Thursday, July 30, 2026

"Why Gurali Go on Bear Hunts and Blog" - Deep Cold River

 Chichi Bela’s and Sasha’s Bear Hunt version circa 1997 when Kuba was 6 and Olek was 2


“We're going on a bear huntWe're going on a bear huntI've got my binocularsI've got my binocularsI'm not scaredI'm not scared
Ooh, look at that tall, wavy grassIt's so tallWe can't go over itWe can't go over itWe can't go under itWe can't go under itWe're just gonna have to go through itWe're gonna have to go through itSwish, swish, swish, swish
We're going on a bear huntWe're going on a bear huntI've got my binocularsI've got my binocularsI'm not scaredI'm not scared
Uh-oh, there's a big river, deep cold river,OohWe can't go over itWe can't go over itWe can't go under itWe can't go under itWe're just gonna have to swim itI hope it's not too chillySplash, splash, splash, splash
We're going on a bear huntWe're going on a bear huntI've got my binocularsI've got my binocularsI'm not scaredI'm not scared either
Eww, look at all that mudUgh, so muddyWe can't go over itWe can't go over itWe can't go under itWe can't go under itWe're just gonna have to go through itUgh, if I have toSquirsh, squirsh, squirsh, squirsh
We're going on a bear huntWe're going on a bear huntI've got my binocularsI've got my binocularsI'm not scaredI'm not scared
Uh-oh, what's that?It's a caveWe can't go over itWe can't go over itWe can't go under itWe can't go under itWe're just gonna have to go into itAre you sure?Step, step, step, step
We're going on a bear huntOoh, we're going on a bear huntI-I've got my binocularsI've got my binoculars tooI'm not scaredI'm a little scared
It sure is dark in hereWhat's that in the corner?I feel two big earsI feel two big earsI feel one wet noseI feel one wet noseI feel two sharp teethI know what that is!What?It's a bear!Let's get outta here!
Let's run back through the cave!Step, step, step!OK, quickly, back through the mud!Squish, squish, squish!OK, let's cross the river!Splash, splash, splash!And, quick, through the tall grass!Swish, swish, swish!

And, quick, through the yard!Up the stairs!Into the house!Close the door!Whew!Uh, we're safeThat was a close oneLet's now go bear hunting anymore




 

"Why I Blog"

  
 

Essays & "First Post" links

 

by

 

Bloggers Everywhere


 

by Jozef Imrich -  

Why I blog: Hundreds of pages could be filled or just a sentence might capture some of the depth behind blogging. Blogging is interactive and in many ways inclusive. Anyone anywhere can shed a light on this strange cosmos of ours.

The cure for boredom is curiosity. There is no cure for curiosity. - Dorothy Parker

Why do I blog?

Short Answer: To be heard. Sole survivors might often be thought of as anonymous, but we never want to be voiceless.

Life is too brief and the world is too small not to blog. Is it a way to let off steam and give your two cents? Does it satisfy a desire to climb the mountains or cross the rivers? Or is it an outlet for your various interests? Let me count the ways blogging can record anything delightful, surprising, or informative.

Blogging is part of who I am ... First of all, I blog to keep up my spirit; to stir the spirit of others; to stir my blood, my brain, and my beliefs.

I blog to meet curious people like Dan Gillmor, Jay Rosen, Shel Israel, Robert Scoble, Michael Schaefer, MJ Rose, Tim Dunhill, David Tiley and many others.

Herman Melville put it best when he said, "We cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads, and along these sympathetic fibers, our actions run as causes and return to us as results."

Before I was a blogger, I was a reader of samizdat magazines and a brother who recorded how his sister Aga died at the communist chemical factory and how another sister, Gitka, was sacked for going to church. As bloggers, we share the deepest emotions on a regular basis and today I read a touching story by Lenn Pryor on the death of his sister "Lori Ann Pryor April 27, 1976 - Febuary 22, 2005."

For me, jotting down facts and ideas as well as reading has always been an addiction. In the past, I used to post or email stories I thought might be of interest to friends and acquaintances. However, when the blog came along everything changed... it allowed me to cut down on the number of emails I sent. I still view blogging as emailing to everybody.

Blogging regularly brings new ideas up, ideas I would never have thought of if I hadn't read other blogs and magazines on a similar subject. The more I blog the more I get addicted to reading other bloggers. Blogging inspires me to read more because reading introduces new ideas or forces me to rethink old ideas.

If I learn something from my experiences, I hope it might be valuable to someone besides me. I have learned much about myself from reading others poems and stories; I hope that others can also learn something from my experiences and my writing. Deep down in the recesses of probably every blogger's heart is a realisation that we use each other for inspiration and motivation on our journey of self-discovery.

I like to think of blogging as something more than just expressing ideas or sharing trends. I like to think I'm part of a wide selfless community. Blogs not only help to reveal who we are; they help us to transcend who we were.

What I like about Blogging is that it is rather organic. There are no boundaries to ideas, interaction and optimism. Blogging can be as deep and wide as you make it to be ...

In many ways, a blog is a playground dreamed up by a powerless voice just like the prophetic story of 1984 was dreamed up in 1948 by a powerless voice of George Orwell (Orwell - Why I Write).George Orwell saw writing not only as a powerful tool for conveying ideas, but also as a demanding and enthralling art with a moral imperative to search for truth. In an autobiographical note sixty years ago, Orwell said, "Good prose is like a window pane." Like Orwell, Vaclav Havel trusted his audience to share his values and understanding of the world, but he also sought to increase their political awareness. Blogging helps us to think for ourselves. Blogs allow us to speak our mind and it helps us to link to concrete realities.

An individual blogger, like Winston Smith, sits down alone with courage and an optimistic belief in his own ideas to communicate his most secret thoughts to an unknown reader. Second, his dedication to truth, the product of independent thought, has the power to improve society. In our time, we desperately need Orwell's clear language, his commitment to aesthetic as well as moral responsibility.

My purpose in this blog is to shed more hope and sunlight on complex and moral issues as where there is sunlight there is less likelihood for slime and mold to grow. What you see is what you get!

To me a link like this one which I received this week from Shel and Robert is priceless: 
http://redcouch.typepad.com/weblog/2005/02/thank_you_jozef.html

Warmly,

Jozef

Jozef's Blog: Media Dragon: Top 100 Cultural and Political Blog in 2004 AD
Bloggers are like the little first amendment engine that could
Book: Cold River, by Jozef Imrich


Peter de Cure: Chair of tax regulator recuses himself from KPMG probe


                Fotograf by Alex Ellinghausen

 

TPB managing conflict of interest issues ‘appropriately’, chair tells inquiry

Peter de Cure has sought to assure senator Deborah O'Neill that the TPB is carefully managing any potential conflict of interest he may have with the KPMG investigation, given his previous ties to the firm. 

Responding to a letter sent to him by senator Deborah O’Neill, TPB chair and former KPMG tax partner Peter de Cure has looked to assure the Senate committee conducting the inquiry into KPMG that any perceived conflict of interest arising from his former role as a partner of KPMG “is being managed with due care, transparency and regard to public interest". 

De Cure also acknowledged that he previously referred to the KPMG whistleblower as “disgruntled”, and reassured the parliamentary joint committee that he would recuse himself from KPMG investigations.

In his 21 July letter, he said that soon after becoming aware of the matter, he initially considered avoiding all engagement “of any type with the matter”.

“I came to the view that I had no conflict of interest that would require me to take this step,” he said. … full text  via MD

 

Chair of tax regulator recuses himself from KPMG probe


Tax Practitioners Board chairman Peter de Cure has been forced to recuse himself from the body’s investigation into KPMG’s data misuse scandal following his failure to comply with conflict of interest rules.

Tax Practitioners Board chairman Peter de Cure has been forced to recuse himself from the body’s investigation into KPMG’s data misuse scandal following his failure to comply with conflict of interest rules.

De Cure, a KPMG partner for nearly 25 years until 2013, put a special conflict management plan in place earlier this month preventing him from discussing the probe with staff or fellow board members, after admitting he failed to declare he was briefed by a KPMG audit partner and called the whistleblower a “disgruntled” employee.

Tax Practitioners Board chairman Peter de Cure has recused himself from the body’s investigation of KPMG. Alex Ellinghausen

The special conflict policy specifies that staff at the regulator communicate any KPMG investigation matters via board member and academic Kerrie Sadiq.

De Cure has told parliament he has no ongoing financial or employment links with KPMG but admitted he has attended multiple KPMG-sponsored lunches and that he sits on three boards that are audited by the firm.

“Mr de Cure is a director of three entities that KPMG provides audit services to,” the Tax Practitioners Board said in a response to parliamentary questions from Greens senator Barbara Pocock.


“From time to time, Mr de Cure has attended audit-related lunches for KPMG audit clients. Mr de Cure has disclosed these attendances to the TPB Board.

“To avoid any perception of conflict, Mr de Cure has in past cases excluded himself from any decision-making in relation to matters connected to KPMG. For the current investigation, Mr de Cure will take the same approach.”

The special conflict policy was created after The Australian Financial Review revealed in July that de Cure had failed to disclose a KPMG briefing on the data misuse scandal and had criticised the whistleblower.

De Cure also downplayed the body’s investigation into the data misuse in a parliamentary testimony in June, saying at the time the board was “not at this stage conducting a formal investigation” because the allegations were not related to the provision of tax services.

This came despite the body having already repeatedly used its extensive powers to get information from KPMG – powers only available during formal investigations into potential misconduct.

The body plays a critical role in policing the mostly unregulated big four accounting partnerships because it is the only federal regulator with the power to investigate KPMG as a whole. This made it instrumental in uncovering the PwC tax leaks scandal.

The Tax Practitioners Board told a parliamentary committee investigating the claims that de Cure had adopted the special conflict policy due to the “heightened interest and sensitivity” of the allegations.

“I discussed the matter with the [Tax Practitioners Board secretary Andrew Orme], and I agreed that the best course was to recuse myself from any decision-making in relation to the matter,” de Cure told the committee.

De Cure declined to respond to questions about when he had spoken to the KPMG partner about the scandal or the details of their discussion. He also declined to respond to queries about whether he’d had any communications with any other KPMG personnel about the scandal.

In response to these queries, the body referred to its response to the parliamentary committee, despite this letter not dealing with those specific questions.

A spokeswoman for Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino, who extended de Cure’s position as chairman until 2029 in March, said, “the government [had] full confidence in the board carrying out its functions under the act consistent with their responsibilities and obligations as Commonwealth officials.”

KPMG has been engulfed in a damaging scandal after a whistleblower, a former executive at the firm, claimed audit partners misused confidential client data and leveraged conflicted relationships to win work.

The claims – many of which have been substantiated – and the firm’s mismanagement of them, have led to multiple senior executives leaving KPMG.

More on the KPMG audit leaks


Find out the inside scoop about Accenture, Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC and McKinsey. Sign up to our weekly Professional Life newsletter.



Regulator upgrades KPMG investigation amid bias concerns

The head of the Tax Practitioners Board, Peter de Cure, has confirmed that the regulator has upgraded its KPMG probe to a formal investigation and has defended referring to the whistleblower as an aggrieved employee.

De Cure, who was a KPMG partner for nearly 25 years until 2013, also conceded that he did not declare to the regulator’s board that a KPMG audit partner had spoken to him about the scandal, which has engulfed the firm since March.

Tax Practitioners Board chairman Peter de Cure told The Australian Financial Review he had “not expressed a concluded view on anything to do with the KPMG matter”. 

These admissions have sparked concern about the ability of the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) to hold KPMG accountable. The board is the only regulator with the power to investigate the firm as a whole and was instrumental in uncovering the PwC tax leaks scandal.

According to several people with knowledge of the matter who are not authorised to speak publicly, it is claimed that de Cure has pushed the idea – as recently as a fortnight ago – that the allegations could be from an aggrieved employee.

This is the view initially pushed by KPMG’s executives internally and to clients seemingly to play down the allegations, which relate to data misuse by the firm’s auditors. KPMG also treated the whistleblower’s disclosure as a human resources issue. The firm has since apologised, and many of the allegations have been substantiated.


De Cure told The Australian Financial Review he had “not expressed a concluded view on anything to do with the KPMG matter”.

On the reference to the whistleblower as an aggrieved employee, he said: “It was a generic discussion about the matter at large and doesn’t reflect on the truthfulness of their evidence or the wrongfulness of the behaviour that is alleged to have occurred.”

“I stand by what I said in parliament. Our work at that point was at an early stage.”

The Financial Review understands de Cure also discussed the KPMG leaks matter within the TPB in conversations, while recusing himself from any “decision-making”.

De Cure said he had recused himself from ”being involved in the board conduct committee that once the investigation is done will decide if there have been any breaches of the law and if any sanctions are required”, given his history with the firm. He has not received any compensation from KPMG since he left in 2013, but worked there for 25 years.

The conversation with a KPMG audit partner that de Cure did not disclose to the board came about in his capacity as chair of the audit committee of Royal Flying Doctor Service SA/NT, which is audited by KPMG. Partners at the firm have been calling clients since the scandal first hit to reassure them about the allegations. Earlier in the crisis, this included pushing the aggrieved employee narrative.

“I didn’t disclose that” to the TPB board, de Cure said. “I received a phone call from the relevant audit partner to reassure me that these matters had no impact on the RFDS SA/NT audit.”

This is despite de Cure saying that “every board conduct meeting we have, we always acknowledge where we’ve had contact or there is a potential conflict”.

De Cure has denied expressing the view that the investigation is not a priority and should be wrapped up without findings against the firm as quickly as possible.

The chair had previously played down the significance of the TPB’s investigation into the KPMG leaks matter.

In a June 4 parliamentary hearing, de Cure told Greens senator Barbara Pocock that the TPB was “not at this stage conducting a formal investigation because at this stage it appears to relate to audit matters and not the provision of tax services”.

But he also acknowledged that the body had used its extensive powers to obtain information from KPMG and that the firm had responded “by sharing with us the same information” shared with a parliamentary committee investigating the matter.

“I stand by what I said in parliament. Our work at that point was at an early stage,” de Cure said on Monday.

The TPB’s former chief executive, Michael O’Neill, who was pivotal in exposing how PwC partners leaked confidential government data, was reassigned in late 2025 to a more junior role at a different agency. The transfer occurred after tax officials made six attempts to sideline or sack O’Neill.

Pocock said de Cure “must recuse himself from the TPB investigation into KPMG as this raises a very obvious conflict of interest”.

“Anything less than a proper, full and conflict-of-interest-free investigation is unacceptable and akin to the Michael O’Neill debacle.”

The TPB has been liaising with KPMG’s head of tax and legal, Ben Travers, when requesting documents and information about the allegations. Travers is one of the KPMG partners in the running for the permanent CEO role.

A KPMG spokesman said the firm “continues to engage constructively with the TPB on this matter”.


AI Companies Are Buying Antique Books, Ingesting Their Contents to Train Models, Then Destroying Them at Incredible Scale

 Futurism: “The world’s best AI training data is setting on a shelf.” Traditionally, books have been good for two things: reading, and looking nice on a shelf. But AI companies are interested in neither. 

To those building large language models, books are nothing more than fodder to be devoured en masse before being spit out like fishbone. Often, they’re happy to use digital books — or even better, pirated digital books, as Meta has been accused of doing, and as Anthropic was forced to pay a $1.5 billion settlement to authors for also doing. 



But many companies, including Anthropic, have turned to ingesting physical books instead, which they can buy countless used copies of on the cheap. According to the settled lawsuit, Anthropic used a hydraulic powered cutting machine to neatly remove the pages from the books it procured from book resellers and then scanned them using industrial-grade imaging equipment. In other words, it was literally ripping off authors’ books to train its AI. 

This process took advantage of a legal concept known as first-sale doctrine, which allows a buyer to do what they want with a purchase without the original copyright holder’s say-so. And since Anthropic was turning the original physical texts into digital ones — rather than redistributing them as new copies — a judge found this to be “transformative,” and therefore protected by fair use. 

Now, as 404 Media reports, this practice has become prevalent enough that even well-established book sellers are looking to cash in on the AI boom. One called ISBNdb, which boasts the “world’s largest book database,” extolls that the “world’s best AI training data is setting on a shelf,” upholding these physical texts as uncorrupted by shoddy AI writing that’s already polluted so much of the internet (and indeed, newer books).

“Print books from the pre-LLM era are structurally guaranteed to be free of this contamination. That alone is a significant advantage,” it explains in an article on its website, as quoted by 404. “Physical books published before this date [pre-2022] are structurally clean of modern poisoning tools.” Once focused on helping libraries, distributors, and book shops find and sell books, ISBNdb now helps AI companies bulk-buy anywhere between 1,000 to one million books per order, according to 404.

As an added bonus, it also promises AI companies that it’ll keep their purchases under wraps — nobody wants to end up in the spotlight like Anthropic and Meta, obviously — while clearly sounding aware about how incredibly shady the practice sounds. “The optics problem is real,” ISBNdb’s site says. “‘AI company destroys two million books’ is not a headline that generates sympathy.”