| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 |
Tonight whilst Googling for random numbers that call us up and don't make it through the Asterisk menus, I discovered Who Called Us, a user-driven site to identify the people behind the numbers, for callers that provide a number but no name. Very cool.
One such number seems to be drawing a reasonable amount of ire.
Generally speaking, we're not bothered by telemarketers, because of the menu Asterisk presents to all callers. It's just interesting to see the cases that continually call back.
On Australia's non-ratification of the Kyoto agreement
Australia's continued refusal to sign-on to the Kyoto agreement made the BBC World news tonight, and it got me thinking.
After seeing An Inconvenient Truth, and learning that Australia just doesn't rank when it comes to carbon dioxide emissions, it's really a moot point whether we get on board or not (but for the record, I think we should anyway, to put more pressure on the US).
Beazley's taken the opportunity to say that if he got into office, he'd sign the agreement. But here's the deal: there are coast-to-coast Labor governments at the state-level. So what if Howard won't sign the agreement at the Federal level? If every state independently decides to legislate such that carbon emission levels are restricted to those of what the Kyoto agreement would require, then Australia has in essence signed on to it, whether Howard wants to or not.
So all Beazley has to do is show a bit of political will, and that the states can tell the Federal government what to do. I'd like to see it happen.
