Posts by nzlemming
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Interview: Glenn Greenwald, in reply to phplad,
Andrea Vanve did something in the herald this morning which has been heavily attacked by a huge swath of aggressive comments. scary.
I think you mean this? (Vance is a Fairfax reporter, not Herald)
Yeah, really ugly in the comments section.
-
Yes,
-
OnPoint: "Project SPEARGUN underway", in reply to Steve Parks,
This seems to be the gotcha Fisher was waiting on, but nothing much has been made of it. What am I missing?
Does seem a bit odd. It also throws the Southern Cross Cable guy (Briscoe?) under that bus as well.
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Sacha,
Isn’t XKeyscore basically the search interface, not the collection one? I believe that’s what Mr Spart is saying. Being able to filter a search doesn’t prove where the content was collected.
You can't filter what's not there. When Snowden explained it last night, it was pretty clear that he, as an analyst, expected to get into all of his target's email etc using XKEYSCORE.
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to PJ,
Seems like the company suing the nats is a patent troll. I’m torn! On the one hand… Hilarious! On the other hand… Patent trolls are the worst. Either way, national are going to lose that battle.
That's not patent trolling. That's copyright enforcement by the publisher. Patent trolling is acquiring patents and then suing people you claim are infringing those patents in order to generate a revenue stream. Big difference.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Alfie,
Is he taking the piss?
Nope, it's quite a serious consideration. Greenwald referred to it last night as unheard of. Stephen Price said much the same yesterday.
-
If anyone’s interested, I just uploaded a copy of the Slater/Blomfield judgement to the Privacy thread. izogi had asked there about whether Dirty Politics had been part of the considerations. It wasn’t:
[3] Recently, some time after the hearing, Mr Blomfield has sought to produce further evidence, arising from the publication of the book Dirty Politics by Nicky Hager, and various email exchanges.
[4] I have declined to grant leave for the introduction of this further evidence on the basis that it is hearsay or privileged. -
CIV2013-404-5218 12-09-2014 JUDG.PDF
Here's the document
-
Hard News: Privacy and the Public Interest, in reply to izogi,
Was the High Court able to consider Cameron Slater’s leaked mailbox in this decision?
Just reading the judgement:
[3] Recently, some time after the hearing, Mr Blomfield has sought to produce further evidence, arising from the publication of the book Dirty Politics by Nicky Hager, and various email exchanges.
[4] I have declined to grant leave for the introduction of this further evidence on the basis that it is hearsay or privileged.So, no, even though Blomfield tried.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Alfie,
Steven Joyce explains all in the Herald.
National's campaign chairman Steven Joyce said National had done everything by the book and he believed the legal action was aimed at getting money and free publicity.
Joyce seriously believes that Eminem would *gain* publicity from National??? There's "punching above your weight" and then there's "how ridiculous can one get?"
