Posts by Rich of Observationz
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I think intensification is important to try and reduce sprawl (although given Aucklander’s love for sprawl, cars and traffic jams, I can’t see this working until fuel finally becomes unaffordable).
However, I don’t think it will reduce prices. Housing in Auckland has become a token independent of utility. As has happened in other property bubbles (the empty office buildings of 1970s London spring to mind) it is not necessary for there to be a demand for property to be put to use in order for prices to rise. The desirability of land (which is all property is - appreciating land and a depreciating structure) is based on the expectation of price rises and the ability to finance the purchase with debt. Whilst the expectation of price rises and the ability to finance persists, prices will continue to rise.
The only way to stop property inflation is introduce measures that remove the expectation of gain and the ability to finance.
-
The bomb threat story just shows the nice quiet place that NZ is. I recall from the 70s my school being evacuated at least once for a bomb hoax - it was right next to an airbase and the IRA were active. We didn't even make South Today.
-
Hard News: The Sharing Man, in reply to Nik Dirga,
The New Zealand Herald should NEVER lead with a Daily Mail story
Also, the Guardian should never syndicate a Fairfax/APN story.
-
I don't think clickbait is a long term thing.
One thing that will kill it (and Facebook) is AI. We're not very long away from a world where huge numbers of AI agents indistinguishable from real people invade social networks with a mission to disrupt. Once that happens, the value of online advertising will dive (is the traffic you're buying real, or are you paying $$$ to entertain web-bots).
-
OnPoint: Yeah nah, but what *do* we…, in reply to Paul Campbell,
Well, no, that's the point of monarchy. You get whatever the previous monarch's offspring grew up into. If the (British, I guess) government starts picking and choosing, then basically we move to having our head of state be whoever the British government of the day wants to nominate*.
* This of course has happened. Edward VIII got the shove, and earlier William of Orange was co-opted when Parliament wasn't having the pro-Catholic James II and VII. -
It shouldn’t be a UN matter. It’s reasonable for the UN to concern itself with preventing conflict at one end and uncontroversial stuff like standardising plugs at the other.
Why should the despots of Saudi Arabia or Zimbabwe have any say in what New Zealanders put in their bodies?
-
...what does Gallipoli say about us? That we’re a nation of brave red-blooded men who are willing to lay down our lives for God, king and country? Or that after being sent into a senseless meat-grinder by our imperial overlords, we said “never again!” and were henceforth masters of our own destiny?
I was talking with a museum professional from overseas who'd just seen the two Gallipoli exhibitions in Wellington, and her comment was that there was pretty much no communication of the context in which WW1 happened.
It's almost as if WW1 is to be seen as a natural disaster that befell the nation, after the fashion of the Christchurch earthquake. The "imperial overlords" narrative ignores the fact that NZ was at least quasi-independent - the imperial government held no powers (short of reverting to direct rule) to direct the NZ government to supply troops. Going to war was a conscious decision of government and populace.
Presenting WW1 as an exceptional event ignores the fact that all subsequent wars (except arguably WW2) have had a near identical context: military alliances, imagined or exaggerated threats, geopolitical calculations and the demonisation of the hostile states (from Germans bayoneting Belgian babies to Saddam's weapons of mass destruction).
-
OnPoint: Yeah nah, but what *do* we…, in reply to Rochelle Wilson,
He also spends his time surreptitiously intervening in UK politics using a range of concealed methods e.g. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/15/revealed-prince-charles-has-received-confidential-cabinet-papers-for-decades
(Everyone's entitled to a political opinion, but for ordinary mortals, their opinions need to be justified and debated to take effect - Charles uses his position to push his ideas whilst being above, for instance, going on "Today" to justify them. If his ideas are so popular, why doesn't he run for Parliament?).
Not to mention the weird attitudes of the Royals. Who else, in the modern world and outside BDSM situations, expects their children, close friends and colleagues to call them "sir".
Would you go to a hereditary dentist?
-
Legal Beagle: Voting in the Flag Referendum, in reply to linger,
(Just saw this)
So, secure as a very insecure thing. Photoshop the details and you can vote as who you like. Ok, so they can consistency check the numbers - 5 digits means that 1:100000 papers would validate (assuming they don't also check the addresses).
While that might be a high work factor for fax, it's a pretty low work factor for uploaded documents from a botnet or whatever.
Next thing, they'll use this where it would be a problem, like local council elections.
-
Polity: Leaving only footprints, in reply to izogi,
Something I've noticed in NZ is the very high standard of waymarking and path improvements - having markers every few metres, nice wooden steps, etc.
This obviously makes the route more accessible (and it's needed to control erosion in some places), but does it encourage people to go walking in jandals and t-shirts? If the routes were less well marked, you'd need to think about what you were up to and carry a map and compass, right?