Updated elevated going to auction
A classic Darwin elevated residence with a modern makeover is going under the hammer close to the Nightcliff foreshore.
The four-bedroom home sits on a 920 sqm block at 5 Lantana Ct, Nightcliff, with pool and lush tropical landscaping.
Selling agent Andrew Haring, of Ray White Darwin, said the redesigned elevated was polished and spacious, perfect for families.
The main part of the home is upstairs and features banks of louvres, timber floors, a neutral colour scheme and plenty of natural light.
There is easy flow between the kitchen and dining room, sitting room, lounge and the front and rear balconies.
The updated kitchen has stone countertops, white cabinetry, five-burner gas stove, 900mm oven and plenty of room for a dining table.
Bi-fold doors open this level to the huge front balcony and the rear balcony, which looks out over the pool.
The three upstairs bedrooms have airconditioning and built-in robes, while the family bathroom is a wet room and there is a separate toilet.
Downstairs, there is a large space with a wall of louvres and bi-fold doors opening to the pool area.
This space could be used as a bedroom, a living room or an entertaining area.
There is also a laundry, a bathroom and a store room on this level, along with carparking for four vehicles and an undercover space flowing out to the pool.
The private backyard is screened by tropical gardens and trees.
The property is close to shops, schools and markets, while the city is a 15-minute drive away.
The home is a short stroll from the Nightcliff foreshore, jetty, boat ramp, and a walk from The Foreshore cafe and Nightcliff pool.
PROPERTY DETAILS
Address: 5 Lantana Ct, Nightcliff
Bedrooms: 4
Bathrooms: 2
Carparks: 4
Auction: Wed, July 2, 5.30pm
Originally published as
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
28 minutes ago
- ABC News
The economic reform round table should discuss AI and robots, not just tax and productivity
Let's hope the economic reform round table in August does not turn into a three-day argument about tax reform. Nobody can ever agree on whether a sustainable budget is best achieved by less spending or more tax, let alone what taxes should be increased or new ones imposed. The 25 citizens in the assembly would be better off trying to come up with a decent set of policies on artificial intelligence and robots. And they could start with a briefing about what US President Donald Trump will reveal in his AI Action Plan to be announced on July 23, and follow up with a rundown on China's eight-year-old strategy to become the global leader in AI by 2030. As for the five reports on productivity's five pillars commissioned from the Productivity Commission by Jim Chalmers in December, and the 453 ideas people have sent in, a way for PC chair Danielle Wood to instil a sense of urgency into the round table might be to read out this article from the Financial Times last week about Meta Platforms Inc offering as much as $150 million sign-on bonuses for AI engineers working for the developer of ChatGPT, OpenAI. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is trying to build a team that will help him create AI that is smarter than human beings. And the staff at OpenAI have apparently been knocking him back! The combined market value of the five leading AI companies – Meta, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon and Nvidia – is $20 trillion, almost twice the value of all houses and units in Australia. The only way any of this makes sense is that Meta, OpenAI and the other peddlers of AI are going make more money from it than from any other technological revolution in history. And the only reason the rest of the business world will pay so much money for AI software and robots is because they will make even more money by replacing humans and increasing the productivity of those still employed. There are two ways of applying AI in a business: top down and bottom up. At the risk of over-simplifying it (but not much) top-down involves a business's executive leadership team deciding to use AI to replace a bunch of human workers by, say, getting it to write software code, or do data entry, answer phone calls or write articles like this one. Bottom-up is where individual employees use AI to become better at their jobs. The key to making the bottom-up use of AI work is writing a good prompt, which is rapidly becoming one of the more important modern workplace skills. An AI consulting business called Fourday is building a 'prompt library' for clients and has developed a prompt writing assistant called Prompt Cowboy. You write into it a sort of lazy, plain language prompt and it spits out a much longer one that is better designed to get the best answer from the AI. ChatGPT performs better with a more detailed, better-written prompt. Fourday founder Henry Badgery says it is possible to get productivity increases of 30-40 per cent with AI but many businesses are reporting no extra value at all because: "You're not using it correctly. You're not asking the right questions because that's essentially what a prompt is, you're asking it the right question, you're giving it the right information to answer your question." If the round table is going to be pragmatically useful in lifting productivity, it should do two things: first, develop a national system for helping small to medium enterprises and employees to write better AI prompts, and second, modernise the welfare safety net so people don't have to be scared of it, allowing companies to replace workers with AI without worrying about contributing to societal breakdown. Specifically, the government needs to rethink unemployment benefits. The current JobSeeker system is not fit for purpose because it's assumed to be a temporary payment for a job seeker. The money is not enough, and the points system that includes the need to apply for four jobs each month won't work if there aren't any jobs to apply for. A Universal Basic Income for everyone, as some are pushing, is going too far, but the government needs to prepare for a period of more permanent unemployment – even if it's not needed in the end because AI does not cause mass unemployment. Business executives and staff need to embrace AI and a good safety net is needed for that to happen. It's another reason for more tax revenue, along with the need for more public housing. And more tax revenue comes down to a new tax – either a wealth or inheritance tax – or increasing the GST. Australia's two previous bouts of major tax reform when tax revenue was falling short of government spending also involved new taxes: capital gains and fringe benefits in 1985 and GST in 2000. Twenty-five years later revenue is short again because of the aging of the population, the NDIS and the decision to increase defence spending. But the near-hysterical response to the plan to reduce the tax break on superannuation balances above $3 million suggests that a new wealth or inheritance tax is too hard. Lifting the GST rate towards the global average of 15-20 per cent is what it will probably have to be. The problem with GST is that it's regressive – it hits the poor more than the well-off. But there is a solution to that, invented by UNSW Professors Richard Holden and Rosalind Dixon. In their book From Free to Fair Markets Holden and Dixon suggest increasing the GST rate to 15 per cent and applying it to all goods and services, but only levying it on spending above a threshold of $12,000 per year. How? By giving back each taxpayer 15 per cent of $12,000, or $1,800, each year, preferably in two six-monthly payments of $900 – simply put it in their bank accounts. Holden and Dixon have modelled the outcome and say the higher GST on a broader base would double GST revenue from $90 billion to $180 billion and that the refunds would give back half that, leaving $45 billion in net extra revenue which they say could be spent on income tax cuts and eliminating the budget deficit. Whether $12,000 ($1,000 per month) is the right threshold for GST-free spending could be debated, but the idea is worth spending an hour or two on at the round table. Then the 25 round tablers could get on with the real business of AI and robots. Alan Kohler is finance presenter and columnist on ABC News and he also writes for Intelligent Investor.
ABC News
28 minutes ago
- ABC News
Melbourne lawyer fled Australia with $1.2m after filing for bankruptcy, court case alleges
What do you do if the bank accidentally sends you more than $1 million? A court has heard this happened to former lawyer Chaim Geron, who's accused of quickly transferring the money offshore, declaring bankruptcy and leaving the country under a false name. What followed was an international pursuit by the person charged with handling Mr Geron's bankruptcy, in a bid to have it recognised in Israel — a move which could allow any of Mr Geron's assets to be used to pay any Australian debts. The former lawyer has now asked to have the bankruptcy set aside in the Federal Circuit Court, where the allegations against him have been detailed in a series of filings by his bankruptcy trustee. According to court documents, the ANZ bank made its million-dollar error in June 2019, when Mr Geron had recently broken up with his wife. At around the same time, he was also embroiled in a disciplinary dispute with the legal regulator that later saw him suspended from practising law over findings of misconduct in relation to his dealings with an elderly client. "Following the breakdown of my marriage and after one year of legal proceedings I ended up losing everything I had, including my practice and any savings and decided to relocate to Israel where I was born and bred and have a family," Mr Geron said in an affidavit. He held the family home in the Melbourne suburb of Elsternwick in his name, but it was mortgaged to ANZ and he owed the bank $1.5 million. He sold the property, but about $1.2 million — which should have been paid to the bank — ended up in the trust account of Mr Geron's lawyers. According to a lawyer for his bankruptcy trustee, Innis Cull from accounting firm PKR, the money was instead moved offshore into a company named Hilazon, "a Hebrew word which translates to 'shelled creature' or 'snail'." "Mr Geron refused to return the money, and instead transferred the funds overseas to bank accounts in Israel, and subsequently to his brother and a company he controlled, Hilazon Inc," Mr Cull's lawyer said in an affidavit filed with the court. Mr Geron denies Mr Cull's version of events. "This is not true," he told the ABC. "I paid debts and Mr Cull has all the information." Mr Geron declared himself bankrupt in 2021, two years after the ANZ transaction, and at a time when the COVID pandemic meant there was no easy way to get back to Australia. In his affidavit, Mr Geron told the court that his bankruptcy was motivated by ANZ suing him over the home loan payment. He told the court that, after realising he needed an Australian address to declare bankruptcy, he asked an acquaintance to sign a lease that was backdated by several months — something Mr Cull's lawyer alleges in a court document amounts to "fraud". Mr Geron provided Mr Cull with a copy of the lease showing he was renting a room in Elsternwick. The bankruptcy went through and there things sat until October 2022, when Mr Geron told Mr Cull he wanted to visit Australia. Within weeks of his return to Australia, Mr Cull ordered Mr Geron to come to his office in Melbourne and face questions about his affairs. By that stage, Mr Cull had appointed a lawyer to comb through Israeli records and identify any assets Mr Geron held there, court documents show. The search turned up an apartment in Mr Geron's name, held without a mortgage, in Rishon LeZion, about 8 kilometres south of Tel Aviv, along with up to four current or former Israeli bank accounts. Mr Cull also began proceedings in Israel to have the Australian bankruptcy recognised over there — the first step towards seizing control of any Israeli assets held by Mr Geron. The court heard that during his January 12, 2023, meeting with Mr Cull, Mr Geron confirmed his address in Australia was the place he rented from his friend and denied having multiple bank accounts. Mr Geron also "claimed that whilst in Israel, he was staying with his mother, or in short-term rented accommodation for which there was no lease agreement," according to court documents. Asked about whether he held the property and bank accounts, and failed to declare them to Mr Cull, Mr Geron told the ABC: "This is not true at all." On the morning after they met, Mr Cull wrote to Mr Geron and used his power, as his bankruptcy trustee, to ban him from leaving Australia. Mr Geron also informed Australian Federal Police (AFP) of the decision. Mr Geron wrote back to say that he "answered your questions in full" at the interview. Later that day, at around 12.20pm, the AFP called Mr Cull's office to say Mr Geron had tried to leave the country, but had been stopped. According to Australian Border Force (ABF), Mr Geron left the country on January 15, 2023, three days after his interview with Mr Cull, using a New Zealand passport in the name of Shane Green. "Unfortunately he has departed Australia without triggering any alert as he used an alias," an ABF officer told Mr Cull in an email tendered to the court. Authorities also told Mr Cull they would update their records to show Mr Geron and Mr Green are the same person. Mr Geron provided the ABC with an extract of official movement records, dated last month, "showing that [I] entered and exited Australia legally under my name". "I emphasise that no criminal actions were ever taken against me for using [a] 'false passport,'" he said. Mr Geron turned up again in February last year, when he filed a response to Mr Cull's Israeli proceedings that court documents say was witnessed before the "consul at the Israeli consulate in Panama City, Panama". Court documents show that until December last year, Mr Geron told the Israeli court he lived in Australia. "I deny court [sic] in Israel have jurisdiction in respect of my matter, since I am an Australian citizen and the correct forum to deal with any issue in respect of myself is in Australia," Mr Geron said in one document, filed with the Israeli court in February last year. "I attach a tax invoice issued to me a few days ago involving a purchase of a car in Australia in my name and bearing my address." The invoice shows the car was a $1,625 Mazda with no plates, sold as a write-off by auctioneers Pickles. More recently, Mr Geron has used his Israeli address in correspondence with the court there. Mr Geron told the ABC that the law required a person to be physically present in Australia in order to file for bankruptcy. He has been seeking to have the bankruptcy set aside on the grounds the required Australian connection never really existed, and has said in court documents that he really lives in Israel and hasn't lived in Australia since April 2019. Mr Cull opposes Mr Geron's attempt to annul the bankruptcy. Mr Geron said courts have previously annulled bankruptcies based on the residency test. Last month, Federal Circuit Court judge Simone Bingham made orders that Mr Geron appear in person at a hearing set down for July 2. "There will be no dispensation to have an online hearing in this case — it is a matter of credit," she said during a brief hearing on May 29. She agreed with counsel for Mr Cull that there were "serious matters" that needed to be examined, including "escaping the jurisdiction" by using a New Zealand passport under a different name. But Mr Geron told the ABC that he's concerned that the financial burden of hiring a lawyer and potentially having to provide security to cover legal costs "will not allow [me] to expose the truth". The case continues.
ABC News
3 hours ago
- ABC News
Why your AI questions are a power and water drain
Sam Hawley: How often do you use AI? It's becoming part of our everyday lives. But when you pump in a question into something like ChatGPT, do you ever think about the energy it uses? Today, Gordon Noble from the Institute of Sustainable Futures at UTS on the data centres driving AI and what they're doing to the climate. I'm Sam Hawley on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily. So Gordon, Googling something or typing a question into ChatGPT, it is so easy and simple for us and very, very useful, of course. But we don't really stop to think about where all that information is coming from, do we? Gordon Noble: Yeah, that's right. And I think this is crept up on us. When you do a search now with all these AI tools, ChatGPT being one of them, they can be 10 times more energy consuming than, for instance, doing a Google search. And what sits behind that is this massive investment that we've seen in data centres globally. So it's absolutely exploded. Sam Hawley: Yeah, okay. So we're not thinking about these data centres when we're typing in what we want to know from ChatGPT. And most of us would never have seen one or been in one. What do they look like? Where are they? Gordon Noble: Yeah, it's a really good question. So data centres, just to put it in visual terms, so the average size of what they call these hyperscale data centres, so they're around about 10,000 square feet. To give you an indication, a Bunnings store is about 8,000 square feet. So they're kind of just big sheds, right? Huge. But what we're seeing now is that we're moving to not just these Bunnings-like sheds, if you like, but we're moving to these massive million square data centres, almost campuses of data centres. Around the world, there are around about 1,100 of these hyperscale data centres. In Sydney, for instance, Sydney is a big centre for data centres here in Australia. We have over 85 data centres. One of the reasons Sydney is such an attractive place for data centres is we have 12 submarine cables that come out of Sydney and basically connect us to the rest of the world. So data centres globally are now around about 1.5% of global energy consumption. The question is what's going to happen in the future? Sam Hawley: Okay, so Gordon, let's delve a bit further into how these data centres actually work, because while they're enabling us to inform ourselves at lightning speed, they're also using a huge amount of power, massive amount. Gordon Noble: So roughly at the moment, global energy consumption coming out of data centres is around 1.5% of all the global electricity. The issue is that data centres are highly concentrated. So it's in places in the world, the US, parts of Europe, Ireland is a massive data centre hub, where they're actually causing strain on the energy grid because of how much the energy growth has been. So to give you an idea in Australia, so a research report from Morgan and Stanley, they were projecting that roughly at the moment, data centre energy consumption from the grid is around about 5% of all of our energy consumption. But what they're projecting is that this could grow to between 8% and 15% of all of our electricity consumption here in Australia, depending on some of the decisions that are made as in how much we use AI tools. So what the International Energy Agency is now saying is that by 2030, the energy consumption from data centres will be the size of Japan. So we're talking massive amounts of increase in energy consumption. That's placing strains on the grid, but it's also placing a shift in terms of how the energies come from. So for instance, in the US, we're seeing providers like Microsoft, who are big data centre operators because of the tools that they've got. They're looking to shift to nuclear. And one of the things they're looking to do is to reopen Three Mile Island, which is the nuclear plant that had been mothballed to basically take all that energy from a reopened Three Mile Island. So lots and lots of decisions as a result of this. Sam Hawley: Why is it, Gordon, that AI takes so much more energy than just Googling? Gordon Noble: These large language models are effectively trained to look at the whole of the internet, right? So when they're developing these models, they're actually looking at everything in the internet. And then when we ask it to do something, it's churning away from all that work that it's done. Lots and lots of different applications, but I think that common common thread is that it's aggregating across a lot of data rather than just that single data search where it goes to a single source. Sam Hawley: Do we have a sense already about the sort of strain that it's putting on electricity grids in Australia? Gordon Noble: Yeah, so at the moment, that's one of the questions. And we don't really have, I think, a good picture of the national demand, right? So the issue at the moment is a lot of the training of these AI tools, they've taken place in the US principally. So they haven't yet really been here in Australia. So that's going to be one of the questions as we increase the size of our data centre industry. Where is it going to start to have implications in terms of energy demand? Will it be, for instance, in Sydney, which is really our data centre capital? What would the impact, if you like, in terms of energy consumption in New South Wales in particular? Other states have the same issue, but because Sydney really is that capital of data centres in Australia, that's where some of the key issues will emerge. Sam Hawley: And Gordon, every time we use an AI site like ChatGPT, it uses a lot of water, doesn't it? Gordon Noble: Yeah, look, this is a real sleeper issue, and it's one that we're very concerned with. There's recent research, for instance, that since 2022, all the new data centres that have been developed, you know, two thirds of them are in areas where there's water stress. So it's becoming a big issue. But the way to think about data centres is that they're like the human body, they like to be kept cool, operate efficiently. And one of the ways that that happens is using water. So they consume literally billions of litres of water. The issue as we go forward is how do we actually, in Australia, build a data centre industry that is sustainable, given that we're an arid continent, given that we're going to have challenges from our climate in terms of water. At the moment, one of the opportunities is that both in Sydney and Melbourne, where data centres are going to likely be established, is we actually have surplus water in the form of recycled water. We tip 97% of our recycled water out in Sydney and Melbourne, we actually tip it out into our oceans and bays. So this is an asset, for instance, that could be used if we're smart enough to say, well, how can we actually build, say pipelines of recycled water to use this water, so we're not actually putting stress, environmental stress, on our rivers and creeks and streams, etc. So there's opportunities around this that we could solve. Sam Hawley: This is all making me start to feel rather bad for using ChatGPT for that recipe last night. I must go back to the old book, the cookbook lives on. Anyway, just tell me about emissions then, because we're meant to be bringing them down and I'm gathering this is not helping. Even the tech companies admit that, don't they? Gordon Noble: Yeah, this is what happened last year. So I think the surprise to the market is we started having the sustainability reports of the big tech companies and they all started to actually reveal how much their emissions had started to increase over the last four or five years. Each one of them, there are different increases in emissions depending on the way they've structured their operations, whether they build data centres, whether they outsource them, etc. But the picture that was emerging was a very consistent increase in their energy consumption. I think that really woke up a lot of the market in terms of, yeah, this is actually an energy intensive industry. Up until at that time, I think there was a little bit of a lack of understanding of how much energy data centres were creating because it wasn't really being aggregated in a single spot. So as we've been getting what we call these climate related financial disclosures and companies are starting to report on what we call the scope one, two and three emissions, we're starting to get a bigger picture. We're expecting to get more reporting in the next month or so. So what we'll start to see is what's happened since 2024 and 2025 and then we'll start to really have a good understanding of where things go forward. But what the clear picture at the moment is emissions arising in the big tech companies driven by their investments in AI. Sam Hawley: Gosh, all right. So Gordon, how worried do you think we should be then about this massive energy use and who should actually be taking responsibility for this? Gordon Noble: You know, I think it's as you mentioned, there's a lot of potential benefits around AI tools. You know, we can use these, for instance, for whether it's the recipe, a lot of environmental applications, a lot of benefits here if we get this right. At the moment from an Australian perspective, what really we haven't seen is a national approach being taken on this. We have, I think, in the Australian government an approach to communications that goes back to the, you know, the days in the early Federation we had a postmaster general. At the moment we need to start to think of, you know, the digital economy as actually moving across a range of different portfolios in the federal government, for instance. So we need a strategy around this to recognise that this has potentially got massive benefits, but also we really need to manage that. What we're seeing in other jurisdictions, for instance, Singapore, have gone down the pathway of establishing a green data centre roadmap. We need something like that in Australia. Sam Hawley: But what do you think without a new approach, can we keep pumping these questions into ChatGPT and still reach our environmental goals? And can our energy system actually cope with demand that is just going to keep growing? Gordon Noble: This is the big question. So the reality is if we do have at the higher end of expectations of the growth of AI, the energy that's demanded here just in Australia will actually crowd out other investments that we're making in renewable energy. So whilst we're making progress in decarbonising our grid, you know, there's an assumption that's based on, you know, a certain level of growth of energy demand. If that increases significantly, you start to put pressure on how much we can actually invest in more renewables, in more solar, for instance, more battery technology. It starts to then have that question, do we keep coal-fired power stations longer than we need? So I think there's a broader set of issues that we really need to get our heads around. Sam Hawley: Gordon Noble is a Research Director with the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology, Sydney. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead and Adair Sheppard. Audio production by Cinnamon Nippard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. I'm going to take some leave from now for a couple of weeks. Sydney Pead will be with you from tomorrow. Thanks for listening.
