Open mike 09/01/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 9th, 2025 - 60 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

60 comments on “Open mike 09/01/2025 ”

  1. Dennis Frank 1
    9 January 2025 at 7:39 am

    Some good Green news for a change…

    Ocean Cleanup's team consists of 120 engineers, researchers, scientists, computational modelers, and supporting roles, working daily to rid the world's oceans of plastic. Dutch inventor Boyan Slat founded The Ocean Cleanup at the age of 18 in his hometown of Delft, the Netherlands.

    This year, The Ocean Cleanup removed 11.5 million kilos of plastic from oceans and rivers. This total surpasses the amount collected in all previous years combined. https://theoceancleanup.com/updates/2024-a-record-breaking-year-for-the-ocean-cleanup/

    Their organisation uses the non-profit donation-driven model. It's a good example of the original `neither left nor right, but in front' ethos that originated the Green movement.

    To effectively solve the problem, we need to both halt the trash flow from rivers, and remove legacy plastics from the oceans at the same time. The Ocean Cleanup, is developing and scaling technologies to rid the world’s oceans of plastic. In April, we celebrated a significant milestone: 10 million kg of waste extracted. This achievement was the result of 6 years of river and ocean operations. Only 7 months later, last November, we reached an astounding 20 million kg of plastic removed.

    Reply
    • Hunter Thompson II 1.1
      9 January 2025 at 9:10 pm

      Glad that they're thinking of prevention, rather than just doing a cleanup job without changing the way people live.

      Now if only that approach could be applied to dairy waste in this country.

      I understand Boyan Slat dropped out of university (he was studying engineering) to do the ocean cleanup. He's really started something.

      Reply
  2. KJT 2
    9 January 2025 at 8:06 am

    Regulatory Standards bill – by Mike Friend

    David Seymour has been quietly plotting the passage of his real agenda ‘The regulatory Standards bill’. This pernicious piece of legislation if passed, as seems highly likely, will signal a final victory in his twenty year travail to foist this ‘Libertarian’ vision for the future of New Zealand. One that will see real power and wealth transfered for ever, from parliamentary democracy, into the hands and pockets of an increasingly smaller cabal of elite business and corporate interests.

    Reply
    • mikesh 2.1
      9 January 2025 at 8:53 am

      Could it not be repealed by a future regime?

      Reply
    • Obtrectator 2.2
      9 January 2025 at 9:58 am

      People are starting to wake up, when it's almost too late. There's a couple of letters on the subject in today's Post, one of them making the very point that I've been pushing – that the TPB is being used to distract attention from the real danger of the RSB (but doesn't add that the media are being compliant in the business).

      Reply
      • Incognito 2.2.1
        9 January 2025 at 10:24 am

        Do you have a link to those letters; I’m interested (obviously).

        Reply
        • Obtrectator 2.2.1.1
          9 January 2025 at 1:24 pm

          You might have to wait till tomorrow, if my attempts to find them are anything to go by. Entering this URL right now only brings you yesterday's offerings:

          https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360540343/post-letters-editor-january-9

          If you like I could transcribe the contents. Might violate some sort of copyright, but what the hell – Stuff/The Post make it too hard altogether to get at things (can't log in at all right now because of unspecified "difficulties").

          Reply
          • Incognito 2.2.1.1.1
            9 January 2025 at 1:47 pm

            No need to breach copyright and I can wait a day or so.

            Reply
            • Obtrectator 2.2.1.1.1.1
              10 January 2025 at 8:49 am

              Sorry, Incognito: something queer going on. I've just tried getting to what should be the on-line letters page for 9th January. I can reach the ones for the 8th and the 10th, but the one for the 9th is simply not there. Whether that's intentional or just an "unfortunate" glitch I wouldn't like to say. Meanwhile, I still have the hard-copy version ready for transcription if wanted.

              (I've sent The Post a feedback email about this, but I won't be holding my breath for any meaningful response.)

              Reply
              • Incognito …
                10 January 2025 at 8:59 am

                Ok, thanks for trying and letting me know, but please don’t sweat it, it’s mainly to satisfy my curiosity and not all that important really.

                Reply
    • Subliminal 2.3
      9 January 2025 at 10:09 am

      And from further into that piece:

      Many of us have falsely envisioned Luxon as a weak fool or poodle to Seymour's Machievellian machinations with either no stomach, or political savvy, to understand or grasp what is happening around him, when the reality is, he's been a player all along!!! Every bit as captured and complicit in this ‘libertarian coup d’etat’. Why else would Luxon not give one jot about the crass public image he entertains us with, from tiktok to Facebook and Instagram? He is laughing at us!

      Luxon is laughing at us but so also is Winston. All his rhetoric about NZ sovereignty is out the window with this piece of legislation. He also has given over to the urge to grovel when confronted by the money men.

      Reply
      • KJT 2.3.1
        9 January 2025 at 11:00 am

        I doubt if Luxon, a typical corporate boot licker promoted beyound his competence level, , has the capability, however his string pullers have almost infinite resources.

        Reply
    • Incognito 2.4
      9 January 2025 at 11:37 am

      Thank you!

      It is clever tactics by this Coalition Government, not just ACT, to try and sneak in the Regulatory Standards Bill in the shadows of the Treaty Principles Bill; even the cynical timing of the two submission processes would support this suspicion. The alleged ‘crashing’ of parliamentary website for submissions on the TPB is further grist on the mill of a wannabe conspiracist by creating another useful distraction from the real danger that is the RSB.

      The opposition has been conspicuously silent on the Regulatory Standards Bill. Do they lack the intellectual power or just will power to deal with this?

      I found only one meagre Blog post on the Labour website from just before Christmas: https://www.labour.org.nz/news-rule_czar_bill_a_right_wing_power_grab

      Nothing on the Green Party website.

      Zilch on Te Pāti Māori’s website.

      In contrast, the opposition has been spending much (too much?) oxygen on the Treaty Principles Bill, as expected (by the Coalition Government and its tacticians).

      QED

      Reply
      • adam 2.4.1
        10 January 2025 at 1:18 am

        Zilch on Te Pāti Māori’s website

        Te Pāti Māori have been emailing members directly over the Regulatory Standards Bill. I've been firing off the some of the posts and comments from the standard to Te Pāti Māori staffers I know.

        I'm Bloody worried about this Bill, and others are starting to see it's ability to wreak our country too.

        Reply
        • Incognito 2.4.1.1
          10 January 2025 at 9:06 am

          Good to hear that but that amounts to off-radar opposition against a dangerous Bill that flies under the radar that needs strong visible opposition and at least as much activism as the Treaty Principles Bill. I really hope that our politicians and their staff of advisors are not a bunch of wannabe amateurs who’ve been hamstrung by incompetence, disinterest, and summer apathy.

          Reply
  3. Sanctuary 3
    9 January 2025 at 8:06 am

    Guyon Espiner's reprise of the case against the shifty Casey Costello this morning on RNZ was damning, and he basically came as close as possible to accusing her of being corrupt without actually saying ("you might say that but I couldn't possibly comment" stuff from Guyon).

    But one little thing stuck out foe. Casey has refused to be interviewed by Espiner for over a year now. Espiner noted "she appears on other platforms". And I wondered why the MSM doesn't damned well call a spade a spade and fight back. Espiner could have said that she appears of far right misinformation platforms without affecting RNZs credibility. And why doesn't he just door stop Costello if she won't be interviewed? Sure, it is a last resort dirty trick to lie in wait with a film crew outside a miniasters flat – but also, a minister who refuses to be accountable deserves to be confronted and it would make for some juicy ratings….

    Reply
    • KJT 3.1
      9 January 2025 at 8:12 am

      That ACT is a totally bought and paid for project to steal NZ, shouldn't be news to anyone.

      Seymour and his bunch of twits, are "useful idiots", But his strings are operated by some very wealthy and devious actors, with access to the worlds top propaganda and "smoke and mirrors" merchants.

      Reply
    • Cricklewood 3.2
      9 January 2025 at 6:19 pm

      She's got the good ol' buf Jacinda didnt appear on Hosking's show defence

      Reply
  4. Dennis Frank 4
    9 January 2025 at 8:24 am

    An in-depth critique of establishment leftism:

    there are entrenched institutional liberal forces, not only in formal politics but in the universities, the press, the legal system, the nonprofit sector, and even the corporate world, that intone the threat Trumpism poses to democracy and the rule of law, yet work every day to defeat their own internal left-wing challengers: student protests, labor struggles, “woke excesses.” When they raid encampments (student or unhoused) or bust unions, they do Trump’s work for him, remaking Americans in authoritarian ways. What Trump represents can only be defeated if liberal institutionalists cease trying to quash the insurgent left in the name of protecting democracy, and instead look to it as an ally and a source of strength.

    There's a fault-line running between aspirational left idealists and moderate left politicos which I've observed more than half a century. The first bunch want a better world (like me). The second bunch want to join the establishment as power brokers.

    Gabriel Winant is an associate professor of history at the University of Chicago, a member of the executive council of AAUP/AFT Local 6741, and a member of the Dissent editorial board. https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/exit-right/

    The obstacle now presented by liberalism is especially frustrating because Trump’s coalition suffers from its own internal contradiction, isomorphic with that of the Democrats. J.D. Vance and Elon Musk would appear to want quite different things: Vance praises Lina Khan, for example, and seems to offer a vision of welfare chauvinism; Musk proposes to fire Khan, radically cut the state, and deliberately induce economic misery.

    Trudeau, the paradigmatic liberal exemplar, recently announced his intention to resign – after his approval rating clocked in at 16%, down from 65% a decade back when he became PM of Canada. The liberal option is a feeble simulation of progress.

    Reply
    • Obtrectator 4.1
      9 January 2025 at 10:06 am

      There's a fault-line running between aspirational left idealists and moderate left politicos which I've observed more than half a century. The first bunch want a better world (like me). The second bunch want to join the establishment as power brokers.

      Indeed. Both "bunches" take ultimate victory by the left for granted, and rather than make certain of it, they prefer to concentrate on ensuring that their "bunch" will be in the driver's seat afterwards.

      Worked out all right for the Bolsheviks after 1917; not such a happy result for the Republicans in Spain in the 1930s.

      Reply
  5. Dennis Frank 5
    9 January 2025 at 9:24 am

    Token democracy is all the establishment really wants…

    Consultant Louisa Taylor has about two decades' of experience in the tech field and said the errors she observed on the website could be caused by two things. "One is that there's high traffic on their website which has taken it out of action because they haven't prepared enough server capacity. That's the negligent part of it.The second part was that the same sort of error might come from an attack. If a nefarious actor sent a lot of traffic to the site they could actually take it down." Taylor said whatever the cause, Parliament's tech infrastructure clearly wasn't up to scratch and it could be down to the coalition's cost-cutting measures. "It was highly foreseeable that there would be a large number of submissions so the server needed to be sized. They just needed to get more machinery, more kit, ready."

    Another tech expert Sam Sehnert said it was "mind-boggling" Parliament's website wasn't up to handling high volumes of traffic and any investment made would be worthwhile. "It does take some time to set up but as you can see the value of doing that is well worth it and usually it's a result of cutting corners or trying to save a buck. If you do that sort of thing, you cut those corners, then outages like this can happen."

    It's not clear how many people were affected by techincal problems but RNZ has seen evidence they could date back to late November 2024. Back then, a submitter emailed their feedback to Parliament, flagging they had experienced problems with the official submissions portal. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/538503/parliament-website-issues-could-be-cost-cutting-tech-experts

    This govt assumed that apparent democracy would suffice. Users discovered the facade. Reminds us that simulation is a left/right shared political strategy. Authenticity takes time & money, so establishment operatives avoid it.

    Reply
    • tWig 5.1
      9 January 2025 at 12:56 pm

      The thought about the site being bombed by outside actors came to me last night. On a networked PC, I was able to easily resend my submission by going back to the start of the filled-in form. That seemed like a double verification set up to deter simple spamming.

      A transparent access system to our legislation process means that anyone, or any entity in the world, can hijack that process. I believe, from now on a formal verification process will have to take place for people to make submissions, and be identified, as citizens, permanent residents, or local and extra-national companies or organisations.

      This smacks of Big Brother, I know, but is the only way I can see that we can protect our democratic process.

      Reply
      • Dennis Frank 5.1.1
        9 January 2025 at 1:38 pm

        Good point, seemingly, but I'll leave it to any experts in the tech admin field. frown

        Given that democracy is our commons, the procedures that implement it ought to be robust. If they can't be transparent as well, folks will trend towards a lack of faith in the system. Therefore it is in the public interest that assurance is provided.

        I don't mean the usual bland assurance from any Nat/Lab PM that they still have confidence in the minister responsible. I mean a statement from the head of the dept that they believe their system is delivering what's required – or that they aim to rectify any operational problem by a specific date. Yes I know everyone expects National and Labour to keep hiding behind their 19th-century evasion of public service accountability but we can give them a pat on the head and encourage them to enter the 21st century now, telling them it ain't really that scary.

        Reply
  6. Kat 6
    9 January 2025 at 10:43 am

    This commentator thinks governing the country is just another version of Game of Thrones………Star Wars even…….definitely not Get Smart………

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360542182/verity-johnson-labour-dont-waste-crisis

    Reply
    • Dennis Frank 6.1
      9 January 2025 at 11:01 am

      Well, media imagery aside, she's trying to persuade Labour to be proactive. Labour knows its better to rely on realpolitik, from your link:

      Even if his approval rating was higher, even if he had that star power fairy dust, the fact is that he lost the last election because we wanted anyone but him and his Labour party. So, can they really get back with him as Boss? Nope. And, if we bear in mind that principle that opposition never wins elections – Governments always lose them….Actually, that’s good news for Labour. All they need to do is keep letting Luxon lose.

      Only works if Lux keeps on losing. So far he's not obviously a loser to mainstreamers, as indicated by his poll relativity with Hipkins. Most swing-voters are mainstreamers watching him sail a tight ship, no sign of mutiny. And Kieran's body language since the election signals to us he ain't aiming to be an alternative leader…

      Reply
    • Ad 6.2
      9 January 2025 at 12:08 pm

      Luxon compared to Ardern is an exceedingly lucky Prime Minister.

      He has dealt with zero crises, zero Ministerial fuckups, and has had plenty of luck esp with law and order.

      Ardern dealt with successive political and natural crises of increasing magnitude throughout her first term, each shifting her attention away from programme delivery.

      We should presume Luxon will continue to be lucky – in no small part because so many developed-economy governments have near-identical policy frameworks.

      If Chippie isn't up to it I hope the Opposition leadership vacuum gets filled fast – for all our sakes.

      Reply
    • tWig 6.3
      9 January 2025 at 12:47 pm

      Love Verity's burn: "It feels like we’re being led by a bunch of Teletubbies who learned governance from Youtube, a one half-day leadership workshop and a lifetime fan-girling Maggie Thatcher. And the only thing we agree on is that it feels like we don’t have a plan."

      Of course the plan is to open up NZ to internationals ready to strip our resources, by removing all protections in the way and by making that process hard to reverse for future governments.

      Reply
    • SPC 6.4
      9 January 2025 at 7:46 pm

      It's a tradition down under to pontificate with ones new lightsaber onto paper about the fate of the nation in the summertime.

      When the sand is beneath the feet, rather than snow, sometimes politicians get flighty and plan a coup – which gives the winner the chance to turn the Crown representative into their sock puppet reading out their speech to parliament.

      It is different this year. Leaders of the opposition do not get rolled when there is a loss of confidence in the governments ability to fill out a stocking like Rhys Darby (aka Terry Pole lifeguard).

      https://www.reddit.com/r/OurFlagMeansDeath/comments/ugsgik/i_need_more_of_rhys_darbys_legs_in_season_2/

      Instead we get the attempt to end the Treaty and indigenous people as an obstacle to a neo-liberal regulatory straight-jacket so international capital obtains sovereign power over future of the nation state. Why? Because the Atlas Network mocking jay (the mockingjay is a bird that was created through the unintended mating of mockingbirds and jabberjays, a bit like a donkey and a horse making a mule) brays TINA TINA.

      Argen TINA, Argoing back to Stralia.

      Reply
  7. Incognito 7
    9 January 2025 at 10:52 am

    Fact-checking Meta’s misinformation about fact-checking and censorship, i.e., Zuckerberg is full of shit.

    https://theconversation.com/meta-is-abandoning-fact-checking-this-doesnt-bode-well-for-the-fight-against-misinformation-246878

    FYI, here on TS fact-checking is mostly done by the community and they effectively call out commenters for spreading mis- and/or disinformation. When the commentariat is vigilant and informed the Mods have light work, as it should be.

    Reply
  8. Hunter Thompson II 8
    9 January 2025 at 12:28 pm

    Parliament's select committee has allowed more time (to 1pm on 14 Jan) for people to make submissions on the Treaty Principles Bill.

    Only problem is the Parliamentary website still lists the bill as having closed for submissions on 7 Jan. It does not appear on the list of bills awaiting public comment, so no electronic submissions can be made.

    I suppose I can chisel out my submission on a stone tablet and carry it to Wellington.

    Reply
    • SPC 8.1
      9 January 2025 at 3:48 pm

      A distraction from making submissions on the bill the C of C intends on making legislation.

      https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/the-dangerous-bill-flying-under-the-radar/

      The theme of the submission, legislation that establishes an order of rule over the nation on behalf of an ideology that is inimical to the values that others want for their democracy, is so obviously of a partisan template that it is unacceptable governance.

      By design it is not of any consensus, it as an imposed regime.

      The next administration should and would remove it, from day one.

      Reference to it as part of a revolutionary agenda to make investor capital sovereign, rather than the nation state citizen – as exemplified by the attempt to diminish the Treaty (trade agreements) and indigenous rights.

      Reply
  9. tWig 9
    9 January 2025 at 1:20 pm

    Trump considers declaring national economic emergency to impose tariffs.

    He's not in power yet, and I said I wouldn't comment until he was, but national emergencies are the excuses of any any anti-democratic state to remove citizen rights, and, in this case, to shit all over international trade treaties.

    I watched an interesting doco on Merkel, and one of her interviewers said “Trump is someone who doesn’t believe in international laws, but in ‘deals’.” This is Trump playing mind games to push the boundaries of existing trade treaties. Does he know what he is doing? Instead of co-operative partners in Mexico and Canada, he will engineer them to compete with the US in common markets.

    Given enough time, the rest of the world will route themselves around the US economic system. BRICS looks more enticing by the minute.

    Reply
    • Dennis Frank 9.1
      9 January 2025 at 1:46 pm

      Xi will be smiling!

      BRICS was formed by Brazil, Russia, India and China in 2009, and South Africa was added in 2010. Last year, the alliance expanded to embrace Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia has been invited to join but has not yet done so. Turkey, Azerbaijan and Malaysia have formally applied to become members, and a few others have expressed interest. The organisation was created as a counterweight to the Group of Seven, comprised of developed nations.

      Its name was derived from an economic term used in the early 2000s to describe rising countries expected to dominate the global economy by 2050. Before Indonesia’s membership, the bloc accounted for nearly 45% of the world’s population and 35% of global gross domestic product, measured using purchasing power parity.

      https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/01/07/indonesia-admitted-to-the-brics-bloc-of-developing-nations/

      Reply
      • Dennis Frank 9.1.1
        9 January 2025 at 1:54 pm

        The CFR portal provides the global public with an insight into its advisory framing for US politicians, so its take is worth considering…

        BRICS countries seek to build an alternative to what they see as the dominance of the Western viewpoint in major multilateral groupings, such as the World Bank, the Group of Seven (G7), and the UN Security Council. The group’s 2024 expansion comes with a range of geopolitical implications. It represents growing economic and demographic heft: the ten BRICS countries now comprise more than a quarter of the global economy and almost half of the world’s population.

        The NDB and the CRA were designed as an alternative to the so-called Bretton Woods arrangement, the mainstream global financial system founded by leading industrial countries in the aftermath of World War II. Many countries of the Global South believe those institutions, especially the World Bank and the IMF, are failing to meet the needs of poorer nations, especially in areas such as climate financing.

        The NDB is more than five times smaller than the World Bank, and experts doubt it could completely replace it. Others contend that its ambitions to redesign the global financial system have fallen short as it maintains many of the practices of its competitors. It has also faced criticism for vague commitments on environmental and social impact standards… A BRICS currency would require major political compromises, including a banking union, a fiscal union, and general macroeconomic convergence. The dollar, long the world’s principal reserve currency, is still used in more than 80 percent of global trade

        I hope Trump doing the loose cannon thing will catalyse more focus and enterprise in developing this alternative system.
        https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-brics-group-and-why-it-expanding

        Reply
        • tWig 9.1.1.1
          10 January 2025 at 1:00 pm

          Interesting discussion about dedollarisation, removal of the $US as the international default reserve currency, which is one of the aims of BRICS.

          "Bank of America economist Claudio Irigoyen recently discussed international fears surrounding U.S. debt levels and the impact that debt could have on the dollar in the long term. Irigoyen says the U.S. will likely not default on its massive debt load, but global economists are concerned the U.S. will instead choose to erode away the value of that debt via inflation.

          "If the U.S. moves to a point where the preferred policy is one of financial repression that allows to inflate the debt away, the market will start wondering about alternatives to the dollar as a store of value," Irigoyen said in a note."

          Reply
  10. SPC 10
    9 January 2025 at 2:40 pm

    Face time with the white guy keeping up with fashion trends.

    https://youtube.com/shorts/9EyOeXHBDJY?si=zF4a8R7RYr9d9EpW

    Reply
  11. Ad 11
    9 January 2025 at 3:03 pm

    Very cool to see the Danish King playing such an important part in the relationship of Greenland to Denmark both now and in the future. Very important now given Trump's stated desire to simply take Greenland over for the USA.

    Imagine if our Governor-General or indeed King Charles stepped in to the current Treaty of Waitangi contests now underway.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/greenland-leader-meet-danish-king-amid-trump-bid-take-over-territory-2025-01-08/

    Reply
    • SPC 11.1
      9 January 2025 at 3:50 pm

      France and Germany have noted that NATO faces a threat from both the west and the east from those that do not respect international borders.

      https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg9gvg3452o

      Reply
    • Dennis Frank 11.2
      9 January 2025 at 3:52 pm

      T may not invade – he could just do a fly-over.

      Greenland, the world's biggest island, has been part of Denmark for 600 years although its 57,000 people now govern their own domestic affairs.

      That puts it between Invercargill (14th) & Napier (13th) on our city population list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_New_Zealand

      France's foreign minister, Jean-Noel Barrot, said… he did not believe the U.S. would invade. Denmark's military capabilities there are limited to four inspection vessels, a Challenger surveillance plane and dog sled patrols.

      I wonder if he called for military intelligence advice to form that opinion. surprise

      Reply
      • Ad 11.2.1
        9 January 2025 at 4:16 pm

        Hopefully whoever Trump finally gets to run the State Department has an Under Secretary well aware of the existing substantial defence treaty the US already has with Denmark over Greenland, which dates back to WW2:

        https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp

        Reply
        • SPC 11.2.1.1
          9 January 2025 at 4:48 pm

          Maybe the Director of National Intelligence …could be asked at her confirmation hearings if she has knowledge of the winter Avalon … as per article 6

          or on the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;

          Reply
    • Obtrectator 11.3
      9 January 2025 at 5:51 pm

      Imagine if our Governor-General or indeed King Charles stepped in to the current Treaty of Waitangi contests now underway.

      He damn well should step into the RSB business. If proposing to surrender New Zealand's sovereignty in this shameful manner doesn't constitute conspiracy to commit treason, then I don't know what does.

      King John did something of the kind in 1215 to wriggle out of honouring his side of the Magna Carta – surrendering England to the Pope and receiving it back again as the latter's vassal. He was rightly reviled for it. (The arrangement didn't last, since both parties conveniently died the following year, but unfortunately faceless international "courts" don't disappear quite that readily.)

      Reply
  12. Incognito 12
    9 January 2025 at 6:01 pm

    Using Google Trends, interest in NZ in the Treaty Principles Bill peaked in mid-November 2024 and early-January 2025.

    The highest peak was at 11:00 PM on 7 Jan 2025.

    Reply
    • alwyn 12.1
      9 January 2025 at 6:32 pm

      Are you sure about the time? A peak at 11 pm seems to be very late in the day to happen if the interest was from people in New Zealand.

      Reply
        • alwyn 12.1.1.1
          9 January 2025 at 6:51 pm

          That is what it says but I find it very hard to believe. Even a night owl like me would be considering getting ready for bed.

          I've never used Google Trends, or even heard of it but that is very late in the day for something to peak.

          Reply
          • Incognito 12.1.1.1.1
            9 January 2025 at 7:07 pm

            Are you sure about that? You did comment in a thread that was about Google Trends not that long ago: https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-02-10-2023/#comment-1970639.

            Anyway, I refer to Kat’s reply to you yesterday: https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-07-01-2025/#comment-2020817.

            TTFN

            Reply
            • alwyn 12.1.1.1.1.1
              10 January 2025 at 10:06 am

              I come here only in the wish to bring some enlightenment to the ignorant. Some are able to be reasoned with. Many are not.

              Now just answer the question. Do you really think that the peak interest in this topic occurred at 11 pm? Really? Is there not the slightest doubt in your mind?

              Reply
              • SPC …
                10 January 2025 at 11:22 am

                IF only. You challenged my quote of the NATO articles. As if I had made an error of fact by doing so (11 above).

                Reply
                • alwyn …
                  10 January 2025 at 12:01 pm

                  I am well aware with where the tropic of Cancer is. It is a line of latitude about 23 degrees 37 minutes north of the equator. Greenland is, IIRC, above the 60 degree line of latitude. Why would they be considering places which may be more than 4,000 km south of Greenland and which, down near the Tropic of Cancer are surely not considered to be in the North Atlantic?

                  I wasn't accusing you of misquoting the item. I was wondering why somewhere so far south of Greenland should be of interest to the question of defense bases in Greenland.

                  Reply
                  • SPC …
                    10 January 2025 at 12:41 pm

                    To include all islands of NATO members … north of the Tropic of Cancer covered them all (including Puerto Rico and Greenland).

                    Reply
                    • alwyn …
                      10 January 2025 at 2:33 pm

                      OK, now I understand where I was getting confused. Thank you for the explanation

                      I thought you were talking about the agreement Ad linked to in 11.2.1, which was only talking about Greenland defense arrangements.

                      I didn't realise that you actually talking a much wider agreement that was the NATO agreement as a whole and as such it had concern for the much wider territorial area. I was looking at just a limited part of it of the area that concerned the linked to document.

                    • SPC …
                      10 January 2025 at 2:53 pm

                      I looked at the NATO articles and there was of course no specific mention of any extra territory island, just all those north of the tropic of cancer.

                      Thus the UK was on its own as per the Falklands.

              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                10 January 2025 at 2:00 pm

                Alwyn, is there the slightest possibility in your mind that online interest in ACT's Treaty Principles Bill in NZ did actually peak one hour before submissions on the bill were due to close [11:59 pm, 7 Jan], as per the evidence? Perhaaps consider the possibility that your ‘evidence’ is merely a personal reckon.

                The closing date for submissions has now been extended to 1.00 pm Tuesday, 14 January 2025.

                Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill
                Make a submission

                I come here only in the wish to bring some enlightenment to the ignorant.

                laugh Maybe your 'charity' should begin at home wink

                O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
                To see oursels as ithers see us!

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_a_Louse

                Consultation on another ACT pro-exploitation, anti-sovereignty bill, the Regulatory Standards Bill, closes 11:59 pm on Monday 13 Jan 2025.

                https://thestandard.org.nz/this-govt-legislation-will-change-our-country-like-never-before-learn-about-it-like-your-country-depends-on-it-because-it-does/

                Bill: The Regulatory Standards Bill

                Do it by: 13 January 2024.

                Why should I care? This bill is the twin to the Treaty Principles Bill. So much so that you can use your submission for that bill as the template to this one. It has been described as: The ‘dangerous’ bill flying under the radar and “arguably one of the most regressive and dangerous Bills ever considered”.

                Here’s how to do it:

                1. Open an email and put RSBconsultation@regulation.govt.nz in the address field. If you wish, send a copy of your submission to your MP and ask them to oppose the Bill.
                2. Begin with any variation of “I oppose the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill. It prioritises big business over people and the environment. Instead, we need regulations that protect New Zealand’s resources, our whānau, and future generations.”
                3. Keep it simple – I included statements like: “It gives far too much power to its architect Minister for Regulation David Seymour” and “This bill has been rejected three times already” and “Taxpayers are put at risk of having to pay the losses of a corporate's profits resulting from legislation even if that legislation protects workers or the environment or the public.” Get more info here.
                4. End your email with any variation of “Please abandon the Regulatory Standards Bill 2021 and its proposed updates. There is no need for this bill and it should not go to an expensive and unnecessary referendum.”
                5. Celebrate! You did your bit to stand up against greedy corporates and exploitative business, protect future generations, our precious whenua, and our values as a country.
                Reply
                • alwyn …
                  10 January 2025 at 2:49 pm

                  "Alwyn, is there the slightest possibility … "

                  The possibility did occur to me but I thought it most unlikely that there were that many people who would still up to be putting in submissions at that time. There aren't a lot of comments being posted on blogs at that hour are there?

                  It would of course be a likely possibility if they were created by bots in an automated attack, as suggested in the RNZ story.

                  https://www.nzherald.co.nz/kahu/record-treaty-submissions-could-be-result-of-nefarious-activity-tech-expert/JQGQVDGHKRDIXPHHJKJSI4TALA/

                  I hadn't thought of that possibility when I made the original comment. That one was simply based on the idea that people may leave things late but they don't usually leave things until 11 o'clock at night and I wondered whether there was something wrong with the way the Google numbers were being put in the wrong time bracket.

                  Reply
                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    10 January 2025 at 5:08 pm

                    The possibility did occur to me but I thought it most unlikely that there were that many people who would still up to be putting in submissions at that time.

                    The graph @12 shows the trend in the (relative) number of times the search term "Treaty Principles Bill" was used in NZ, not the trend in the number of submissions on the bill – a record 150,000 on 7 January.

                    Is conflating "Interest over time" with submissions on the bill an example of your "wish to bring some enlightenment to the ignorant"?
                    wink

                    It would of course be a likely possibility if they were created by bots in an automated attack, as suggested in the RNZ story.

                    That RNZ article suggests that an automated attack was unlikely.

                    But another expert Sam Sehnert has since checked the now re-opened Treaty Principles Bill submission form and said the submission forms appeared to be protected from bots.
                    …
                    RNZ has asked the Clerk of the House, David Wilson’s office if Parliament’s website has protections against DDoS attacks.

                    Wilson has already said the website issues were caused by an unprecedented volume of submissions coming in at the same time and wasn't aware they were the result of anything untoward.

                    "To my knowledge, there is no evidence that issues were due to nefarious activity," he said.

                    The country's cyber watchdog, the National Cyber Security Centre, which is part of the GCSB, said it has no information to believe this was a cyber security incident.

                    Reply

Leave a Comment