Posts by jon_knox
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
that Leonard Cohen relgion comment reminds me...
there was an interesting interview with John Gray replayed on Kim Hill's RNZ show over the weekend labelled "on the Death of utopia".
I think that stuff is a lot more comprehensible in an audio format.
-
that Leonard Cohen relgion comment reminds me...
there was an interesting interview with John Gray replayed on Kim Hill's RNZ show over the weekend labelled "on the Death of utopia".
I think that stuff is a lot more comprehensible in an audio format.
-
The thing I hate the most about extreme cold is women being all rugged up.
hmmm...Ben I hope you get a lot of painful spam from people selling saunas.
-
doh...my (very polite) response went missing. It's not intended to be abrasive.
So looking at:
I'm not a monopoly
And then looking at:
Firstly my stuff is very difficult to get
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that you, Islander, Simon and other creatives don't hold a monopoly on the rights to your outputs, at least initially?
So for the works that you've retained sole control of, where might I legitimately acquire your stuff from, other than you?
-
Yup, I hear ya.
If the media, or anyone else for that matter wants to hype it up and there's not personal animosity, why not make the most out that free publicity by raising some cash for a very good cause and proving that you're better than they suggest in the form a civilised & amusing debate.
Ride that wave....just be aware that there are strings....actually those strings may well exist already for Russell.
Then there’s the whole Dawkins-like notion of diluting your legitimacy/making them seem legitimate by sharing a stage with the illegitimate/evil/stupid.
I suspect that the idea of animosity won’t go away by itself. It will get trotted out during those slow weeks, or when someone has an axe to grind.
-
Gawd, that's tragic. Really tragic.
Quite a spectacular failure to understand from the Radio Live people concerned...are they really that stupid?
Bearing in mind that it's probably likely to played up by the media every time you and Bill so much as sneeze in opposite directions , I wonder if opposing sides of a charity debate might be a better considerably better use of skillsets and a better example. It might also put an end to the idea echoing around dd infinitum.
-
Yeah, there are few ways to look at it. It's good to try a few on.
Rob, to what degree do you feel the commercial value for rights you hold has been impacted by people providing other content legitimately for free?...along the lines of Islander's post about the elephant.
Did you manage to have a look at the e-book Keir provided a link to a couple of weeks ago? I managed to get about 4 chapters in.
In terms of understanding the justifications used/claimed by the proponents for the scrapping of monopolies supported by IP, I think it wouldn't hurt you....too much
-
I wonder given the number of times that car drivers trot out that classic line "but I just didn't see them" regarding the cyclist or motorcyclist they've hit, if the car driver was asked "If you had an extra look, do you think you would have seen them?", would many of the indicate that the extra look would have made a difference?
That classic line is used all too frequently in my somewhat limited, skewed and entirely anecdotal recollection. If drivers were using appropriate levels of care, they simply would see that person is riding a bicycle, or motorcycle rather than having longitudinally mounted a recently arrived tardis and make a decision not to enter the collision path.
NZ drivers all too frequently don't expect to see bikes, thus don't look or occasionally take the risk that the rather more vulnerable person on 2 wheels doesn't have the guts to deliberately allow themselves to crash into a larger vehicle that has pulled in front of them.
If a driver is found to have reasonably caused an accident, be that inadvertently or otherwise, it's a pretty good indicator that they are actually (not allegedly) unsafe to be sharing the road as a driver.
-
Trying to save a single animal “we now know is a very shallow view”. You have to save environments - complex webs of plants, insects, birds, mammals
Copyright enforcement is a single animal.
-
Chuck, If you meant that because homosexual sex between men is more risky because of a higher rate of HIV infection among men who participate in homosexual sex in NZ, then you should have indicated that.
I'm assuming that the stats in NZ back this up, because I couldn't actually find them when I had a look.
High risk sex surely is pentrative sex where one participant has HIV and the other(s) do not.
Are there stats collected regarded knowing if the source of infection was infected, when transmission occurred, or is there simply the assumption that people don't know they're having sex with someone carrying HIV, or wouldn't fess up to being so stupid even if they were "chasing the dragon"?