The announcement of Labor’s $2.3 billion home battery subsidy scheme has sparked intense discussions across various forums. While many homeowners are celebrating the prospect of more affordable energy storage solutions, there’s a deeper conversation we need to have about equity and access in our transition to renewable energy.

Looking through the comments and discussions online, there’s clear excitement from homeowners who’ve been waiting for this kind of initiative. Many report significant benefits from existing battery installations - from near-zero power bills to maintaining power during outages. The technology clearly works, and works well.

The internet has always been a double-edated sword when it comes to privacy. Sitting here in my home office, watching the rain pelt against my window (typical Melbourne weather), I’ve been following a concerning story about an educational institution attempting to unmask an anonymous Reddit user who criticized their safety policies.

This isn’t just another tale of institutional overreach - it’s a stark reminder of how fragile our online privacy really is. The story revolves around a school board seeking court orders to reveal the identity of someone who voiced concerns about safety issues following a tragic incident. Rather than addressing these concerns head-on, they’ve chosen to pursue legal action to identify and potentially silence their critic.

The housing debate took an interesting turn this week when a property investor with 26 properties tried to blame immigration for Australia’s housing affordability crisis. The irony wasn’t lost on anyone, but it highlighted a deeper conversation we need to have about property distribution in our country.

Living in the inner suburbs, I’ve watched perfectly good houses sit empty for months or even years, while desperate renters compete for increasingly scarce rentals. Within a kilometer of my home, I can count at least ten vacant properties - some waiting for redevelopment, others seemingly forgotten by their investors. It’s a pattern repeated across Melbourne, where approximately 50,000 properties are tied up in short-term rentals like Airbnb.

Looking through my phone this morning, scrolling past countless photos of my teenage daughter’s school events and family gatherings, I found myself thinking about digital privacy. Recent news about law enforcement officers sharing a woman’s private photos after an illegal phone search has left me feeling deeply unsettled.

The digital age has brought unprecedented challenges to our privacy. While most of us worry about hackers or corporate data breaches, there’s an equally concerning threat from those who are supposed to protect us. The incident where deputies accessed and shared a woman’s intimate photos without consequences isn’t just a violation of privacy - it’s an abuse of power that should shock anyone who values basic human dignity.

Reading about Peter Cutmore’s story from the Waterloo Creek massacre has left me deeply reflective today. The brutal truth of what happened on January 26, 1838, when a young boy watched his people being slaughtered, stands in stark contrast to the barbecues and celebrations happening across the country.

The survival story of Peter Cutmore, preserved through generations of oral history, tells us of a child who survived by hiding in a log where his mother placed him. It’s a testament to both the horror of colonial violence and the incredible resilience of First Nations people. His descendants are still here, still telling his story, still waiting for justice after 187 years.

The recent news about healthcare insurance companies rushing to scrub their leadership pages from their websites would be almost comical if it weren’t so tragically emblematic of corporate America’s approach to problem-solving. Rather than addressing the underlying issues that led to this violent incident, they’re attempting to hide behind digital walls.

Working in tech, I’ve seen countless examples of security theater - implementing superficial measures that create an illusion of security without addressing core problems. Removing executive profiles from websites while their names remain readily available through SEC filings, LinkedIn profiles, and countless other public sources is exactly that - a performative gesture that solves nothing.