Posts by Rich of Observationz
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Can we get an adult up in here?, in reply to Russell Brown,
Indeed. But with Anonymous being amorphous and leaderless, I doubt they are easy to dialogue with. (they may, for all I know, have left a memory stick in a left-luggage locker on a European railway station*)
Anyways (and this is description, not advocacy):
- Anonymous are a non-violent, non-legal direct action group. More like the Sea Shepherd than Greenpeace. Getting them to change this model is like persuading Paul Watson to give up ramming Japanese whalers and switch to importuning passers-by for monthly direct debits.
- There is a model for anti-state action by small groups that has been fairly successful:
- Group perpetrates actions (of a damaging, annoying or lethal nature)
- State cracks down against group and its (perceived) supporters
- Support community becomes "radicalised" by this
- Group increases in size and abilities
- Repeat until state backs down and makes concessionsWorked for Haganah, the IRA, the ANC. Didn't work for the Angry Brigade, Baader-Meinhof - they failed to get momentum before getting caught.
The difficulty for Anonymous is the (apparent) lack of goals or structure, which, if it continues, would make the negotiation stage hard.
* Disclaimer: if this turns out to be the case, I know nothing. Blame John Le Carre.
-
But Wikileaks / Anonymous aren't the same entity. I'm assuming that Anonymous hacked the emails and credit card data and then passed the content to Wikileaks.
Who in turn passed the content to the SST, etc.
Are we saying that all these entities are accessories after the fact (legally / morally) to the hacking? Or that the downstream recipients (including the rest of us) should refuse to receive that "tainted" information.
-
Hard News: That page doesn't exist ..., in reply to Ian MacKay,
Wow. You must be what, 120? Glad to see such a wide age-range on here, congratulations, Sir!
-
If I'd been those hackers, I'd have logged into Westpac, selected the "New Zealand Government" account and requested a new password.
-
Hard News: CELEBRITY DRUG SHOCK NEWS! AGAIN., in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
That said LSD. Ecstasy didn't become widely used until the 80's.
-
For a bit of quiet and comfort at festivals, I recommend a camper.
My experience with big commercial festivals was Glade in the UK. No queue of any size to get in, but had separate parking and needed to haul everything about 1km in the pouring rain. Also, BYO (& licensed), but all your booze had to be onsite by midnight on the first day for some reason..
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Steve Barnes,
music business tycoons have been forced to travel economy.
a rock musician drove a Toyota Corolla into a paddling pool.
and a rapper was forced to subsist on meth, Lindauer and some skank he met in Four Kings -
Southerly: Deconstruction and Construction, in reply to Hilary Stace,
spa pool family
Is that a family that was conceived in a spa pool?
-
Southerly: Deconstruction and Construction, in reply to George Darroch,
You do unless you want your throat burnt off by 100% anhydrous ethanol. Unsafe.
(I don't drink alcohol. I drink beer, wine and some other beverages. Sure, they contain alcohol, but they also contain sugar. And nobody says they drink sugar).
-
the Speaker was not a Minister of the Crown
Correct. The speaker is elected by parliament.
The means of that, however, is a difference between the UK and NZ systems.
The UK Speaker is elected by an exhaustive secret ballot and expected to command some cross-party support (being secret, the MPs cannot be whipped or mustered). Speaker's are also elected asynchronously with Parliaments.
The NZ Speaker is elected by the house majority - I don't know if supporting the governing parties choice is part of confidence and supply, but we've never had a Speaker from the opposition ranks AFAIK.
I feel we should adopt the UK system, it's once of the few things they do right.