the purpose of the campaign is to scare young men, and the fewer of them there are on the road on drugs, the better
Chicks on speed and 40 year olds on acid are fine to drive however. They won't crash....
..power-tripping people who knew nothing about NZOS, New Zealand or the article topics
Yeah, I've had that over pages that cover things that are way more relevant in an NZ context than a lot of Wikipedia is in a US context.
personally, I think the only way to deal with them is to throw shit back and wear them down. Maybe we should all make a concerted effort to reinstate the NZOS links?
Who would be good as a Labour leader?
Quite possibly there is nobody at all suitable who has a term's experience in parliament and isn't on track for retirement. Maybe they could get Cullen back in on a list swap as a caretaker leader.
All security is a tradeoff between cost, amount lost and convenience. What our law needs to do, as in other countries is to place the responsibility to make that tradeoff with the banks, who have the ability to make that call. It shouldn't be possible for individuals to lose out as a result of systematic failure.
Meanwhile, Wikileaks has a shitload of pager messages from September 12th 2001. WTF!
That's why I'm a fan of the political compass, which seeks to give a two-dimensional representation of political opinions
I'm not, because policy is joined up and interlinked.
If like ACT, you pursue policies that build social injustice, the fallout from that is an underclass of socially excluded, delinquent people. The "fix" for that is increased authoritarianism - ban the drugs the underclass have problems with, lock people up for wearing patches, sterilise the poor. Of course, there are better and nicer fixes involving removing root causes, but they're excluded by propertarian ideology.
The other half to that is the need to build "democratic" support behind policies that benefit a small, wealthy group. That typically involves giving the middle class the idea that they are above a small underclass group that can be scapegoated and attacked. Hence the existence of people like David Garrett in ACT.
In some states and some times (California keeps changing the law) you may be asked for a picture ID - they expect a driver's license, some people have never seen a passport and may be confused.
I just show my Kiwi license and if they quibble, berate them for not knowing the names of all the US states (NewZealand is between Idaho and North Dakota, don't you know that, sir).
For "standard" EFTPOS gear as used in stores, the system is fairly robust. The pinpad has to be sealed and tamperproof/evident, the EFTPOS unit musn't pass card numbers to the shop computers (which stops them cookieing card numbers as an alternative to loyalty cards, for instance).
But it's possible that isn't the case on car park machines. I'm thinking that like most such units, these are credit card only and don't check PINs, which makes them one step lower in security requirements than a machine with PIN checking. If they are PIN-based true EFTPOS machines, then they have the potential to collect card details and PINs, which is a lot more serious as a miscreant could easily withdraw thousands through cash machines before the card is blocked.
I had to use Paypal the other day. Now I have a USD card with an NZ address, which their retarded system can't cope with. I didn't want to pay exchange fees, so I tried entering my NZ address - wouldn't work.
Then I entered a random US address (in New York with the correct 10001 zip code). That worked! So clearly Paypal isn't doing billing address matching.
You know, it would be possible to modify the t-shirts sold for a well known charity with some words like "I've got [redacted] on my tits"?
Would one get busted for weariing such a garment in public?
Questions: do Aussie and US immigration get informed of convictions, regardless of name suppression?
Or are their embassies able to pass on accurate rumour to the home authorities (presumably having diplomatic immunity).
And would the fact that someone was refused admission to an overseas state because of a suppressed conviction itself be suppressed?