Who's searching for whom on the Australian political scene as we enter the mother of all election periods

Over the next eighteen months Australians will go to the polls across Australia to elect a Federal Government (probably in 2010 but by April 2011 at the latest) and electors will be voting at state level in South Australia (March 2010), Tasmania (May 2010 at latest), Victoria (November 2010), and New South Wales (March 2011).

According to the Australian Elections Timetable the Northern Territory won't hold a state election until August 2012, the Australian Capital Territory is next at the polls in October 2012, West Australia does not have to hold an election before June 2012 at the earliest and Queensland does not go have to go to the polls until June 2012.

All in all, somewhere in the country voters will be having campaign spin forced down their throats (with varying degrees of resistance) for some time to come.

Google Trends comparison of Internet searches for Leaders of Government and their Opposition counterparts - Kevin Rudd & Tony Abbott (Federal), Anna Bligh & John-Paul Langbroek (QLD), Mike Rann & Isobel Redmond (SA), David Bartlett & Will Hodgman (TAS), John Brumby & Ted Ballieu (VIC), Colin Barnett & Eric Ripper (WA), John Stanhope & Zed Seselja (ACT), Paul Henderson & Terry Mills (NT) and Kristina Keneally & Barry O'Farrell (NSW).

Langbroek, Redmond, Hodgman, Ballieu, Ripper, Selselja, Mills and O'Farrell all rate low on a search query scale at home or overseas, but although still battling against an incumbent with a higher profile Tony Abbott tracks fairly steadily against the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and interest in him has shown a spike since he became Leader of the Opposition.

Only in Tasmania and the ACT did there appear to be sustained and vaguely comparable levels of search term disinterest in both government and opposition leaders.

It will be interesting to see if how these politicians trend on the Internet bore any relation to how they fared at the next elections.

From the 2010 Antarctic Whaling Hall of Shame

New Zealander Glenn Inwood of Omeka Public Relations
Allegations here.

The King Canute of Cyberspace! (Yes, I'm laughing at you, Kevin Rudd)

For a man who appeared to hold some promise when he became Australia's prime minister in November 2007, Kevin Rudd is now descending into absurdity with the eager assistance of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.

Their plan to impose mandatory ISP-level filtering on Australian Internet access via a URL blacklist is an expensive joke perpetrated by the right-wing of the ruling Labor Party.

A scheme allegedly created to protect children by partially blocking access to the world wide web for 21 million or so citizens - many millions of whom don't appear to have dependant children living in their homes.

This pathetic ACMA-inspired blacklist currently stands at around a thousand website/page addresses and is expected to grow once national digital censorship is imposed.

However, there is not hardware or filtering software available to Australian servers with which to blanket filter the entire indexed Web before it reaches Australian citizens, without either these servers malfunctioning dramatically or just quietly letting most of those supposed 'nasties' slip through their nets.

This is what the Google Inc. official blog said in 2008 about the number of URLs already out there in cyberspace:

We've known it for a long time: the web is big. The first Google index in 1998 already had 26 million pages, and by 2000 the Google index reached the one billion mark. Over the last eight years, we've seen a lot of big numbers about how much content is really out there. Recently, even our search engineers stopped in awe about just how big the web is these days -- when our systems that process links on the web to find new content hit a milestone: 1 trillion (as in 1,000,000,000,000) unique URLs on the web at once!

How do we find all those pages? We start at a set of well-connected initial pages and follow each of their links to new pages. Then we follow the links on those new pages to even more pages and so on, until we have a huge list of links. In fact, we found even more than 1 trillion individual links, but not all of them lead to unique web pages. Many pages have multiple URLs with exactly the same content or URLs that are auto-generated copies of each other. Even after removing those exact duplicates, we saw a trillion unique URLs, and the number of individual web pages out there is growing by several billion pages per day.

So how many unique pages does the web really contain? We don't know; we don't have time to look at them all! :-) Strictly speaking, the number of pages out there is infinite -- for example, web calendars may have a "next day" link, and we could follow that link forever, each time finding a "new" page. We're not doing that, obviously, since there would be little benefit to you. But this example shows that the size of the web really depends on your definition of what's a useful page, and there is no exact answer.

We don't index every one of those trillion pages -- many of them are similar to each other, or represent auto-generated content similar to the calendar example that isn't very useful to searchers. But we're proud to have the most comprehensive index of any search engine, and our goal always has been to index all the world's data.

To keep up with this volume of information, our systems have come a long way since the first set of web data Google processed to answer queries. Back then, we did everything in batches: one workstation could compute the PageRank graph on 26 million pages in a couple of hours, and that set of pages would be used as Google's index for a fixed period of time. Today, Google downloads the web continuously, collecting updated page information and re-processing the entire web-link graph several times per day. This graph of one trillion URLs is similar to a map made up of one trillion intersections. So multiple times every day, we do the computational equivalent of fully exploring every intersection of every road in the United States. Except it'd be a map about 50,000 times as big as the U.S., with 50,000 times as many roads and intersections.

Now how is your pathetic little blacklist going to keep up with that, Prime Minister?
Or are you intending (once this censorship becomes Australian law) to approach Google Inc. with a view to this corporation creating a censored google.com.au for Australia, as it did for its search engine in that notoriously authoritarian regime China?

Photo from Google Images

Classic Bob Ellis musing about the so-called War on Terror

Bob Ellis starting the year well over at ABC The Drum:

We bomb Afghanistan so well-educated Nigerians don't blow up aeroplanes over Chicago. Or that's the theory, it seems.

We bomb Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan so well-educated American-born Muslims don't shoot up their fellow soldiers in Fort Bragg. We bomb Iraq, and Gaza, and Afghanistan and Pakistan so well-educated British Muslims don't blow up Glasgow airport.

We have no alternative to this, it seems, in this necessary war, this just war on terror. This is why we're in Afghanistan, and why we have to be there for five or 15 more years, to stop well-educated people with exploding powder in their underpants from getting on planes in Oslo, or Paris, or Shannon, or Kingston, or Honolulu, or Cairns.

Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it. They clearly go to Afghanistan to learn how to put exploding powder in their underpants, and unless we bomb them there, they'll come over here, they'll get on a plane in Oslo...and they'll... Well, they'll...So we have to bomb them in...We have to bomb them in...Let me read that again.

Why are we in Afghanistan?

Is Hartsuyker in danger of losing his Cowper seat?

For months rumour has been saying that the Nationals Luke Hartsuyker is in danger of losing his seat at the next federal election.

Possum Comitatus' seat rankings (based on a proposition that an election was held sometime in the last 3 months) appears to verify that all is not well in Cowper.

Extreme Risk – being those Coalition held seats that would almost certainly have fallen to the ALP. It would have taken an historical anomaly for any of these seats to have been retained by the Coalition.
High Risk – being those seats that would probably have fallen to the ALP. A large majority of these seats would have changed hands.
Moderate Risk – being those seats which would have been in some danger of falling to Labor. For nearly every High Risk or Extreme Risk seat which did not fall, there would most likely have been a seat in this Moderate Risk group that would have taken its place.

* Click on list to enlarge

Neal gets called a nosey parker :-)

Someone finally wrote a letter to The Daily Examiner on 1 January 2009 voicing what quite a few have been quietly thinking about this photo snapping little man:

Parking rights

NEAL MORRIS, of Maclean Neighbourhood Watch, seems to think that he is a ranger, parking inspector or a police officer. (Neighbourhood Watch Column, Coastal Views 18/12/09).
Parking in Maclean or anywhere in the Valley has absolutely nothing to do with him.
Absolutely none of his business.
Whilst we all agree that many people are breaking the law re parking, it is not up to him to scrutinise it.
It is the job of the expert authorities such as police or council employees.
I think maybe your unpaid voluntary neighbourhood 'watching' has gone to your head, Neal.
Leave the job of parking patrol to those who are legally authorised and paid to do so.

S Aloi,
Yamba

Update:

Neal goes feral in his letter to editor in response on 6 January 2010.........

Crime watch is for all

I HAVE received a copy of a letter (DE 1/1/2010) from an inane scribbler under the possible pseudonym of 'S Aloi' welcoming the New Year.
It is quite normal for the guilty conscience to appeal against the law, if this appears to be the case and it is to remain anon, please send a photo of.the vehicle concerned so we can relate to the offence and recognise the individual with whom we deal.
For your information, the reason all crime exists in your area is simply because of this attitude shown in the letter which clearly states that it is only the responsibility of the police and or council.
This is so far from the truth it's unbelievable, as it is a normal requirement that all residents should watch out for any unsociable or criminal acts for their own and their neighbour's welfare and have the intestinal fortitude to act immediately.
The police are far too undermanned and the rangers due to workload are unable to watch for such things as the writer apparently commits, and as a consequence if we are unable by our actions to get a staff increase to cover all aspects which is our aim. Then we are all in trouble.
To the decent persons in Grafton and Maclean who advised me of this tirade, many thanks for your help.
For future reference please note. Maclean District Neighbourhood Watch will continue to assist all in need against any unsociable acts and all information gleaned from the public and or our actions will be forwarded to the authorities for their dealing.
FOR MACLEAN DISTRICT NEIGHBOURHOOD WATCH,

Neal Morris JP, area controller, crime prevention network