Posts by Dismal Soyanz
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Dean Wallis,
“Is the GCSB, and/or other Government departments, monitoring New Zealand’s electronic data? ...”
I would add "or analysing metadata of New Zealanders" and "what is the source of that data?"
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Depending on its flexibility, it could even be a taut tort(e).
-
Hard News: Interview: Glenn Greenwald, in reply to Not The Messiah,
They are good at hiding their tracks. They have to be.
As was pointed out Monday night, there is a reason why these operations are termed covert.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to stephen clover,
May need a lawyer's input here but the liability would surely still rest with the Nats even if they bought the rights in good faith. I would have thought National would then have grounds for suing the company that "sold" them rights.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Alfie,
Je suis l'etat?
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to nzlemming,
Exquisite
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Jake Starrow,
agree with the American expert on Hoskings this morning whose name escapes me who said even if Snowdens claims are largely true, “I’m pretty certain that innocent people had or have nothing to worry about.”
Because people in positions of power never abuse that power?
*snort*
-
OnPoint: "Project SPEARGUN underway", in reply to Olly Buxton,
And just because we don’t like it, doesn’t mean the public at large don’t like it: judging by the (extraordinarily!) blase reaction of many New Zealanders, wholesale metadata scrubbing would probably not be politically controversial.
But equally just because the public tends to be blasé doesn’t mean they like it. As was said last night (can’t remember by who) that’s a choice that the public should make explicitly.
And given the need to introduce the 2013 Act, I’m not so sure it was within rights to do it.
-
Andrea Vance appears able to at least ask the question.
I wonder what Key's answer will be?
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Again, and with all due and sincere respect, I actually think it’s very important that our immigration processes are not subject to blatant political interference at the behest of foreign governments and multinational corporations.
Important, yes. But I believe immigration policy (and possible efforts to undermine it) is inherently more transparent and also arguably affects fewer people than mass surveillance by our secret squirrels. Dotcom was a fizzer but I quickly forget about him once it got underway.
[ETA: but anyway, this really shouldn't be viewed as some kind of pissing contest]