Posts by Euan Mason
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
On a lighter note, John Key has finally figured out why they call them "keyholes".
-
Apart from the poor process, which is better described as appalling, metadata is the most significant issue. Would MPs be happy to provide leaders of opposing political parties with a daily log of their phone calls, their email correspondents and all the websites they've visited? No? Then they should not be voting for this legislation.
-
People will buy and read what they perceive to be balanced reporting. Unfortunately this check on media bias has the following flaws in a web-based world:
a) Many newspapers are free to read on the web and it's advertisers who choose what thrives
b) Buy up enough outlets and readers have no choice but to read your propaganda
c) Sources and whistle-blowers cannot be protected from legalised domestic spying
d) People read what plays to their prejudices (always true, not just in a wwwworld).So where does this leave the fourth estate as a check on governments' abuses of power? Is it possible for the media to retain this role? Should we have some kind of regulation of media ownership, and isn't this just regulatees regulating the regulators? Relying on friendly, public-spirited billionaires isn't a very stable solution.
-
I vacillate between thinking that the NZDF's policy was inevitable and that it is bloody outrageous. "Both" said Pooh, sagely. If the law is murky and immoral behaviour saves your ass then those with positions to lose often find easy "justification" for immorality. We need to ensure that immoral choices are clearly illegal, and the GCSB bill is heading in exactly the wrong direction on that account. Very scary stuff, with huge consequences for NZ.
It can happen here.
How do we break through the profound apathy of the "If you have done no wrong then you have nothing to hide, Jack" brigade?
An interesting piece from John Naughton at the Guardian, suggesting consequences for the internet-as-we-know-it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jul/28/edward-snowden-death-of-internet
-
Hard News: Community standards, in reply to Tim Darlington,
the banality of politicians who want to be seen as our moral protectors.
Given that politicians generally seem to have a moral compass more appropriate to members of the mustelid family than to homo sapiens, you have to wonder what credibility they have to be our moral protectors.
Some seem to have mislaid their moral compasses, as evidenced by the GCSB bill. :)
-
It hasn’t taken long for Cameron to jam things into reverse and declare that his filter wouldn’t block"soft” porn (while remaining hopelessly unclear about what it would block) but what’s remarkable is that he genuinely doesn’t appear to have thought through any of it before making his announcement
ROFL! Thanks, Russell, for making me laugh. This is absolutely priceless.
-
Hard News: A different kind of country, in reply to Jeff Rowe,
Jeff,
I have boycotted an event at Skycity that was put on by my professional institute. I see it as worth the personal sacrifice.
Cheers,
Euan -
The most astounding thing is that John Key apparently believes that groups he doesn’t like would actually want to hold a conference at this gambling facility. Bananas anyone?
-
Hard News: The future: be careful what…, in reply to Peter Darlington,
But that only works if EPL is the only thing you want to watch. You gain EPL and a price drop but lose Euro leagues, Champions League, rugby, cricket etc… Throw SOHO into the mix and yes, you pay through the nose but it’s a one box management solution for everything and it’s easy for lazy sods like me.
Apparently the aim is to have a football channel on-line. I'd be happy paying for football and then again for rugby. It's still way cheaper than Sky. Yeah, I know that Sky offers other content like movies and news, but it is also riddled with ads and hardly better at those things than free to air - certainly not $80/month better.
-
Hard News: The future: be careful what…, in reply to Tom Semmens,
Those born of the less anxious or less caring walk to school and still play contact sports with an oval ball, where they discover manly virtues like stoicism and courage in way not likely to give them a death wish in their later teens/early twenties. And because they enjoy it, they are more likely to keep playing when they get older.
As I near my 7th decade I still play football, but I wouldn’t dare subject my knees to rugby.
Football is a bit like life: With age you understand in far greater subtlety how to play the game, but your body increasingly restrains you from implementing your understanding. The same cannot be said for rugby (much as I enjoy watching it also) because after a certain age it would be suicidal to walk onto the field.
Nice troll, though, Tom!