Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The TVNZ 7 Internet Debate

84 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

  • Phil Palmer,

    Five! Five broad headings! Our chief weapon is surprise....

    Since Nov 2006 • 34 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Five! Five broad headings! Our chief weapon is surprise....

    Whoops.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18824 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    So questions for the debate (if you need one):

    - anything about peering - (for example) Telecom claims we're all moving to VOIP in a few years wouldn't it be a bad thing is half our local calls have to go through LA ?(much less Auckland)

    - something about ACTA - there's an international IP treaty being negotiated in secret at the moment, we the public have no idea what's in it - is NZ involved at the moment? should we be? will the public get to see it and debate it before we sign it?

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2125 posts Report Reply

  • Peter Martin,

    I have to admit to being more picky over the programmes and find myself wandering away from NatRad somewhat over the weekends these days.

    I seem to tune in to Radio Live...even with ads...

    I'm not sure if it is the format, the programmes or the announcers.Or just me...

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 184 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    I think that they wanted to ask whether Asian crime was a problem in New Zealand

    If they'd started out from an angle that East Asians were *less* inclined to criminality than other groups, and went on to consider whether the police were adequately addressing what crime there was, then that might have been reasonable.

    But that would have distracted from the whole Peters-style xenophobic bandwagon.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4444 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    (I should point out that in fact MFAT is negotiating in ACTA and it's web site tells us: "Participants also discussed future engagement with stakeholders and agreed to proceed with such engagement at the domestic level and to identify opportunities for engagement in the future."

    Apparently the public are not 'stakeholders' ....

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2125 posts Report Reply

  • Geoff Lealand,

    I agree with you Russell, that having McCroskie, McVicar and all the other Mc's on Kim Hill would be the ruination of the programme. As you pointed, they have ample access to other areas of the media. You can see what has happened with The Panel (Nat Radio weekdays), when it has come to depend on the usual suspects ie pundits who have already too much access to the airwaves eg Michelle Boag, Richard Griffin etc. You know what they are going to say on any given topic; there is little surprise, no lateral thinking, ill-informed opinion stands in for enlightenment.

    Karl du F certainly has a big chip on his shoulder about the educated classes!

    I will sit and consider what might be a good question for your internet panel

    Screen & Media Studies, U… • Since Oct 2007 • 2305 posts Report Reply

  • andrew llewellyn,

    Five! Five broad headings! Our chief weapon is surprise....

    Gold.

    Since Nov 2006 • 2073 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    no surprise and fear ....

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2125 posts Report Reply

  • Carolyn Skelton,

    This may not be a suitable question for the debate, but it relates to issues of Internet accessibility.

    I see there's news this morning of Auckland City Council considering running libraries and other services as businesses. Libraries provide free Internet access for members of the public who don't have access at home. I would not like to see this service become commercialised in a way that undermines accessibility.

    Since Nov 2006 • 39 posts Report Reply

  • John Fouhy,

    Yeah, definitely something on peering. Although I'm not sure what the current state of that argument is. It seems that the free market system we've got acts contrary to the goal of getting the best possible internet service here. It'd be nice to see some pressure from the government for "internet efficiency" -- a principle that intra-NZ traffic should not leave the country unless the internal routes are so saturated it's the clearly the better option.

    You could also ask some questions about National's fibre policy (though I'm not sure if you can get answers): can they do it for the budget they propose? who will own the resulting fibre (government or telecom)?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 87 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    Two questions on cybersafety:

    Does the panel believe central government has any role in censoring the internet in the name of cyber-safety and, if the answer is yes, how would the panelists ensure any such centralised censorship wasn't captured by vested interests who push to ban sites that cater to lifestyle choices or political views they don't approve of?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1796 posts Report Reply

  • Idiot Savant,

    Ask them what the purpose of copyright is and how long they think it should last. Basic, but illuminating.

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1640 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    I don't understand the NZ peering argument - surely all the local traffic filling up the overseas pipes costs the ISPs more - or is the issue that they made the mistake of hiring marketting drones and this is their way of making themselves seem usefull

    (BTW all my packets to/from PA appear to go Dunedin->Auckland->Los Angeles->San Francisco->Auckland or the reverse)

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2125 posts Report Reply

  • larryq,

    I love living in Wellington but it's hard to disagree that the place is more deluded and self important that it could be. Kim Hill's programme is a reflection of this, especially since she got Mark Cubey on board as poducer. I guess that Kim Hill is a liberal, and no guessing is required about Cubey's left leaning views, but I don't really care. When I listen to the programme I filter what's said. It's a great programme. I'd rather listen to opinionated people because it's entertaining. What I don't like is the soporific Sunday Morning programme. It's needs some humour and energy. It's way too Wellington.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 24 posts Report Reply

  • Mikaere Curtis,

    Question for the panel:

    Whether they support the compulsory filtering of all data by the ISPs, as the Aussies seem rather keen on.

    Tamaki Makaurau • Since Nov 2006 • 455 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    all my packets to/from PA appear to go Dunedin->Auckland->Los Angeles->San Francisco->Auckland

    PA hosts in NZ? Are you made of money Russell?

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4444 posts Report Reply

  • Tim Michie,

    Given how many of the Kim Hill program guest are overseas scientists or writers visiting New Zealand and she's grabbing them while they're here their personal politics don't really reflect there appearance on the show. Their personal politics may not fit the New Zealand Left-Right labdscape.

    Certainly their ideas can be considered in light of New Zealand'a situation but isn't that just as it should be?

    Auckward • Since Nov 2006 • 554 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    PA hosts in NZ? Are you made of money Russell?

    Hell no -- that would be crazy. We're with the hosting service in California that CactusLab uses. Their monthly allocation is freakin' huge, and it's not expensive.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18824 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew E,

    Sean Plunket will moderate. Fran O'Sullivan and I will ask questions and pass on live questions from viewers. There'lll also be a studio audience asking questions, a live IRC channel, questions submitted via Skype and online polls. Yes, it does sound complex.

    Yes, it sounds far too complex, with a large proportion of the first hour possibly being wasted on transferring between the different channels of questions coming in to you.

    But nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition...

    174.77 x 41.28 • Since Sep 2008 • 197 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    ah - that's OK then :-) my traceroute stopped at a SF node but whois on your IP address gave Auckland ....

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2125 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew E,

    More seriously, ask them whether they think ISPs are common carriers or publishers.

    Ask them if they think internet access is now a utility like water, electricity and gas, and therefore should be regulated as such.

    Ask them if they think Treasury imposes too high a discount rate on infrastructure investments. See here (pdf).

    Agree you should ask them Idiot/Savant's question about copyright.

    Ask them if they think they would ever want to force ISPs to retain all traffic and content data for government data mining, like the UK.



    If you get credible answers to half of these you'll be doing fantastically.

    174.77 x 41.28 • Since Sep 2008 • 197 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    That said all my peering that does happen still happens in Auckland - I use VOIP a lot, and I know that after lunch (our time) VOIP to the states (in my case Vonage) seems to become unuseable - there's no reason why any of my local Dunedin calls (I also run a SIP exchange) should go thru the US much less Auckland - of course part of that is because the DSL circuits are not terminated locally because my ISP doesn't yet have hardware in the local exchange - 'cabinetisation' (my neighbourhood this month I'm told) is good for me because it pushes the fibre closer to me, it also means that my ISP probably can't afford to put gear in individual cabinets and will be required to do more complex things in order to peer locally

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2125 posts Report Reply

  • Robyn Gallagher,

    I'm rather excited about the TVNZ 7 Internet Debate - and I'm going to be in the audience!

    I'm really pleased that internet issues are being seriously debated. It's a nice change from times when politicians considered the internet a pool of nutters and/or paedophiles.

    Others have raised this topics, but I'd also like to see what parties opinions are on the Australian internet filtering situation. It seems like a bit of a FAIL to me, but I'd hate for someone to consider that as something that NZ needs to aspire to.

    Raglan • Since Nov 2006 • 1855 posts Report Reply

  • Public Servant on a tea-break.,

    I know I’m jumping back a topic, but I have to come to the defence of the Sunday Morning programme on Radio NZ, which has come into criticism on ‘Hard New’s’ discussion thread before today. I honestly prefer it to Kim Hill on Saturday. The chief reasons for this being:

    - the interviews do not sound like the person being interviewed is wrestling to get a word in edgeways past Kim Hill, which can happen in her interviews;

    - I’ve actually had enough of frantic political commentary by Sunday, and it is nice to hear discussions being undertaken by informed people on important topics who are breathing through their noses, and;

    - For insightful commentary on recent events, Media Watch is very good at holding the media to account, so is a must hear for me.

    In fact, the only real complaint about the programme I have is about of the music show (that is aimed at revealing hidden gems and sound bites). The compiler/commentator continuously gabs across the intros of the songs like some commercial DJ who has had too much V. If I’m hearing a tune that is new to me, I like to hear the whole thing. I’m picky that way.

    Wellington • Since Apr 2008 • 67 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.