Posts by Damian Christie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Damian, people on the web side of the argument feel very strongly about that point. Sad gits or not, they tend to regard connectivity as the stuff of life./<quote>
Heh, yes, I was thinking that when I wrote actually - which would Russell rather face, a year in jail or no internet...
<quote>It's part and parcel of the unfairness of the act, that it allows penalties to be enforced, without proof of guilt, that go beyond those a court could impose.
I'm not trying to be pedantic (but I am a lawyer, so) - it's the use of the word 'beyond' here I have an issue with, in that it seems to mean 'further' or 'more extreme'. The courts already have a large number of weapons in their arsenal, the fact that internet disconnection isn't one doesn't make it draconian per se - it's the process that does that.
I think there are very strong arguments against s92A, all I'm saying is this isn't one of them.
-
And Simon, interesting to hear you say you don't buy vinyl any more (I hate to think what you pay in storage fees for your collection as it is) - it's the fact I can still get new LPs (and good reissues) on vinyl that keeps me pumping money into the music industry. I know it's a flawed, emotional way of thinking, but the reality is that if I"m faced with paying $35 for a CD more or less indistinguishable from the ones that litter the floor of my office, I'd rather download the shit illegally. But if it's on vinyl, well...
-
I'm also of the mind that it's not reasonable that 92A mandates a penalty -- disconnect from the internet -- that no court or tribunal would.
I've heard you say this a bit Russell, including with Chris, and I've got to say that out of all the arguments against s92A, this one seems to me like a bit of a straw man, or maybe just irrelevant. Would s92A be better if the arbitary uncontestable penalty was a fine or imprisonment, or whatever else a judge currently has in his/her arsenal? No, it's still arbitrary and uncontestable. And to compare it with the penalties for child porn sounds like a variation on Godwin's Law - not to mention that as above, the penalties for child porn already include imprisonment and large fines - something I'm sure you would agree is harsher than having your broadband turned off...
Given that it's the ISPs who are being required to take this step, it's perhaps analogous with employment law, where an employer can be compelled to take back a wrongly-fired employee.
-
For those in Wellington who want to go along, Back Benchers starts again tonight (Wed 18).
Yes, thanks Hilary, I probably should have mentioned that myself. Just sitting here cutting the newswrap now before rushing for my flight. Come say hi if you make it along.
-
If it's journalism, you have a sub-editor!
I agree about the Herald - was reading the paper version of the HOS and found a tonne of glitches - and not that it's journalism, but whatshername Glaucoma's column's particularly full of typos.
-
Very late on this one - and the thread now seems somewhat derailed, but...
"Analogously, a bartender is required by liquor laws to stop serving anyone they believe to be drunk."
but can't do anything about them walking into another bar...
Out of interest, is there anything to stop an 'offender' from joining up with another ISP? I know that doesn't stop the inherent injustice if someone is cut-off on the basis of accusation alone, but...
I like the earlier suggestion of cutting off the govt from key websites (such as ours, maybe Farrar's) with a front page or the like, saying, "this copyright holder licenses this site only for non-Governmental use, please click here if you're not from the Govt", then issue notifications when the Govt ISPs show up. Kinda childish, but a good way of testing the law. Providing it's possible under the copyright act to restrict viewing to a class of people on a basis other than censorship provisions (shuffles off to read Copyright Act...). Anyone?
-
Damian, Damien, I'm used to that one. Damon I always have issues with, cos it's like a whole syllable off... And yup, 'Bob' 'll do. :)
My gf has the same issue with claustrophobia, and I think that's probably the most common issue people have learning to dive. I wonder how much of that just comes down to good, patient instruction from someone you get along with, not being rushed and so forth.
Breathing underwater is not natural, and I think a little fear is healthy - I've had friends learn to dive who are completely cavalier from the outset, skipping the safety steps, not sticking with a buddy underwater, and frankly that scares me on their behalf, let alone what happens if I get in trouble while diving with them.
All I'm saying is don't necessarily write it off - especially if you've tried it once on one of those "discover scuba diving" things where they talk to you for half an hour and then push you into the water...
Mark: Riding turtles underwater is kinda like dressing chimps up and getting them to do tea parties at the zoo - great fun, but not really looked upon too well these days. But those were my first turtles, and first mantas - Nudibranches are pretty common up at Poor Knights, have you dived there? I'm planning another trip there in the next month or so perhaps...
-
David, that was truly an awesome post!
Um, it's Damian, but thanks :)
With horrendously unrealistic mouth sizes and stingers.
Fortunately Mantas don't have stingers (although they do have hundreds of rows of small teeth to filter plankton which could probably be turned into something nasty) - not that Hollywood would have to let the facts stop them from ignoring that to make "Devil Fish - Terror of the Deep"
Oh, and Michael - I'm back, just quietly, but I've still got at least one post from overseas to get through before I resume normal NZ transmission... so let's all imagine I'm still on the beach, I certainly will be. But this Wednesday, I'll be visiting the freezing capital too.
-
I met heaps of tourists in this area and none were remotely interested in going to a human zoo.
I'd have to guess that given every single tour operator from Chiang Mai north offers "visit long-neck village" as part of their Elephant Trek/Bamboo rafting/etc day trips, there's a fair few visits going on. There are a number of these villages, the one I went to was the furthest away (about 27km) in the hope that it would be less of a zoo. I have to admit I didn't know anything about the Burmese refugee and Thai Govt angle until I went there.
Jackie, yes it was the Manta Rays. Andin, no, much like a strip club, the dive operation has a 'no touching' policy when it comes to the fishes and stuff. So there's no riding turtle's backs. Cue next blog...
-
Where are yer fodos dude? You can't do a travel blog without fodos... I mean, not of pingpong shows and that, but just urine and rubbish...
I hear there's a seaside town in South Cambodia where the child prostitution is even more obvious. I'd find it hard not to walk around with a piece of 2x4 I think.
Sitting at the airport in Chiang Mai, trying to fly to Phuket. When i booked my flight, from Chiang Mai to Phuket, I didn't understand that 'change of plane required' meant changing fricken airports at my own cost... someone will pay.... probably me... grumble.