-centric it is. It is geared towards people installing their “normal” apps with the GrapheneOS special sauce sandboxing. No F-Droid by default where all of the FOSS apps are.