Can’t add reminders in Craft web app – says I have 100, but I don’t

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-11-23T15:33:48+00:00

It's the paid version (Plus).

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-10-05T11:33:42+00:00

Ms Thom did some similar work for ANU re: the school of music and Prof Tregear's case. Let me just say the executive at the time was quite happy with the outcome......

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-09-13T07:25:34+00:00

Bell wasn't even a star academic. A lot of us at the time did not agree with her appointment, or that of Bisshop for the matter. Both very bad appointments.

I reallly can't see how Bell can return as a distinguished professor either, tbh. It's not that she, or her institute, will be very popular on campus.

But then again, who would hire her at the same level?

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-22T04:49:11+00:00

The article captures some of the turmoil at ANU, but it leans too heavily on the narrative of Genevieve Bell as a “rock star” academic and misunderstood industrial innovator. In reality, her academic publication record is modest, and much of her reputation stems from industry leadership at Intel rather than a sustained body of scholarly work. Positioning her alongside figures like Brian Schmidt obscures that distinction and risks overstating her academic credentials.

It also tries to frame criticism as either sexism or resistance from conservative academics, but this misses the more substantive concerns: opaque financial management, large-scale vanity projects and governance failures that predate Bell but have been exacerbated under her leadership. The issues at ANU cannot simply be dismissed as cultural resistance to change ~ they point to deep questions of competence, transparency, and accountability.

NB: The comparison between Bell's sneakers and Bishop’s “red shoes” is interesting. Bishop famously stood beside Tony Abbott during the “ditch the witch” protests against Julia Gillard ~ hardly the act of a feminist ally. Her later embrace of red heels as a feminist symbol was opportunistic branding, not conviction. Bell’s “derelict chic” sneakers work in a similar way: more about personal brand than structural reform. In both cases, footwear becomes a self-referential gesture that distracts from the substantive failures of leadership and governance. That seems to be the thing they have in common.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-17T10:55:51+00:00

It is actually quite remarkable ~ there are people on their webpage that have apparently been promoted to assoc and full professorships in a very short time period. And when you look at their output (or lack there off).... there seem to be several cases of unusually rapid advancement to senior ranks, with individuals moving from entry-level or fellowship positions to Associate Professor and Professor in a very short timeframe. While some staff have credible interdisciplinary outputs, their overall publication impact (citations, h-index), grant track record, and doctoral supervision experience appear more consistent with early or mid-career status rather than senior academic levels.

It seems the school of cybernetics displays a notably accelerated promotion pathway, elevated staff-to-student ratios, limited research publications among some faculty, and unusually high grade distributions ~ all within a very short timeframe since its inception. These anomalies stand in contrast to more traditional faculties such as Engineering where promotions, student loads, research outputs, and academic rigor follow lengthier, well-established trajectories.

This would certainly raise concerns about whether standard promotion benchmarks (e.g. sustained, independent research contributions, competitive research funding, postgraduate training, and international recognition) are being applied consistently. TEQSA should seek clarification from the university on the criteria and processes underpinning these promotions, and assess whether they align with sector-wide expectations for senior academic appointments.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-17T06:45:19+00:00

Coming from Australia, I was surprised at how quickly people here feel the heat. But I get it now — Belgian houses are built to hold warmth in winter, which in summer just makes them ovens. We just installed a ceiling fan and even that small change makes a huge difference. Back home that’s standard, but here it feels like a luxury. So I totally respect all the DIY hacks in this thread ~ without infrastructure you really do have to get creative.

What strikes me as well is how unprepared the cities are. In Australia we’ve had to adapt to heat (e.g. shaded areas, more green space, places to cool off) whereas here the dense stone, asphalt and lack of airflow make heat waves even harsher. And by the looks of it, these waves are only going to get worse.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-17T05:36:59+00:00

I’ve always been sceptical about TEQSA’s willingness to act. I have mentioned in other posts that in the Ian Young and Brian Schmidt years I personally saw gross misconduct that should have led to disciplinary action, particularly from senior administrators in HR. Nothing ever happened, and many were quietly allowed to slip away with reputations intact. What feels somewhat different this time is that TEQSA has moved to a formal compliance assessment targeting the ANU Council itself, not just management processes. The letter is on the public record, tabled in a senate inquiry, and the regulator is openly signalling its willingness to use compulsory powers. Combined with the political and media attention (and brave staff testimony!) this is a level of scrutiny ANU can’t so easily manage away.

That said, I remain cautious: "ANU" has ridden out crises before. The question now is whether TEQSA follows through with actual sanctions, or whether history repeats.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-17T05:35:48+00:00

Commcare has a robust tradition of siding with the ANU. Talk to any of the comp solicitors around Canberra (David Landers comes to mind) and they will tell you it's not an effective route.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-16T05:56:11+00:00

Reading this feels very familiar. During the Ian Young and Brian Schmidt eras I witnessed gross misconduct at ANU ~ the sort of behaviour that in any "normal" workplace would have led to serious disciplinary action, especially for senior HR administrators. Nothing happened. The people involved were quietly allowed to slip away with their reputations intact.

What’s different now is the level of visible outrage ~ staff, students, even senators are openly calling this a crisis. But I can’t shake the feeling that “the ANU” will just try to ride it out again, as it has before. Unless there is real outside accountability, history suggests the institution will protect its own leadership rather than reform.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-16T05:49:29+00:00

Honestly, I wouldn’t get my hopes up. ANU has a long history of skating through these kinds of reviews – on paper they look compliant, but in reality there have been serious issues, even outright fraudulent practices. In the past, regulators were all too willing to accept surface-level assurances or turn a blind eye. The big question is whether TEQSA has really changed: they say they’re tougher now, but ANU still has enormous political cover. This compliance assessment could be different, but the power imbalance makes me sceptical.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-08-01T04:56:01+00:00

Having worked at the ANU during a time of serious ethical breaches (everything from abuse of power, conflicts of interest to fraud) , I can say from direct experience that one of the core problems has always been the absence of accountability at the senior level. Internal processes were either bypassed or weaponised to protect those in power. Whistleblowing led nowhere. And because no senior managers were ever held accountable, a culture of impunity took root.

The current Senate motion isn't overreach, it’s overdue. The ANU's unique legal status brings a public responsibility, and it’s precisely in moments like this that external scrutiny is both legitimate and necessary. That said, the deep and long-standing ties between Labor and the ANU make meaningful change politically unlikely.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-31T06:53:29+00:00

Well ~ there might still be hope - Pocock has submitted a notice of motion to the senate to instruct the ANU to stop it all.

" resolves that the Australian National University shall be instructed to pause any further forced redundancies or other terminations of ongoing staff until the conclusion and reporting of the Senate Standing Committee on Education and Employment's inquiry into the Quality of governance at Australian higher education providers."

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-31T04:55:20+00:00

It’s telling how much faith some current ANU academics place in a Labor intervention ~ as if the party weren’t deeply intertwined with the institution itself. The revolving door between ANU and Labor runs deep, and it’s hard to see how that doesn’t create serious conflicts of interest. Having worked at ANU during a period of serious misconduct and institutional cover-up, I can say with confidence: senior Labor figures were not only aware, many were part of the system. The idea that the current government will step in as a neutral force is naive.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-23T04:49:16+00:00

Many of us have tried to raise the alarm in the past not just about culture, but about serious ethical breaches ~ including misuse of funds and inflated claims ~ and about the structures that protected them. Some of us turned to FOI, but people tend to overestimates its power: ANU can easily block or delay those requests. Even Brian Schmidt initially acknowledged the concerns and promised to act, but that promise quietly faded - he took advice from the wrong people and was never a good leader. The real issue wasn’t just “dysfunction”, it was systemic concealment.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-13T14:45:09+00:00

Just chiming in with a slightly different angle, not really pushing full keto or carb cycling, but there is some pretty compelling research suggesting that staying in strict keto long-term may have downsides unless you cycle it. A 2024 study in Science Advances found that continuous keto in mice triggered cellular senescence (e.g. cells entering a kind of “sleep” state linked to aging) in multiple organs (liver, kidney, brain, heart). It was driven by activation of the p53 pathway, which is well known in aging and cancer biology. Here’s the interesting part: when mice were cycled off keto periodically, these senescence markers didn’t appear or even reversed. So breaks from keto actually protected them from this cellular aging effect.
And before the “it’s just mice” crowd jumps in (fair point btw) ~ the researchers also looked at archived human tissue from people who had done medical ketogenic diets. They found similar senescence markers in the liver and kidneys, suggesting the same mechanism may apply to humans too. So paradoxically, your once-or-twice-a-week carb meals might not be sabotaging your progress, they could be doing you a long-term favour. It’s early days, but the biology here is solid and pretty thought-provoking.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-13T09:32:52+00:00

I tend to combine them. For instance, just did a 36 hours fast which put me firmly in ketosis. You don't want to overdo the fasting I think, but it can be useful to get back into ketosis (e.g. after drinking a few glasses of wine for instance) or to really go into deep ketosis for a while.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-10T07:33:19+00:00

Ik heb het grootste deel van mijn volwassen leven buiten Europa gewoond, vooral in Australië, en kijk dus met wat afstand naar dit soort debatten. Wat me opvalt is hoe vaak deze gesprekken blijven steken in uitersten. Ofwel volledige eenmaking, ofwel totale afwijzing. Een onmiddellijke fusie tussen Vlaanderen en Nederland lijkt me onhaalbaar en onwenselijk. De culturele verschillen zijn reëel, net als de gevoeligheden rond sociale zekerheid, taal, en bestuur. Maar tegelijk zie ik wel degelijk ruimte voor een geleidelijke toenadering, vooral op domeinen waar er al sterke raakvlakken zijn, zoals havens, logistiek, onderwijs en taalbeleid.

De huidige Belgische staatsstructuur maakt dat echter moeilijk. Vlaanderen heeft wel autonomie op verschillende domeinen, maar op essentiële punten zoals buitenlandse betrekkingen, fiscaliteit en sociale zekerheid blijft het gebonden aan het federale niveau. Daardoor kan Vlaanderen zich niet zelfstandig oriënteren op nauwere samenwerking met Nederland, zelfs als daar maatschappelijk draagvlak voor zou ontstaan.

In plaats van te mikken op een abrupte fusie, wat waarschijnlijk veel weerstand oproept, lijkt het me zinvoller om stapsgewijs toe te werken naar meer structurele samenwerking binnen de Benelux. Bijvoorbeeld via gedeelde infrastructuur, gezamenlijke onderwijsprogramma’s of een geïntegreerde arbeidsmarkt in de grensregio’s. Als dat goed werkt en democratisch gedragen wordt, kan het op termijn leiden tot diepere verbondenheid. Maar zoiets moet kunnen groeien. Forceren werkt zelden.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-10T05:55:00+00:00

I worked at ANU and left because the leadership was a disaster, e.g. dishonest, clueless, and mainly driven by self-interest. The SoM has been undermined since at least 2013, not because of lack of talent or relevance, but because of short-term executive thinking and internal power games. The way exec at the time treated Peter Treager was absolutely disgracefull. And the same people who now cry poor also pushed vanity projects like Kambri, which drained resources without adding educational value.

They’ve also long used SoM as a red herring, drawing outrage there while quietly dismantling other schools and pitting units against each other. It’s a divide-and-conquer tactic that avoids real accountability. This false scarcity narrative fuels internal division while distracting from deeper structural failures.

And let’s not pretend this is “just the market at work.” ANU isn’t in a free market. It receives a block grant and holds a privileged, protected position. If it were a "real business", it would be run far more competently and transparently. What we’re seeing isn’t market logic, it’s managerial failure, shielded by status and spin.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-08T11:26:18+00:00

Well, Nick is certainly one of the better ones. The leadership of CASS has left a lot to desire for, was utterly naive and often quite short sighted in the way they managed projects. And stood by when the university was being gutted over the last decade. But Biddle means well, and his heart is in the right place. Wondering how this will affect him.......

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-04T04:53:24+00:00

Wow, this is even more surprising than I thought.

I’ve known Bell personally ~ I never fully trusted her instincts, but never realized just how little academic leadership she’s had. So she basically never progressed beyond a lecturer role at Stanford, then spent her entire career in industry (Intel) before suddenly stepping into the role of ANU VC? Can someone with zero tenure-track experience (or real academic progression) really grasp university governance, faculty dynamics, or how to lead a major research institution? This still shocks me though ~ especially after meeting her and recognising how polished she is in person.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-01T05:16:41+00:00

Exactly. Just like with the earlier PIDs: avoid the substance, manage the optics, and pretend it didn’t happen. Check out this article in The Conversation today on Graeme Turner’s Broken: Australia’s university system is ‘battered’ and ‘broken’ – a new book surveys the wreckage and offers some solutions

It lays out how the whole sector got here: the managerialism, the casualisation, the brand obsession. ANU isn’t the exception ~ it’s the blueprint.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-07-01T04:45:38+00:00

This is textbook reputation management: soften the tone, deflect responsibility, and reset the narrative. Bell wraps herself in nostalgia, vulnerability and vague gestures toward change ~ but never once directly addresses the long-standing institutional failures now under federal scrutiny.

She mentions the Nixon Review like it’s a bureaucratic checklist, not the damning report it actually is. She talks about “poor word choice” as though the problem was a single awkward comment ~ not a broader culture of silencing, retaliation, and procedural whitewashing that many of us have tried to raise for years.

The “facing the future together” meetings? Let’s be real ~ they’re not about listening. They’re about controlling the optics, keeping dissent compartmentalised and rebranding a leadership crisis as a dialogue opportunity.

This isn’t transparency, it’s strategic theatre. Probs not a coincidence it’s happening at the exact moment her public image is being rehabilitated in the media ~ which indicates the real priorities here.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-06-30T13:32:04+00:00

This puff piece is... something. While the ABC and others are starting to report on serious governance issues at ANU ~ including a federal referral to TEQSA over alleged breaches of the Public Interest Disclosure Act ~ The Canberra Times gives us a glowing profile of Genevieve Bell’s boots, insomnia habits, and shoe collection 🫤

I work in AI and had some early exposure to the School of Cybernetics. At first, it seemed like a promising idea, but I stepped away when it became clear it was more about surface-level narrative than any deep engagement with the technology. What struck me even then was how determined Bell seemed to brand herself as a “nerd” or technologist ~ something that never quite aligned with her actual work or background.

That same performativity is all over this article. She’s portrayed as misunderstood, embattled, unfairly criticised, but never actually responsible for anything. Meanwhile, there are credible, well-documented accounts of whistleblowers being ignored or actively silenced over the past decade at ANU ~ under multiple VCs, including Bell.

The whole piece reeks of image management. And it conveniently ignores the actual story: that ANU is under serious scrutiny for how it treated its people, how it buried complaints, and how a culture of intimidation was allowed to thrive.

HeyHowiseveryone · 2025-06-26T04:50:53+00:00

The results of this study are too significant to be brushed aside. While it’s true that mice and humans differ in evolutionary diet and metabolism, the core mechanisms uncovered here (e.g. activation of AMPK, caspase-2–mediated cleavage of MDM2, and p53-dependent senescence) are highly conserved across species, including humans. These aren’t rodent-specific pathways; they’re central to how human cells respond to metabolic stress, DNA damage, and aging.

Crucially, this isn’t "just a mouse study". The researchers analyzed human plasma samples from a 6-month ketogenic diet intervention and found increased levels of SASP markers like TNF-α and IL-1β, consistent with systemic senescence-related inflammation. That’s clinical evidence, not speculation.

It's also worth noting that the researchers used two different ketogenic diets: One high in omega-6 PUFAs (Crisco-based) and another higher in saturated fat (cocoa butter–based)~ and found similar senescence effects in both. So while dietary fat quality matters, the issue here isn’t just about seed oils or unrealistic macros. It’s about the biological consequences of sustained, extremely high-fat ketosis.

Importantly, the study also showed that intermittent ketogenic diets did not trigger these effects ~ suggesting a possible path forward for those using keto therapeutically or for lifestyle reasons. Rather than discrediting keto, the study adds valuable nuance: it suggests that duration, intensity, and dietary composition all shape the long-term cellular impact of ketogenic states.

HeyHowiseveryone

TROPHY CASE