Open mike 31/01/2025

60 comments on “Open mike 31/01/2025 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Tony Veitch 1

   31 January 2025 at 6:16 am

   Like many of my generation (boomers) I have a somewhat tenuous relationship with computers and big tech. I use my laptop quite a bit, but mainly just for word processing and connection to the internet and can see, in my case, a few limited uses for AI.

   But I didn't quite grasp how profoundly earth-shattering DeepSeek will potentially be to the whole economy of the world.

   This appears to be in the realm of 'invention of the wheel' type transformation!

   Richard Murphy explains – 8.50 mins long.
   • SPC 1.1

     31 January 2025 at 11:10 am

     It is true that the USA economy is developing via IP/wealth aggregation based on global monopoly, rather than competition (and using tariffs to limit foreign competition).

     And AI is the next big thing.

     Thus the modern Cold War is about tech IP and information security, as much as military power.
2. Dennis Frank 2

   31 January 2025 at 7:41 am

   History was made last night:

   Parliament voted in favour of the Taranaki Maunga Collective Redress Bill this evening, marking the 100th settlement between the Crown and Māori and the end of nine years of negotiations.

   Parliament voted unanimously to pass a law that formally grants legal personhood to Taranaki maunga (mountain). The bill also acknowledged the historical grievances inflicted on Taranaki’s eight iwi by the Crown.

   https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/taranaki-maunga-becomes-legal-person-govt-acknowledges-immeasurable-harm-inflicted-on-iwi/UJTF25LJX5FNTA3CZ23NGK4C7Q/

   Googles AI overview:

   New Zealand has granted legal personality to several natural features, including:

   • Te Urewera A mountainous region that became the first natural feature in New Zealand to be granted legal personality in 2014

   • Whanganui River the first river in the world to be granted legal personality in 2017
   • Taranaki Maunga New Zealand's second-highest mountain was granted legal personality in 2023

   Green analogue of corporate personhood, and we now have a triad. It means any of these regions can take the state to court if state agents cause harm to the ecosystem, such as spreading poison within such regions. However that will only happen if Greenies decide to organise natural rights into political activity and use the legal personhood concept as a tool.
   • Wynston 2.1

     31 January 2025 at 12:51 pm

     Google A1 not that accurate there. Taranaki Maunga is the second highest in North Island and 65th in the country.

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mountains_of_New_Zealand_by_height
     • Dennis Frank 2.1.1

       31 January 2025 at 1:26 pm

       Could be that Wikipedia is also inaccurate: their list includes ridges & sub-peaks on the same mountain. Sort of like pretending that the different limbs of an animal are actually different animals. Whereas most people point to a mountain and say `there it is', a mountaineer may define a mountain in terms of various climbs to the top that loom in the adjacent possible of decision-making…
3. Res Publica 3

   31 January 2025 at 9:06 am

   As a data and AI engineer, my two cents on DeepSeek is that it will only be revolutionary under three conditions.

   Their claims about cost, speed, and hardware hold up.

   DeepSeek’s reported efficiency in training its model is impressive—but unverified. There’s also plausible evidence they may have used stolen OpenAI data. And while they claim to have trained on H800 chips, they’ve also hinted at stockpiling 10,000+ export-controlled H100s, which raises more questions than answers.

   They can match global standards on data security and privacy.

   The relationship between DeepSeek and the CCP is murky. Given AI is a strategic priority for China, it's highly likely they have state backing—if not direct funding. Can they operate with the same transparency and privacy safeguards required of non-Chinese firms?

   There's also the question of them model's reluctance to discuss issues that reflect badly on Xi Jiping or the CCP.

   Their business model is actually sustainable.

   It’s one thing to make a splash, another to build a long-term business. DeepSeek still has to prove it can compete without opaque funding or regulatory arbitrage.

   Which is more likely?

   1. A quantum leap in AI efficiency, seemingly from nowhere?
   2. Or an aggressive market disruption from a new player in a sketchy jurisdiction with questionable practices that just happens to want to be a major competitor as a matter of serious national policy?

   The jury's still out.

   At the moment the AI market is overheated and overhyped – basically a bunch of tech and crypto bros high on huffing their own supply. Nobody with an understanding of the technology and underlying problems of building and scaling AI is taking this particularly seriously.

   For now, best we can do is treat it like the cheaper, knockoff ChatGPT it likely is.
   • Bearded Git 3.1

     31 January 2025 at 9:17 am

     So what if Deepseek uses stolen data and stockpiled chips?

     So what if it has links to the Chinese Communist Party?

     Nobody really cares about this. What Deepseek has done, brilliantly, is show that the AI propaganda based-boom is built on sand and will collapse. Watch those tech share prices plummet.

     It's wonderful timing with Trump just elected.
     • Res Publica 3.1.1

       31 January 2025 at 9:31 am

       You're absolutely right! AI is spectacularly overhyped. And like all bubbles, it will eventually burst.

       But what happens next matters.

       The crash won’t kill AI—it’ll just reshape the market, concentrating power in fewer hands. Normally, that process weeds out unsustainable products and leaves a few dominant players standing.

       If one of those players happens to be a CCP-backed firm built on stolen IP, deception, and state protection from scrutiny, that’s a serious problem.

       The AI hype bubble may collapse, but what comes after could be even worse.
       • Muttonbird 3.1.1.1

         31 January 2025 at 10:07 am

         Western consumers have happily lapped up products built in China using stolen IP for decades. Why will this be any different?
         • Res Publica 3.1.1.1.1

           31 January 2025 at 10:30 am

           Good point Muttonbird: western consumers have overlooked stolen IP in Chinese-made products for decades.

           But the technology and strategic context matters.

           Selling cheap knockoff gadgets is one thing. Reshaping the global AI landscape to gain control over a foundational technology is another.

           That’s why this can't be ignored like consumer tech has been.

           At the end of the day this isn’t just about China building a better AI product (assuming the claims DeepSeek have made are verified).

           It’s about flooding the market with models trained on stolen data, backed by state support, and shielded from regulatory scrutiny. That’s not competition; it’s economic and technological sabotage.

           Which leaves us here in Aotearoa vulnerable: to data theft, infrastructure compromises, and security threats.

           That’s not to say we can blindly trust the US, or that late-stage capitalism will magically protect us from its worst excesses and be good stewards of our personal data.

           The irony of OpenAI's complaints about data theft are not lost on me.

           But at least with a US or EU company, we have a fighting chance of regulation and accountability.
           • Descendant Of Smith 3.1.1.1.1.1

             31 January 2025 at 11:24 am

             Censorship is also an issue. Deepseek has it built in e.g. ask about 1989 Tiananmen Square and you'll get that is beyond my scope.

             That alone makes it untrustworthy. I do find AI useful for getting sources but even then find the sources minimal overall eg really hard to get AI to use Hansard for instance as part of its research base. Not sure whether it just uses most popular.

             Is there any evidence that the privatisation of public assets saved the promised 30% to 40%. List sources.

             The claim that privatization of public assets saves 30% to 40% is often cited in debates about privatization, but the actual evidence is mixed and context-dependent. While some studies and reports suggest that privatization can lead to cost savings and efficiency improvements, others highlight that the outcomes vary widely depending on the sector, country, and implementation. Below is an overview of the evidence and some key sources:

             Evidence Supporting Cost Savings

             1. World Bank Studies:
                • The World Bank has published reports suggesting that privatization can lead to significant efficiency gains and cost savings, particularly in sectors like telecommunications, energy, and transportation.
                • Source: World Development Report 1994: Infrastructure for Development (World Bank, 1994).
             2. Megginson and Netter (2001):
                • A widely cited academic study reviewed privatization efforts globally and found that privatized firms often experienced improved performance, including cost reductions and increased efficiency.
                • Source: Megginson, W. L., & Netter, J. M. (2001). "From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization." Journal of Economic Literature, 39(2), 321-389.
             3. UK Privatization Experience:
                • The privatization of British Telecom (BT) and British Gas in the UK during the 1980s and 1990s is often cited as a success story, with reports of improved efficiency and service quality.
                • Source: Privatization and Economic Performance (Oxford University Press, 1994).

             Evidence Questioning the 30%-40% Claim

             1. Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU):
                • PSIRU has published reports arguing that the promised savings from privatization are often overstated. They highlight cases where privatization led to higher costs for consumers and reduced service quality.
                • Source: The Privatization Industry in Europe (PSIRU, 2014).
             2. OECD Studies:
                • The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has noted that while privatization can lead to efficiency gains, the outcomes depend heavily on the regulatory framework and market conditions. In some cases, privatization has not delivered the expected savings.
                • Source: Privatisation in the 21st Century: Recent Experiences of OECD Countries (OECD, 2009).
             3. Latin American Privatization:
                • Studies of privatization in Latin America have shown mixed results. While some sectors (e.g., telecommunications) saw improvements, others (e.g., water and electricity) experienced price increases and service disruptions.
                • Source: Privatization in Latin America: Myths and Reality (Stanford University Press, 2005).
             4. Water Privatization Failures:
                • In cases like Cochabamba, Bolivia, and Jakarta, Indonesia, water privatization led to significant price hikes and public backlash, undermining claims of cost savings.
                • Source: Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World’s Water (Maude Barlow and Tony Clarke, 2002).

             Key Takeaways

             • Sector-Specific Outcomes: Savings are more likely in competitive sectors (e.g., telecommunications) than in natural monopolies (e.g., water, electricity).
             • Regulation Matters: Effective regulation is critical to ensure that privatization benefits the public and does not lead to exploitation.
             • Context Matters: The success of privatization depends on the country's economic, political, and institutional context.
             • Mixed Evidence: While some cases show significant savings, others show no improvement or even negative outcomes.

             Conclusion

             The claim that privatization consistently saves 30% to 40% is not universally supported by evidence. While there are success stories, there are also notable failures. The outcomes depend on how privatization is implemented, the sector in question, and the regulatory environment. For a balanced view, it is important to examine case studies and empirical research rather than relying on generalized claims.
             • Res Publica …

               31 January 2025 at 11:32 am

               Funnily enough, the subject of my master's research was a takedown of neoliberal public management models, privatization, and the growth of managerialism in the public sector.

               As for AI, it's an incredibly powerful tool. But we are only just scratching the surface of the ethical, legal, and data management implications.

               We're basically toddlers running around with a chainsaw.
               • Descendant Of Smith …

                 31 January 2025 at 11:53 am

                 privatization

                 Yeah one meta-analysis identified only rubbish disposal as making any where near decent gains.

                 growth of managerialism in the public sector.

                 Yeah that's a fuck up of monumental proportions – made worse now by incompetent Ministers if my obrservations are correct eg ferries.

                 AI is great funnily enough for non-techy people who could revolutionise small community groups in terms of productivity and research. An instant draft presentation can save hours of thinking and work.

                 Write me a short presentation on how potato chips are made. Include references and individual steps n the process.

                 Presentation: How Potato Chips Are Made

                 Slide 1: Title Slide

                 How Potato Chips Are Made

                 • A step-by-step guide to the production of everyone's favorite snack.
                 • References included for further reading.

                 Slide 2: Introduction

                 • Potato chips are one of the most popular snacks worldwide.
                 • The process involves selecting the right potatoes, slicing, frying, seasoning, and packaging.
                 • Let’s explore how this crispy treat is made!

                 Slide 3: Step 1 – Potato Selection

                 • Key Point: Only high-quality potatoes are used.
                 • Varieties like Russet or Maris Piper are preferred for their low sugar and high starch content.
                 • Potatoes are inspected for size, shape, and defects.
                 • Reference: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Potato Processing Technology.

                 Slide 4: Step 2 – Washing and Peeling

                 • Key Point: Potatoes are cleaned to remove dirt and peeled.
                 • They are washed in water and passed through abrasive peelers.
                 • Some brands leave the skin on for a more rustic chip.
                 • Reference: USDA, Guidelines for Potato Processing.

                 Slide 5: Step 3 – Slicing

                 • Key Point: Potatoes are sliced into thin, even pieces.
                 • Industrial slicers cut potatoes into slices about 1-2 mm thick.
                 • Uniform thickness ensures even cooking.
                 • Reference: Fellows, P. J. (2009). Food Processing Technology: Principles and Practice.

                 Slide 6: Step 4 – Rinsing and Blanching

                 • Key Point: Slices are rinsed to remove excess starch.
                 • Blanching in hot water (70-90°C) softens the slices and removes sugars to prevent over-browning.
                 • This step also improves the final texture and color.
                 • Reference: Singh, R. P., & Heldman, D. R. (2014). Introduction to Food Engineering.

                 Slide 7: Step 5 – Frying

                 • Key Point: Slices are fried in oil at 175-190°C for 2-3 minutes.
                 • Continuous fryers are used in industrial production.
                 • The chips are monitored to achieve the perfect golden color and crispiness.
                 • Reference: Food Engineering Magazine, The Science of Frying.

                 Slide 8: Step 6 – Seasoning

                 • Key Point: Chips are flavored with seasonings.
                 • Salt is the most common seasoning, but other flavors (e.g., barbecue, sour cream) are added using tumblers or spray systems.
                 • Seasonings adhere to the chips while they are still warm.
                 • Reference: Potter, N. N., & Hotchkiss, J. H. (1995). Food Science.

                 Slide 9: Step 7 – Packaging

                 • Key Point: Chips are packaged to maintain freshness.
                 • Nitrogen gas is used to flush out oxygen in the bags, preventing staleness and extending shelf life.
                 • Bags are sealed and labeled for distribution.
                 • Reference: Robertson, G. L. (2012). Food Packaging: Principles and Practice.

                 Slide 10: Conclusion

                 • Potato chips are made through a carefully controlled process:
                   1. Potato selection
                   2. Washing and peeling
                   3. Slicing
                   4. Rinsing and blanching
                   5. Frying
                   6. Seasoning
                   7. Packaging
                 • Each step ensures the chips are crispy, flavorful, and ready to enjoy!

                 Slide 11: References

                 1. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Potato Processing Technology.
                 2. USDA. Guidelines for Potato Processing.
                 3. Fellows, P. J. (2009). Food Processing Technology: Principles and Practice.
                 4. Singh, R. P., & Heldman, D. R. (2014). Introduction to Food Engineering.
                 5. Food Engineering Magazine. The Science of Frying.
                 6. Potter, N. N., & Hotchkiss, J. H. (1995). Food Science.
                 7. Robertson, G. L. (2012). Food Packaging: Principles and Practice.
                 • Dennis Frank …

                   31 January 2025 at 12:26 pm

                   You have specified a heptad at slide 10:

                   1. Potato selection
                   2. Washing and peeling
                   3. Slicing
                   4. Rinsing and blanching
                   5. Frying
                   6. Seasoning
                   7. Packaging

                   According to the theory of magical thinking, any such set of 7 elements operating as a plan of action will have a magical effect when enacted.

                   So that's why the dietary influence of potato chips the past half-century has inflated the bodies of consumers so much: the method works like magic – it is powerfully transformative in a physical sense.
                   • Mac1 …

                     31 January 2025 at 12:40 pm

                     It's the salt- cravings for salt. There is, I believe, a cellar/pantry inventory hard-wired into the brain that, reminding us that potato crisps, cheese crackers and beer are available for immediate consumption, short circuits any nascent delayed gratification urgings…..
                   • Descendant Of Smith …

                     31 January 2025 at 3:01 pm

                     Same reason they cottoned on that salt on chips sold more drinks at fairgrounds – as does the salt in soft drinks sells more soft drinks.

                     Create a nice viscous circle of need and satisfaction.
             • tWig …

               31 January 2025 at 3:16 pm

               Most of the pro-privatisation reports are from 20 years ago. You have to look at the long game for true cost-benefit. Don't trust ai to do your homework.
               • Descendant Of Smith …

                 31 January 2025 at 3:37 pm

                 No I wasn't. Was just seeing what AI would produce. It seeems fair too even handed for what I've read – most were an abject failure as far as the promised savings, many have had to be bailed out and the cynical and exploitative Theresa Gattung policy of multiple (confusing) pricing models is an example of profit maximisation at the cost of the consumer – as is wanky borrowing to pay dividends to shareholders – capital theft at it's finest.

                 One thing Labour could do is say each is only allowed one price for electricity. Then they can compete for consumers.
       • SPC 3.1.1.2

         31 January 2025 at 11:12 am

         What if (Chinese) Open Source allows Europe and India to compete in AI and not be an American market colony?
         • Res Publica 3.1.1.2.1

           31 January 2025 at 11:23 am

           Ok sure, open-source AI could certainly help Europe and India build competitive AI ecosystems.

           But independence depends on more than just access to code. Infrastructure, talent retention, regulatory frameworks, and investment all play a role.

           The real question is whether these regions can build sustainable AI ecosystems that aren’t overly dependent on any single power. Whether that's the US or China.

           That said, real competition requires a level playing field that drives actual innovation. Not just wholesale IP theft, protectionism, or a facade propped up by propaganda.

           An open market is valuable, but only if it leads to genuine progress rather than reinforcing artificial advantages.
   • Jenny 3.2

     31 January 2025 at 10:29 am

     Which is more likely?

     1. A quantum leap in AI efficiency, seemingly from nowhere?
     2. Or an aggressive market disruption from a new player in a sketchy jurisdiction with questionable practices that just happens to want to e a major competitor as a matter of serious national policy?

     I would put money on 2.
     • Res Publica 3.2.1

       31 January 2025 at 10:32 am

       My judgement is also that scenario 2) is much more likely.

       Tech is now just another front in great power competition. Which, as an IT professional, scares the living daylights out of me.
       • SPC 3.2.1.1

         31 January 2025 at 10:53 am

         Tech, science and democracy.

         https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Sn8EkqOxpvg
       • Jenny 3.2.1.2

         2 February 2025 at 7:41 am

         AI is a tool, like every tool it can be turned into a weapon.

         An AI arms race is developing between the US and China.

         Eventually, AIs will be pitted against each other.
4. Reality 4

   31 January 2025 at 10:03 am

   Shane Jones on Morning Report this morning confirmed that he is a self-important, slithering supercilious snake. Many more adjectives could be used but not going to waste any more of my time.
5. Muttonbird 5

   31 January 2025 at 10:14 am

   Trump claims diversity hiring is the cause of the Potomac River crash, but reports are saying air traffic control was not staffed properly at the time, so perhaps budget cuts are the primary cause.

   I'm no aviation safety expert but it looked to me like the military helicopter should have been there, crossing the descent path of the airliner.

   We know the airline pilot was white, so no fault there according to Trump, but since he is quick to lay the blame on DEI, it's very important we know the colour skin of the helicopter pilots, the air traffic controller, and their rostering manager. Only way to know for sure!

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360565297/small-plane-crashes-river-washington-dc
   • Tony Veitch 5.1

     31 January 2025 at 11:19 am

     military helicopter should have been there, crossing the descent path of the airliner.

     Surely you mean 'shouldn't.'
     • Scud 5.1.1

       31 January 2025 at 12:49 pm

       There is a Helicopter transit corridor down the Potomac River, which the Blackhawk was using next to Ronald Reagan Airport.

       It appears that Blackhawk Pilot may lost Situation Awareness and it also appears that he/ she didn't have it's transponder/ anti collision transponder on either?

       Then we also have the understaffed ATC at Ronald Reagan Airport, who are double hatting atm which could also be a factor as well?
   • KJT 5.2

     31 January 2025 at 10:02 pm

     Isn't Trump a DEI hire.

     Mentally deficient Narcissist?
6. PsyclingLeft.Always 6

   31 January 2025 at 10:19 am

   RFK, the New Amerika Health cooker in chief…..a clear and present danger, not only to USA Health.

   Samoa's director general of health says Robert F Kennedy Junior's comments in the US Senate about the 2019 measles outbreak in Samoa are a "complete lie".

   Aiono Professor Dr Alec Ekeroma warns…

   "To have an anti-vaxxer at the top of the United States health system is not good for anyone."

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/540478/rfk-jr-s-comments-on-deadly-measles-outbreak-a-complete-lie-samoa-s-director-general-of-health
   • I Feel Love 6.1

     31 January 2025 at 11:05 am

     He's an anti-vaxxer who had his own children vaxxed. The guy is a mega grifter & very weird.
     • PsyclingLeft.Always 6.1.1

       31 January 2025 at 11:08 am

       As a Cooker in chief….perfect for that role. As US Health supremo ? Bad news….
   • Incognito 6.2

     31 January 2025 at 12:15 pm

     ‘cooker in chief’, surely, that should be ‘head chef’?
     • PsyclingLeft.Always 6.2.1

       31 January 2025 at 12:31 pm

       Well, he could be seen as a variety of "head" (chef, dick, case etc), the problem is his elevation way beyond any competence….to a Public danger .

       He has promoted disproven claims, including that childhood vaccines cause autism.

       He has also been accused of fuelling vaccine scepticism in Samoa ahead of a deadly measles outbreak that killed 83 people there in 2019.

       His own cousin Caroline Kennedy…

       said his views were "dangerous enough" to disqualify him from the role but his personal qualities posed an "even greater concern".

       A toxic soup…

       https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/540281/caroline-kennedy-calls-robert-f-kennedy-jr-a-predator-ahead-of-confirmation-hearing
7. tWig 7

   31 January 2025 at 10:51 am

   The Tony Blair Institute asked people in 6 western democracies their views on government. Voters were 'turning away from centre-left and centre-right parties not for ideological reasons, but because confidence in their competence and integrity have plummeted. “Whatever voters are looking for, they increasingly…doubt that it can be delivered by the parties they…traditionally elected to office"…'economic pessimism was linked to declining faith in democracy.'

   Perception is everything, as propagandaists know. TBI said 'the findings served as a “clarion call to mainstream parties: disrupt or be disrupted”…to build and maintain support, mainstream parties needed to “change through disruption – of social media feeds, of the old left-right spectrum and by embracing new technology, especially AI. At the same time, credible answers must be provided for legitimate grievances', eg immigration in the UK and Germany.

   We know we have reached a political inflexion point world-wide. I think is due almost entirely to the transition in the last decade from trad media to a million viewpoints on the same event. And controlling or manipulating social media with its anonimity, via shills or bots or influencers, is the key to controlling voters. Whaleoil times 5 million.

   To gain attention, but not via a constant spew of trumpian crap is the challenge for the left. More, much more radical, but in a principled direction, is the message from this research.
   • Dennis Frank 7.1

     31 January 2025 at 11:13 am

     Interesting, but the times seem more indeterminate than indicative. Thinking ahead in a situation of social turbulence is challenging for anyone but we did evolve on that basis so we do have the capacity as a shared resource.

     Yes, a political inflection due to media diversity is likely but more as ebbing of faith in the system than clever proactivity and solutions-based thinking. In the short term, anyway, while folks ponder the lack of an apparent alternative to the status quo.

     Supporters of the opposition claim that they will provide a positive alternative – but neither them nor the opposing parties are fronting with sufficient evidence to impress the increasingly-disillusioned masses. You point to a principled radical stance as primary take for the left. It seems a necessity, yet it ain't happening.
     • tWig 7.1.1

       31 January 2025 at 3:20 pm

       Chicken 'n egg argument there, Dennis. I believe my egg trumps your chicken.
   • Ad 7.2

     31 January 2025 at 11:23 am

     Worth a post all by itself. Will look at over weekend.
8. PsyclingLeft.Always 8

   31 January 2025 at 11:06 am

   The Tony Blair Institute ? Really? Nil credence should be given to that…

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Blair_Institute_for_Global_Change#Criticism
   • tWig 8.1

     31 January 2025 at 3:37 pm

     I gave the source, because I understand Blair is a capitalist apologist, and his think tank possibly suspect. But, I think the survey itself is very informative, and that TBI make a valid challenge to the left to change things by taking big steps.

     There is a heap of 'Labour and the Greens are out of touch/don't progress fast enough' at TS. This work at least tries to identify why and suggest a 'how'.

     I am thinking how marxism at the turn of the 1900s had a simple message of social justice from capilalist exploitation. It was spread by grass-roots worker groups. This led down the track to Labour's Welfare state, Rooseveldt's New Deal, etc.

     Earlier on, we forget that, in the same way that the US defanged the robber barons, via taxation, we in NZ had the breakup of giant land estates. These are all 'big' ideas. How to get back on a democratic track via a big social message, well-proliferated?
9. dv 9

   31 January 2025 at 11:32 am

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/540473/potomac-crash-live-more-than-60-people-dead-as-jet-helicopter-collide-over-washington

   The president replied: "It may have, I don't know. Incompetence might have played a role…

   "But we want the most competent people. We don't care what race they are, we want the most competent people, especially in those positions.

   "And you're talking about extremely complex things, and if they don't have a great brain, a great power of the brain, they're not going to be very good at what they do, and bad things will happen."

   Yes Mr Trump, especially for the president !!!!
   • SPC 9.1

     31 January 2025 at 11:36 am

     One person doing two jobs in air control in a busy period.
     • dv 9.1.1

       31 January 2025 at 11:39 am

       AND

       Just Bizarre

       Just days before the crash, President Donald Trump enacted a sweeping shake-up of the federal agencies responsible for aviation oversight, removing the administrator of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), David Pekoske, and eliminating all the members of a key aviation security advisory group. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which regulates airlines and aircraft manufacturers and manages the nation’s airspace, was also without permanent leadership at the time of the crash, as its top official, Michael Whitaker, stepped down ahead of the new administration’s transition after clashing with Trump ally Elon Musk.'

       https://apple.news/ArCq_C-eRRceLBxLv5zoO9Q
       • Muttonbird 9.1.1.1

         31 January 2025 at 11:48 am

         “In the 10 days since Trump’s inauguration, his administration froze the hiring of additional air traffic controllers, gutted key air safety protections, and fired FAA leadership to the benefit of Musk’s business interests,” the progressive policy advocacy group MoveOn wrote in a statement.

         Hiring freezes jeopardising safety. Where have we heard this before?
     • SPC 9.1.2

       31 January 2025 at 12:19 pm

       The two controller jobs – one managing helicopters in the vicinity and the other landing planes.

       https://bsky.app/profile/mattdpearce.com/post/3lgyaywczy22r
   • SPC 9.2

     31 January 2025 at 12:02 pm

     Incompetence in executive order governance.

     https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-freeze-hiring-air-traffic-controllers-washington-crash-2023348
10. Dennis Frank 10

    31 January 2025 at 12:18 pm

    Dr James Kierstead is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Languages and Cultures at Te Herenga Waka -Victoria University of Wellington. He has a commentary on Dame Anne Salmond's latest essay here: https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/01/31/hayeks-real-bastards/

    The picture painted in Salmond’s article is one in which Act is seeking to strip ordinary New Zealanders of their human rights, and in which my Initiative colleagues play a supporting role as purveyors of an ideology which is fundamentally illiberal, anti-democratic, and even racist.

    In an effort “to work out what’s going on”, Salmond looked at three books – Globalists, Crack-up Capitalism and Hayek’s Bastards – by the Canadian intellectual historian Quinn Slobodian… In Salmond’s telling, “a direct genealogy can be traced from the Austrian Chamber of Commerce in the 1920s to the Mont Pelerin Society in 1947, the Atlas Foundation” and the New Zealand Initiative… It’s very strange, then, that Salmond associates us with the likes of Wilhelm Röpke, whose pro-apartheid racism she documents (without mentioning the anti-apartheid work of other members of the Mont Pelerin Society), as well as Curtis Yarvin (a.k.a. ‘Mencius Moldbug’), who has argued for the restoration of monarchical rule in Western nations.

    Her associations cited here aren't strange to me. Leftists normally conflate rightists and vice versa. It has long been the primary way for both groups to become delusional.

    true dialogue, though, requires both sides to actually listen to what the other is saying, and not put words in other people’s mouths.

    Paying attention is extremely difficult when one's state of mental normalcy is driven by bias of any kind. It become more likely when others aren't viewed as enemies, allowing the possibility of mutual respect. Principled advocacy from the right is a refreshing change to normalcy, worthy of encouragement.
11. Muttonbird 11

    31 January 2025 at 12:24 pm

    A key objective certainly of ACT and very probably of National is to undermine universities, and university academics. Particular targets are academics who study humanities and human sciences, and especially those who speak for the underprivileged. The reason is clear, it's the because these academics are a form of regulation against the unbridled power and profit seeking of the privileged, and the flawed version of democracy which they hide behind.

    Academics like Annabel Ahuriri-Driscoll:

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/540491/treaty-principles-bill-s-promise-of-equal-rights-ignores-blind-spots-of-our-democracy
12. PsyclingLeft.Always 12

    31 January 2025 at 12:48 pm

    "No Frills" Simeon semi-delivers…..

    Watch: Dunedin to get scaled-back hospital, Health Minister Simeon Brown confirms

    Wait…what?

    Brown said the government listened to the Dunedin community and was committed to building the hospital they needed..

    And, unsurprisingly (amongst others..)

    A PET scanner, as originally proposed by National during the election, was nowhere to be seen in the announcement.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/540498/watch-dunedin-to-get-scaled-back-hospital-health-minister-simeon-brown-confirms

    NAct1: bringing you the Hospitals and Health System you need. Apparently.
    • I Feel Love 12.1

      31 January 2025 at 1:53 pm

      Yep, in 6 years we will have a new hospital with fewer beds than our current one. I see our mayor is hailing this as a success, fukkin sell-out.
13. Dennis Frank 13

    31 January 2025 at 1:48 pm

    National copies Labour: https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/29-01-2025/just-some-ideas-to-help-nz-win-the-growthy-yessy-arms-race

    Where Obama had hopey-changey, New Zealand and Britain are battling to own the growthy-yessy mantra. Here’s how we win.

    Luxon is plainly up for the task. The first week back in the seat last week was festooned with invocations of growth and saying yes, culminating in a state of the nation speech that arrived like a giant word cloud pregnant with growth and its sidekick yes. (“Turbocharging New Zealand’s economic growth is the key to brighter days ahead.” “The bottom line is we need a lot less no and a lot more yes.”)

    It's all about power-sloganeering. Sadly, Lux failed to credit his Labour source:

    “Kickstarting economic growth is this government’s number one mission. (blah blah blah) We must start saying yes.”

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-vows-to-go-further-and-faster-to-kickstart-economic-growth

    RR joined the Labour Party at the age of 16, then got a masters degree from the London School of Economics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Reeves

    Toby predicts ministers will be known as maxisters. Son of Think Big looms…

    Gore becomes Goer, Lower Hutt becomes Upper Hutt and Upper Hutt becomes Upperer Hutt. And we will abandon the No 8 Wire mentality in favour of a Yes 8 Wire mentality. At the end of the day, we’re talking about being relentlessly positive for a brighter future. Let’s do this.
    • Mike the Lefty 13.1

      31 January 2025 at 3:42 pm

      To put it all in a few words: This is a government that specializes in spin.
14. Jenny 14

    31 January 2025 at 2:29 pm

    MP landlords have cause to celebrate today

    https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2025/01/31/its-now-no-cause-eviction-open-season-on-renters-as-national-reopen-country-up-to-digital-nomad-hyper-tourism/
15. Muttonbird 15

    31 January 2025 at 3:53 pm

    Hmm…

    

    I think it’s the seemingly duplicated pink hair nets which make this picture what it is.

    And the two struggling not to laugh in the background.
    • Jenny 15.1

      31 January 2025 at 4:04 pm

      If there's something weird
      And it don't look good
      Who you gonna call?
    • Matiri 15.2

      31 January 2025 at 5:27 pm

      Why on earth does Luxon need a hair net???
    • KJT 15.3

      1 February 2025 at 7:44 pm

      Bing Videos

      Biggs Dickus?
    • Anne 15.4

      1 February 2025 at 8:03 pm

      Is that Willis?
16. Jenny 16

    31 January 2025 at 4:48 pm

    Electronic Intifada details the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza by Israeli forces since the start of the ceasefire.

    How is it, these killings are not considered to be a breach of the ceasefire agreement?
    And Hamas getting a name wrong on a list, or too enthusiastic crowds at a hostage handover are considered breaches of the ceasefire?

    Because these are just the normal background of racist murders that Israel has visited on Palestinians since 1948
17. Populuxe 17

    31 January 2025 at 6:29 pm

    So I guess we can finally address the worst-kept secret in NZ….

    Tim Jago… Now that we can legally call a nonce a nonce.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS