Hard News: Buy now: spend the recession inside!
182 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
Rather than spend $500 on a set-top box, I've sort of seen the writing on the wall. Both my VCR and DVD player are on their last legs...
So I'm going to attempt to build a HD Freeview PC contraption. Dunno if I'll ever get it perfectly seamless, but I like a challenge. -
Sue said:
my one thing i remind most people i know is that this is a country that denies the massacre that happened in tiananmen square in the summer of 1989.
Oh, it's better than that. About three years back, I saw an article about the massacre, and how the Chinese aparatchik deal with it. The short version, incoming members who are too young (read: under about 40) to "remember" it are shown videos that decry the protesters as violent insurgents out to bring down the nation, justifying the oppression, and suggesting that it's entirely reasonable to run people down with tanks.
That's not historic, that's recent. This material was shown to people who were taking up positions earlier this decade, so it's not something that was only done in the years immediately afterward.
But if we don't engage with China on trade we'll be left out and that's not good for the economy. As Helen observed the other day, nearly everything that China exports to us comes in tariff-free anyway. We have about the most open marketplace in the world, bar none, but people still bitch and moan that an FTA with China will open us up to flood of cheap, crappy imports. Guess what: we're already being flooded with those cheap, crappy (and other distinctly un-cheap and un-crappy) imports. Nothing's going to change. We stand to benefit a lot if we can get our goods into China's protected markets easily, and we don't have much to lose because we have so little protection in the first place. China has very little in the way of objectionable policy that they would want to make conditional (as contrasted with the US position of their way or the highway on IP-related policy) and so we don't lose in that regard, either.
The only possible downside is low-cost workers coming here, but Helen seems to think that that's taken care of. Without seeing what the agreement says on the matter it's irresponsible to speculate on what might occur.
-
Ralston has an interesting point that blogs don't do 'primary research', in terms of people on the ground actually doing interviews, taking footage etc. And yes, for most blogs, which are written by one person, that is of course true. They're not a huge newsroom with professional photographers and helicopters waiting to race off after ambulance or police emergencies. They don't usually get interviews with the PM. In general, the news is mostly parasitic off the MSM.
However, they are an alternative 'view' on that data coming in, and they are places of discussion. They go further than any medium before in that respect. If you want analysis, you'll get all you can handle on the blogosphere, and Ralston appears to know this when he both slags on blogs, whilst at the same time confessing to spending a lot of time reading them.
And the 'primary research' point is not totally true either. The commentators on blogs are numerous, and they will often talk directly about what is going on inside their own domains. As for interviews, we are starting to see quite a few people who would normally be the sole province of a TV or radio interview coming straight here and saying their piece, exactly how they wanted to say it, without any editing.
It's not the same as MSM news. It could not replace it, any more than than electronics have replaced paper. But it may very well become bigger, in exactly the same way that Wikipedia is bigger than any other encyclopedia, and Linux has more people working on it than any other OS. This could be very hard to see for people stuck in the model of thinking that unless you can make a lot of $ out of it, it won't last. Some ideas are just bigger than that.
-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10498996
While it's just a singular "inside view", I think that perhaps some people like Mr Locke should explain why they think we should have instantly lambasted China for their troops "standing back and watching protestors" and "not moving to quell violence for 2-3 hrs" when Tibetans were throwing rocks and torching buildings.
As you alluded to Russell, there is an instant "China must be violently quelling peaceful dissent" meme whenever Tibet and China are mentioned but it's probably a Western arrogance towards both the people of Tibet and China when their complex struggle for some degree of autonomy boils down to that. -
Stephen said:
As far as I know, New Zealand foreign policy has always been of craven pragmatism whenever there are exports at stake. This latest to-do is no different.
Us and the rest of the world. Principles are a very sometimes thing in global politics. We're a lot more principled than many nations (look at how the US cuddles up to Saudi Arabia and then in the same breath calls Mugabe a murderous thug) but there are still real downsides to shitting in the international trade lunchbox. If we can't trade, we're in deep, deep poo, more so than many nations because our internal economy is so tiny. We cannot support our standard of living just buying and selling within NZ, so trade is vital. Politicians know that, and act accordingly.
-
Let’s face it if enough of china starts drinking milk we’re sorted economically for a while and we don’t even have to dig up our outback to do it like ‘stralia.
Tibet is incredibly disturbing, as is Xinjiang , as is Iraq, as is the Sudan. The world is not free politically and never has been. It would be fantastic to start developing real consensual international policy to deal with oppression of freedom but at the same time we have to eat and our allies aren’t too bothered about the strength of our pantry.
…and Ralston is just saying what I’m sure the MSM is saying everyday behind closed doors, “what the hell is the blogosphere and why do I feel pain when I think about it?”
-
And the 'primary research' point is not totally true either. The commentators on blogs are numerous, and they will often talk directly about what is going on inside their own domains.
This is a well made and important point. There's little demand for investigative journalism and therefore limited employment in this genre. Some blogging represents an evolution in investigative journalism and commentary - I venture there's a very broad range of expertise represented by the PA readership which regularly provides for insights not otherwise available in the MSM... however with expertise and direct engagement also comes the some restraints not necessarily experienced by journalists.
-
China is undeniably autocratic but it should be noted that there are experiments in democracy that are being sanctioned by the regime. This article by John Thornton comes up with some surprising findings. Clearly democratisation will only happen if sanctioned by the Communist Party and the Chinese model may be evolving into that of a one party state but governed by elected representatives.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080101faessay87101/john-l-thornton/long-time-coming.html
-
Locke is consistent in his human rights campaigns and anti-'free' trade is a Green policy.
That he gets more coverage over China isn't his fault.
-
Bitter babyboomer said in the Listener:
Most blogs are simply opinion, commentary or, occasionally, analysis. There is little or no original reportage in this new form of media. Seldom do bloggers unearth any genuine facts. Most of the time they simply repeat what they have gleaned from the traditional news media and then launch into a rant.
Well, reading National Party press releases (newstalk zb), columns devoted in large part to Bible quotes (darth george), and sky-is-falling hysteria (nzherald anti-EFA campaign) are hardly examples of "original reportage" either. The difference being that reporters are paid to undertake such reportage, while most bloggers write as a hobby. Which helps to explain why we often don't "unearth genuine facts" ... although quite often bloggers are able to point out that the "genuine facts" revealed by the professional news media are, in "fact", crap.
Even done so myself once or twice. Like here.
As BenWilson points out above, there is more analysis than you can shake a stick at on blogs. This reflects the fact that for most it's a hobby.
-
sigh - MHEG-5 - not defining a middleware is the BEST thing to do - you want to be able to buy cool boxes from people who want to innovate (MythTV!) not have your UI projected at you and controlled by the TV stations or freeview themselves - this is the US cable company-centric sort of world view where they want to control your viewing experience.
Instead document your protocols, provide a free-to-air EPG feed with month-ahead data and let people get creative!
that way people can make boxes that do freeview PVR, manage your torrents, feed the kids ipod video fix, store your CDs, etc etc
-
Sue,
If we can't trade, we're in deep, deep poo, more so than many nations because our internal economy is so tiny.
aha
but aren't there (and this is my opinion) nutsos who think nz should be 100% self sustainable.
these are the ones who advocate calculating food miles and only buying produce that is XXkms away from your homeI seem to recall one being on kim hill recently, and avoiding her more insightful questions
-
There's little demand for investigative journalism and therefore limited employment in this genre.
Yup, each blogger is at most one investigative journalist. To compare a blog with a newspaper is wrong. But compare the newpaper with a collection of the top 100 blogs and you'll find there's a shitload of primary research going on. For instance, Russell is talking today about his own personal experiences with a Freeview HD Decoder. This is primary research.
I'm interested in this information about the death of Arthur C Clarke, as a case in point about where blogs and freely contributed information fit in. I first saw it on Google News (which does no primary research whatsoever). That took me to C/Net, in which the author appeared to have first gleaned his info from Wikipedia. No doubt the Wikipedia info came from someone seeing it on the MSM somewhere, perhaps the BBC. Does that mean that nothing has been added to the original BBC info? All three places, C/Net, Wiki, and the BBC have slightly different things to say about him, and different ways of saying it. The BBC is your classic dry tribute. The C/Net article gives us a whole bunch of resources to look at, from YouTube and various forums around the world, and snippets therefrom. The Wiki gives you the encyclopedic view, for those who previously knew nothing at all about the man, or very little, it's a great place to start. -
BW - exactly. Either Ralston doesn't know about how the contemporary media works (in the manner you describe), or he doesn't care.
Whatever, from what people are saying it was a dirty, petty and personal attack on our gracious host for no obvious reason other than "he could".
As per yesterday's discussion, there is an unfortunate failure in some quarters to distinguish between professional and relatively polite criticism of someone's work and ideas, and being, well, a total bitch.
Although sometimes Darth's love of the cut-and-paste function does push even me over the edge ... ;-)
-
Sue said:
but aren't there (and this is my opinion) nutsos who think nz should be 100% self sustainable.
these are the ones who advocate calculating food miles and only buying produce that is XXkms away from your homeYour opinion roughly mirrors mine. Where do these people think we'll get clothing from? NZ has no cotton industry worth a damn, and the wrong climate to really grow the stuff anyway. So we'd be stuck making environmentally-friendly clothing out of hemp (what hemp?) and wool (so lots of us will be going commando!).
We don't grow much rice, either, and again our climate's not really right for it. So there goes that staple of vegan/vegetarian diets, to be replaced by...?Being self-sufficient is a nice idea, but reality is a big, hard brick wall. We literally cannot produce a lot of things that are important to modern life. If we want to all go back to riding horses, wearing clothing made from hemp and flax, eating fairly poorly (only seasonal, locally-grown fruit and vege, no rice), not taking part in the modern world (where do these people think computers and all other electronic devices are made?), and generally being an early-19th-century agrarian economy, then we're sorted. For those of us who like living in the modern era, though, NZ is not, will never be, and can never be self-sufficient.
-
Ralston is famous for his pompous rants.
He was late for a flight I think on Ansett and missed it.
He came back with "Do you know who I am!"
Ballsie checkin used the PA to ask "Does anyone know who this man is he can't remember?"
Yeah I wasn't there but it's a good story and it seems to fit.
These tanties are often among 1st term MPs and the like.
-
And what about the coffee?!?!?! Oh the humanity, we would have no coffee. Or chocolate! I don't think that "nutsos" quite encompasses the depths of their depravity!
-
When exactly was the last time Mr Ralston did primary research anyway? As far as I can tell the guys been doing commentary and analysis for years now...
-
Oh the humanity, we would have no coffee.
I grow coffee at home. People seem to forget that you can grow stuff under glass (or transparent plastic in my case). Admittedly I'm yet to get one cuppa out of it, so I'm chemically incapable of accepting self sufficiency at the moment.
-
When exactly was the last time Mr Ralston did primary research anyway
Well someone has to review Prego, don't they?
Okay so I can see why people might think that the blogosphere was catty and snide and didn't focus on the big issues....
-
Keith Locke is taking it a little too far for an MP in my opinion...
I'm not sure what Keith Locke said, but there's an important role for the radical opinion in these debates. Keith Locke is often pushing the minority opinion, and he's raising important issues.
Him being out there frames one side of the debate, and helps us all find the 'sensible middle ground' if there is one.
Can anyone name an example of a country against whom we took a strong stance and AND with whom we have had a significant trading relationship?
Our stance against it varied greatly, but we have very significant trading relationships with South Africa. It's not big in traditional trade as far as I know, but the sporting relationship with South Africa, is worth tens of millions of dollars each year. And the significance of rugby is probably viewed as a lot more than that on both sides, hence the debate that both countries have had).
-
Paul C said
that way people can make boxes that do freeview PVR, manage your torrents, feed the kids ipod video fix, store your CDs, etc etc
That's pretty much my planning, and I'm hoping that I can make mythTV work out for me!
-
"Ralston is famous for his pompous rants.
He was late for a flight I think on Ansett and missed it.
He came back with "Do you know who I am!"
Ballsie checkin used the PA to ask "Does anyone know who this man is he can't remember?"
Yeah I wasn't there but it's a good story and it seems to fit."
Lovely story - but I think it might be an urban myth that started in Oz.
-
Well someone has to review Prego, don't they?
They do. Although I think I'd personally trust someone who wasn't famous, because they might get the kind of service I'd be likely to get.
-
Our stance against it varied greatly, but we have very significant trading relationships with South Africa.
Heh. Those 'variations' are no longer in the history books, don't you know?
There was a clip on the news last night about NZ's history of protest, including the 1980 Olympics boycott. The boycott of the 1976 Olympics - and the country that prompted it - was not mentioned.
Yes, NZ (more accurately, some NZers) took a stance on international issues at various times. But this "we lead the world" stuff is a bit grating.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.