Posts by Matthew Poole
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Two roads lead to the city, in reply to Russell Brown,
There’s quite a loss of pedestrian rights
Silly Russell. Pedestrians don't have rights, they merely have allowances that interfere with the passage of the true rights-holders: automobiles.
-
And now we know how National dunnit:
Foreign Minister Murray McCully announced this morning Mr Jones was appointed as the Ambassador for Pacific Economic Development and would also serve as High Commissioner to several small island countries in the Pacific and Indian oceans.
As anticipated, he’s been appointed to a legitimate HOM role which gets around the legal restrictions on the Minister hiring people outside the SSC.
-
OnPoint: The Big Guns: Truecrypt and Tails, in reply to Martin Lindberg,
Good discussion on ArsTechnica
Also on Slashdot.
Seems that the industry consensus is coalescing around two theories:
1) The site and/or project got pwned.
2) The project got served with a National Security Letter and went all Lavabit on the feds rather than complying. -
OnPoint: Why does the top 10% paying…, in reply to BenWilson,
I think it’s worth hearing that that privilege just isn’t what it once was.
Being white, educated and heterosexual sure ain't getting us onto the housing ladder.
-
OnPoint: Why does the top 10% paying…, in reply to Sacha,
Cheers. We all survived :)
-
Hard News: Circumstance and coincidence, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
well after the first 15 mins
Not sure that that rule applied to still photography, though. It's not a rule in the general guidelines.
-
OnPoint: Why does the top 10% paying…, in reply to Moz,
graduating, having kids, and just accepting that they’ll be in debt, renting and moving flats every few years just like the poor people do (poor, again, meaning “lower half of the income scale… like they are). Hopefully only until they’re in their 40’s and have got their incomes up above the median, paid off student loans and saved a deposit, but who knows what will have happened by then.
We’re kind of in that position. Mid-30s with established careers that pay us reasonably well. Her SL is paid off, and mine will be in a year’s time. We have a one-year-old (so we now care about local schools, too) and want another sooner rather than later. Having to save a six-figure deposit whilst also raising a child and paying rent (and our rent is quite cheap, though the house is very average) is like being a paraplegic and being told that one must summit Mount Cook.
-
OnPoint: Why does the top 10% paying…, in reply to BenWilson,
instead of hanging on to the bottom-but-one rung as I do, to be actually left on the ground
It's worse still when one's household income is in that 9th decile but you still can only dream about owning a 3+1 in your current not-inner-suburbs-and-not-Grammer-zoned suburb of residence; one just up the street from us, on a full section that's half blocked for development by scheduled natives, went for $1.035m a couple of months back. That kind of thing is devastating.
-
Hard News: Circumstance and coincidence, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
Those rules for still photographs also look like the shot of Amanda Banks in the witness box yesterday would also be in breach of the rules.
How so? I cannot find the photo to look at it, but I see nothing in the rules prohibiting the photographing of witnesses provided the court is in open session.
-
Hard News: Circumstance and coincidence, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
The footage came from TVNZ. They share and that’s what they were given on the day.
Yes, and I'm sure that TVNZ's editorial staff forced TV3 to run footage that was outside the rules that the judge (who apparently said no footage from outside the first 15 minutes of the day can be used) and the courts generally have applied to the media coverage of this trial.
Saying "But, but, TVNZ supplied it" is a cop-out. TV3's editorial staff made the decision to use it, knowing the rules. They're in trouble for breaking the rules, and TVNZ are not despite being the source of the footage. Taking the footage is allowed provided the rules about how it's taken are followed. It's the use thereafter that's got TV3 in trouble.