💧Tib

@annaclarity1 @noplaceforsheep Agree & there is some evidence that using chatbots makes you dumber. time.com/7295195/ai-cha…

@noplaceforsheep What gets me is the futility of the AI thing. Studying for a degree, Masters, PHD is a process, frequently arduous, of improving your mind and your reasoning abilities. If you never have to write a reasoned analysis yourself then you won't acquire that level of proficiency.

I have no idea how anyone can write a PhD or any other thesis at all, without actually reading the literature they’re using to support their argument. It makes no fucking sense & I say this as a scholar who cited 135 sources in my doctoral thesis & read every one. I admit I’m a nerd but even so…

@Sculptmud @MichaelWestBiz @JeffLormans @EricLDaugh I don't know about the other stuff, but I've always thought that in a case of peak irony, Ivanka could be the 1st female POTUS. I think she's a Democrat at heart, though she'll run as a Republican.

@MichaelWestBiz @JeffLormans @EricLDaugh Plot twist. Ivanka divorces Jarad, becomes a Christian, testifies against her father for incest and pedophelia, totally cleans up the Epstein Party then gets elected president to continue the Trump dynasty.

🚨 HOLY CRAP! President Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump was targeted in an ASSASSINATION plot by an Iranian IRGC-trained terrorist — NYP Mohammad Al-Saadi, an Iraq national who was recently caught by federal law enforcement, "pledged" to take out Ivanka and had a BLUEPRINT of her house in Florida The plot was part of revenge against Trump for the killing of Gen. Soleimani Absolutely terrifying. A former deputy military attaché told the NYP: “After Qasem was killed, he [Al-Saadi] went around telling people ‘we need to kill Ivanka to burn down the house of Trump the way he burned down our house.'" “We heard that he had a plan of Ivanka’s house in Florida." Thank God she's safe, and this terrorist is in custody! 🙏🏻

An Open Letter to Tim Wilson MP @TimWilsonMP Sunday 24 May 2026 – 11:44 AEDT Re: National Press Club Address 20/5/26 Dear Mr Wilson, On 20 May 2026, during your address to the National Press Club, you referred to a young entrepreneur named Sienna Jovcevski and her business, Tweeny Skin. According to the official transcript and video of your speech, you stated: “At the age of 12, Sienna set up Tweeny Skin in her bedroom.” “Built after school, packed orders on weekends … reinvested basically every dollar back into the business.” “Yet while Sienna finishes her HSC, she has learned she has a shareholder who wants to take half the reward of her effort.” You later referred to this “half” as a potential 47% tax outcome when questioned by ABC journalist David Speers. Mr Speers specifically asked you: “The government says existing exemptions for small business would remain. So how exactly would Sienna lose half her profit?” You responded: “Well it depends on when Sienna chooses to opt out of her business and sell it and for what price…” You later added: “It could, depending on the exit strategy and price, ultimately face up to 47%.” Mr Speers then asked: “But is it possible she could pay no capital gains tax as well?” To which you replied: “We’re dealing with hypotheticals… It depends on when she decides to exit, it depends on what she sells for, it depends on what stage of life she’s at based on the current application of the law.” Given the seriousness and specificity of the claims made in a nationally broadcast address, and the potential for those claims to alarm small business owners and young entrepreneurs, it is reasonable for Australians to seek clarification as to the factual basis of the example you presented. Accordingly, could you please clarify the following: 1/. Prior to referencing Sienna Jovcevski and Tweeny Skin in your speech, did you make any enquiries regarding the legal ownership structure of the business? 2/. Did you seek to determine whether the business operates as: → a sole trader, → a company, → a discretionary trust, → or another legal structure? 3/. Did you seek to determine whether the business is legally owned, operated, or controlled by Sienna Jovcevski personally, or by other individuals, entities, or family structures associated with the business? 4/. Did you make any enquiries as to whether existing small business CGT concessions may apply to that business in the event of a future sale? 5/. Did you obtain or review any information regarding the approximate turnover, profitability, or scale of the business before presenting it as a national example of the impact of proposed CGT changes? 6/. Did you receive any professional taxation or legal advice supporting the proposition that the business would realistically face an effective 47% tax outcome under the circumstances you described? 7/. Given your acknowledgment that the example was hypothetical and dependent upon numerous unknown future variables, do you accept that your original framing may have conveyed a misleading level of certainty to viewers? 8/. Have you since sought clarification regarding whether your example accurately reflected the operation of Australia’s current small business #CGT concession framework? These are reasonable questions arising from statements made by a Federal Member of Parliament during a nationally televised address on taxation policy. Australians are entitled to expect that examples used in public policy debates, particularly those involving taxation and small business, are properly verified, accurately framed, and presented with appropriate factual context. We look forward to your clarification. Sincerely, The Noisy Trunk On behalf of many Australians

ChatGPT diagnosed 40 million people with a disease that was invented as a joke. Not a real disease. Not a misunderstood disease. A completely fictional condition with a fake name, fake papers, and fake statistics. And it told patients to see a specialist. The disease is called Bixonimania. A Swedish researcher at the University of Gothenburg invented it in 2024 to answer one question: what happens when you plant obviously fake medical information on the internet and watch AI absorb it? She deliberately chose the name bixonimania because it sounded ridiculous — bixon is a nonsense word, and mania is a psychiatric term that no legitimate eye condition would ever use. She uploaded two papers to a preprint server. Both were obviously fraudulent. AI-generated images of patients with dark circles gave the fake research a veneer of plausibility. Then she waited. She did not have to wait long. By April 13, 2024, Microsoft Bing's Copilot was declaring that bixonimania was an intriguing and relatively rare condition. On the same day, Google's Gemini was informing users that bixonimania was caused by excessive blue light exposure and advising them to visit an ophthalmologist. Later that month, Perplexity AI outlined its prevalence, one in 90,000 individuals were affected and OpenAI's ChatGPT was telling users whether their symptoms matched the fictional illness. One in 90,000. A precise statistic. For a disease that does not exist. Every red flag was visible. The name was absurd. The papers were crude. The condition made no scientific sense. None of the AI systems flagged any of it. They read the fake papers. They absorbed the fake statistics. They presented both to patients with clinical authority and zero hesitation. Then it got worse. Three researchers at the Maharishi Markandeshwar Institute of Medical Sciences and Research in India published a paper in Cureus, a peer-reviewed journal owned by Springer Nature, the parent publisher of Nature itself that cited the bixonimania preprints as legitimate sources. A real peer-reviewed paper. In a Springer Nature journal. Citing a fictional disease as established medical fact. Passing editorial review. Entering the permanent scientific record. It was only retracted after the hoax became public. Nature published a full investigation of the experiment. Alex Ruani, a health-misinformation researcher at University College London, called it a masterclass in how misinformation operates. Here is the scale of what this means. More than 40 million people turn to ChatGPT every day for health information, according to OpenAI's own analysis. ECRI, a US patient-safety nonprofit has named chatbot misuse the number-one health technology hazard of 2026. ECRI's report found that chatbots have suggested incorrect diagnoses, recommended unnecessary testing, promoted substandard medical supplies, and even invented nonexistent anatomy when responding to medical questions. Number one. Out of every health technology hazard that exists in 2026. An April 2026 study published in BMJ Open found that nearly half of the answers provided by leading AI chatbots to common health questions contain misleading or problematic information. Nearly half. Of all health answers. From the tools 40 million people use every day. Here is the line from the researcher that cuts through everything. The Bixonimania case is striking precisely because it was engineered to be so obviously fake. The real question it raises is: what is passing through the same systems that is not nearly so easy to spot? The experiment used a ridiculous name. Fraudulent papers. Visible red flags at every level. It was designed to be caught. It was not caught. The AI that told patients about Bixonimania is the same AI they asked about their chest pain, their medication, their child's symptoms, and their cancer screening schedule. 40 million people. Every day. And nobody is telling them that nearly half of what comes back may be wrong. Source: Osmanovic Thunström · University of Gothenburg · Nature · April 2026 · Link in the (comments)

I don’t get why Americans put up with this

@noplaceforsheep Just as an observation, it now seems inevitable that Americans are retreating to the highways & public lands established during a period of high progressive taxation by FDR's New Deal, Truman & Eisenhower, before the neo-cons slowly destroyed the American Dream.

Can we get this forensic detail in Australia- when names of those lobbying successfully against Antoinette L have been suppressed for 10 years?? But surely there are others who could be accused of “legal intimidation?”

The "death tax" scare campaign is the laziest dog whistle in the playbook. Here are the facts straight from the Budget papers and ATO: Inheritance isn't taxed. Estates aren't taxed. Farms are exempt. Small business CGT concessions are retained in full. Existing testamentary trusts are grandfathered. Fixed testamentary trusts can still be set up for new wills at zero extra tax. The only change: new discretionary testamentary trusts created after 12 May 2026 will pay a 30% minimum on trust income from 2028. There are about 10,500 testamentary trusts in Australia — 1% of all trusts. And only the discretionary, income-splitting variety set up from now on is caught. 30% is what a nurse on $80k already pays on her top dollar. The Right isn't defending battlers. They're defending the tax planning industry that lets wealth split income across grandkids and bucket companies to pay less than wage earners on the same money. If you want to leave assets to your kids, nothing stops you. What's stopping is the loophole.

We need to keep up the pressure because pressure works. It's time for a 25% gas export tax. afr.com/companies/ener…

The debt system is the cleanest version of the whole operation because it requires no soldiers. A country gets a loan from the IMF or World Bank, usually in a moment of crisis, often a crisis produced or deepened by prior colonial extraction. The loan comes with conditions. Structural adjustment programs. Privatize your public utilities. Cut your social spending. Open your markets to foreign competition. Devalue your currency. Remove subsidies on food and fuel. The local economy, already fragile, is further destabilized by the conditions of its own rescue. The country cannot repay. The country gets more loans with more conditions. The debt grows. The conditions deepen. The government, unable to deliver services to its population, faces protests. The protests are called "instability." The instability is cited as evidence that the country cannot "manage itself." "External oversight" is recommended. More conditions are attached. The country was never in debt to the bank. The bank was in debt to the country, for centuries of extracted resources and suppressed development, and found a mechanism to make the creditor pay the debtor. And called it "aid." And called it "development." And called it, with a straight face, "civilization."

@DaniMayakovski This is more of his bvllshit. The US taxpayer pays the military & economic costs of the Iran war. Any financial benefits from plundering Venezuelan oil go to Big Oil, which pays little to no tax.

"Con el petroleo que estamos sacando de Venezuela, nos hemos pagado la guerra contra Irán unas 25 veces, no nos va mal en Venezuela". El criminal de Trump se vanagloria del saqueo al petróleo de Venezuela y afirma que con el dinero saqueado ha pagado la guerra contra Irán. Estas alimañas imperialistas roban a un pais para agredir a otro, son asesinos de masas y bárbaros saqueadores de pueblos que deben desaparecer si queremos que la humanidad sobreviva.

Mysterious money trail behind the biggest Israel lobby govt grant in Australia. @sstephanietrann investigates ECAJ, top among the scores of Zionist charities & NFPs #auspol #ECAJ michaelwest.com.au/money-trail-le…

@RonniSalt I guess if she says nothing about actual nazis standing outside the NSW parliament, then no way she'll criticise Israel. Whatever it does.

A group of Australian citizens were kidnapped on international waters and beaten senseless on camera by their captors - Israel The most prominent Israel advocate in Australia - Jillian Segal - has so far said nothing about the welfare of her fellow Australian citizens nor condemned this atrocious abuse of human rights and brutality by her home state of Israel Jillian Segal is an employee of the Australian people charged with promoting "social cohesion" and her silence on this blatant Israeli abuse of her fellow Australians is a disgrace to these abused citizens and to the Australian taxpayers who fund her

And Tim Wilson gave us MORE. As if the "Salon" - which is seemingly a predominantly online business 'run' by an 18-year-old, wasn't enough, he gave us this also: See Speers very specific questions: David Speers asked at the #NPC: David Spears from the ABC. Thanks Tim Wilson for your address. The government says there's a whole lot of misinformation around its capital gains tax changes. I wonder if I could ask you to explain the example you just used in your speech. You talked about Sienna who started Tweenyskin five years ago, done well, business has grown. You said half of her profits will be taken by the silent shareholder, the Prime Minister. Can you just explain how that would happen? The government says existing exemptions for small business would remain. So how exactly would Sienna lose half her profit? And here is what goober TIM replied - Remember, NPC rules mean Speers cannot ask another question so Tim's reply goes unchecked. Read this bullshit, or better still, watch him say it. ▓ Skip the bit BETWEEN the bricks ▓ if you are going to watch the video, but read the explanation below. ▓ Tim's reply and its full of shit: Well it depends on when Sienna chooses to opt out of her business and sell it and for what price. I mean she started from her bedroom, her cost structures were zero so of course she's going to have a maximum uplift associated with her businesses. A lot of the people who are setting up businesses are the treasurers out there today spinning a message, as often he does, highlighting existing exemptions for CGT. Most of those are focused at the back end of people's lives, particularly as they head towards retirement and also based on the price at which they sell. I can't tell you what Sienna's going to sell but I can tell you the work, saving and sacrifice and everything they have put into it could, depending on the exit strategy and price, ultimately face up to 47%. But is it possible she could pay no capital gains tax as well? Well I can't give you, we're dealing with hypotheticals, I'm telling you what her story is. It depends on when she decides to exit, it depends on what she sells for, it depends on what stage of life she's at based on the current application of the law. But there are a lot of small business owners all around the country that are looking at the proposals put in this budget and not just do they think it comes in a tax them, they are looking at it and saying we worked, we sacrificed, we saved, we were there at 2am on a Sunday morning when nobody else was there. And all of a sudden the government, which traditionally takes some of the capital gain, no one's disputing that, is essentially working towards doubling that and in some cases it would be that much. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>▓ 1. The Hypothetical Dodge Tim Wilson explicitly admits his example is hypothetical: "I'm telling you what her story is. It depends on when she decides to exit, it depends on what she sells for, it depends on what stage of life she's at..." Translation: He has no concrete evidence that Sienna (or any small business owner like her) would face a 47% tax under the current or proposed CGT rules. Reality: The government’s proposed changes do not affect small business CGT concessions. Sienna, as a small business owner, would still qualify for: →15-year exemption (100% tax-free if she retires and owned the business for 15+ years). →50% active asset reduction (only 25% of the gain is taxable after discounts). Retirement exemption (up to $500k lifetime exemption). →Roll-over relief (defer CGT by reinvesting). Result: Her effective CGT rate would likely be 0–25%, not 47%. His answer is a word salad to avoid admitting the truth: His example is baseless. 2. The "Silent Shareholder" Myth - Tim claims: "...the government, which traditionally takes some of the capital gain, no one's disputing that, is essentially working towards doubling that and in some cases it would be that much." Reality Check: The current top marginal tax rate is 47% (45% + 2% Medicare levy), but this only applies to salary earners on income over $190k. For small business owners like Sienna: If structured as a company (Probably not she is under 18 or just turned 18, so likely, we will come back to this, 'held' by her ex-beautician mother/family): 25% company tax rate. If selling the business: 0–25% CGT after concessions. No scenario exists where the government takes 47% of her business sale profits under the proposed changes. The "doubling" claim is false. The budget does not double CGT for small businesses. It tightens loopholes for high-income earners (>$450k) and super funds, not small business owners. 3. The Emotional Manipulation Tim leans on melodrama: "...we worked, we sacrificed, we saved, we were there at 2 am on a Sunday morning..." Irrelevant to tax policy. Hard work doesn’t justify false claims about tax rates. Distraction tactic: He avoids the Speers direct question ("How exactly would Sienna lose half her profit?") by appealing to emotion. 4. The Press Club Rules Loophole David Speers couldn’t follow up due to Press Club rules. Tim knew this. He used the format to dodge accountability, knowing he couldn’t be pressed for details. TIM IS SPREADING MISINFORMATION like a PRO COOKER. Quote - Tim Wilson: "We're dealing with hypotheticals"

You've nailed the distinction that matters. Hanson's racism must be called out - loudly and without apology. But there's a difference between calling out the leader and writing off the followers. Most PHON voters aren't voting for the racism - they're voting despite it, because their pain is loud enough to drown out everything else. That's not a reason to go soft on Hanson. It's a reason to make sure her voters have somewhere better to go. If we don't build that somewhere, we lose them permanently. #auspol

@SueBarrett Yes, that's it, thanks : )

One Nation Is The Wrong Answer To The Right Question. The right question: who do we vote for when the two-party system has completely failed us? Most people being drawn to One Nation are not inherently racist. Research shows they are driven by economic humiliation, cultural dislocation, and a bone-deep sense that the rules have been changed against them. When we call them racists we don't reach them. We lose them completely and One Nation wins. History is repeating itself. Complexity scientist Peter Turchin has spent decades modelling what happens when inequality passes a tipping point. The pattern is always the same: the wealth pump extracts upward long enough, people give up on reform, and reach for something that promises to burn it all down. 59% of Australians now want the system majorly changed or burned down entirely. One Nation will not fix it. But the question its voters are asking is completely legitimate. Until we understand that - and build something better - we cannot reach them. Today on Substack. 👇 open.substack.com/pub/suebarrett… #auspol @JoYohana @deniseshrivell @aaronsmith @TheNoisyTrunk @Anthony_Klan @rachelrwithers @CommunityIndeps

@AmeliaBee7 @oscopycol Exactly. Most Victorians understood that DOCTOR Brett Sutton was legally responsible for calling the shots with shutdowns. Andrews just had the *cojones* to front up to the feral press EVERY day to answer the same question being asked 100 different ways.

@oscopycol But the vast majority of Victorians re-elected him 3 times, with an increased majority each time….

‘Former Premier who hasn’t been in politics now for some time plays golf’ is the idiotic trash we’ve come to expect from this Murdoch rag The desperation to stir up “covid era” outrage in a state that re-elected him overwhelmingly DURING the “covid era” is particularly pathetic