Posts by ScottY
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Given the dysfunctional personalities within the ACT caucus, it continues to amaze me they’ve survived this long as a unit.
Hide is now so utterly compromised as a leader I can’t see him winning Epsom next year.
These nutjobs may be doing incalculable damage to our country, but at least they’re putting on a show for us. The 82 page document is an entertaining read, especially the Risks and Options section.
-
Also, the date is now Friday, Sept 10. We had to move it back a week to avoid a very eventful week the one before. We'll be seeing you, then?
Well that's some good news. I'd been booked to go on a work retreat thing on the 3rd, and was gutted to learn of the date clash.
I'm not sure if anyone has suggested it yet, but can I suggest we all have our AQ scores on our nametags? It might help to break the ice: "Ah, so you're a social butterfly who loves to chatter? I'm severely emotionally damaged and hate people. How do you do?"
-
I scored a 20 on that test, which is about where I thought I’d find myself.
My worst fear is being required to make polite small-talk about nothing to people I don’t really know. In many cases I would rather jump out a window than ask someone I don’t know what they think the weather is doing or whether they think the Warriors will make the finals.
I’m sure that much of this must be down to upbringing. I have always thought the reason I am horrified of chit-chat is because in my family if you ever asked how someone was, you’d get a half-hour recital of woes that would make Angela’s Ashes seem like a romantic comedy. I guess that’s what you get growing up around depressed people! So it was always better not to enquire, for the sake of one’s sanity.
I don’t find alcohol to be very useful as a social lubricant, because if consumed in excess I can become a bore. My more or less permanent state of sleep deprivation (thanks to 2 small kids) means even a small amount of booze can be dangerous.
All this is why I find the internet a truly wonderful place. Except when I make a complete arse of myself and it’s too late to delete my comment.
-
Derek Cheng attempts a balanced report.
Interesting to read how similar laws in other countries have had no noticeable effect on unemployment. I must have missed that bit in Key's speech.
Evidence is for sissies
And socialists.
How does this improve productivity, exactly? Appears pretty counter-productive to me.
That's because you're looking at this completely the wrong way. Our PM has special powers you Muggles cannot begin to understand.
-
Are search warrants still required in New Zealand?
This Misuse of Drugs Act gives police wide powers of search when the presence of drugs is susoected. So in this case, probably not.
-
Craig, Sacha responded better than I could on most of the points you raised.
I think Pete Bethune's a bit of a dick, actually.
Bethune may well be, but then he's entitled to be just a wee bit pissed off at the way he's been treated.
A Japanese whaling ship deliberately rammed his ship and almost killed him and his crew (some people would call that attempted murder), and our Government has not only done nothing to protest that action, it appears to have accepted the Japanese version of events.
I'm sure consular staff aided Bethune as best they could in Japan, as you would expect them to. But at a high level nothing has been done to question the circumstances that led to Bethune boarding the Japanese ship.
It's interesting to speculate on what would have occurred if Bethune had been an Australian citizen.
-
More McCully. In light of Bethune's media statement, Scott Yorke lampoons our govt lapdogs of the Japanese.
Ah... yes...well, I'm a bit ashamed of that post. It was a cheap shot comparing McCully and Key to dogs.
Sorry dogs.
-
I think we had a debate on one of those previous copyright threads about whether copyright exists in a digital reproduction of an out of copyright work.
Without regurgutating too much of what was previously discussed, the law is unclear in this area, but it'd be a brave company or organisation that sued for copyright infringement on the strength of a digital reproduction where the original was out of copyright.
As for the link thing, I can't see how an organisation could ever enforce a condition like that. It might be possible, if all elements of a contract between the parties concerned could be established (consideration? offer and acceptance? etc etc). And I imagine the organisation would have a challenge establishing any kind of loss when all the person is doing is linking to publicly available material.
-
I don't find Viacom very appealing at all.
They have some damn fine shows tho'. Daily Show and Colbert are but two.
-
Today is a very interesting day. One other thing to note is that Google has won the copyright case Viacom brought against it.
Okay, it's a big deal for I.P. geeks like me.
That sure is a huge victory for Google, although Viacom is appealing. So it's really only Round One to Google.