Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Fluency, ease of manner - and Norton Antivirus

173 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 7 Newer→ Last

  • Hilary Stace,

    It really annoys me all the discussion about winners and losers in the debate. How superficial. Surely it is about the ethics and morality of the issue itself.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3214 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Thomas Beagle commented usefully under Audrey Young's column:

    The clauses around the definition of communications and metadata have not changed since the 2003 GCSB Act. The Kitteridge Report revealed that the GCSB's interpretation of this Act was that they could collect metadata without a warrant, she recommended that the law be changed to clarify this. This has not been done in the new bill. John Key's assertions are not worth much when compared to the actual documented behaviour of the GCSB.

    More to the point, the GCSB won't have to. The ability for the GCSB to capture data for the purposes of cybersecurity (purpose 8A in the bill) is so wide that just a couple of access authorisations (signed by the PM and CSW) could give them access to everyone's mobile and internet traffic.

    You might say "Well, the PM says that they won't be doing this" to which I respond with "If they don't want to do that, let's remove the ability to do it from the bill."

    I note that section 14 against spying on New Zealanders is still there - but only applies to information captured for intelligence work (purpose 8B), not cybersecurity (8A).

    I do think that most of those declaring there's nothing to worry about don't actually grasp how wide the powers available to the GCSB are under this bill, and broad its brief to use them is.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22830 posts Report Reply

  • Don Christie,

    What surprised me is that people were surprised a NZ prime minister could front up and defend their policies. Has JK set such a low expectation? Anyone who watches his weekly press conf will see just how he is regularly on the receiving end of hard and robust interrogation, especially when Al "the cat" Thompson gets going :-) As far as I can tell he usually copes very well.

    But I also believe that concern about mass surveillence by global governments has moved out of tech circles and well into the public consiousness. Thank you Assange, Manning, Snowden, Swartz and the jornos that supported them. We used to live in horror at the stories that came out of Eastern Europe and the USSR about state spying on its citizenship and the abuses this leads to (we know you are guilty of "x", so we'll lock you up without the need for an expensive trial). That is still a deap part of our conciousness.

    One robust denial from one prime minister is not going to change public concern about the GCSB and TICS bills.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1645 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe,

    And the winner on the night was Mark Textor.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2898 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Russell Brown,

    I do think that most of those declaring there’s nothing to worry about don’t actually grasp how wide the powers available to the GCSB are under this bill, and broad its brief to use them is.

    Or if they do, then they really are illiberal enough to believe that 1984 is a training manual.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5429 posts Report Reply

  • AndrewH,

    If I were Campbell i'd be assembling some of the knuckleheads who know nothing on the show tonight to take down key's talking points one by one.

    For me, the idiotic Norton av point would go with "we all have a choice to uninstall norton".

    Wellington • Since Nov 2008 • 33 posts Report Reply

  • Don Christie,

    in other news, I see that the GCSB themselves are not being allowed to appear before the TICS select committee. That's hardly front footing anything.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1645 posts Report Reply

  • Glenn Pearce, in reply to Hilary Stace,

    It really annoys me all the discussion about winners and losers in the debate

    It wasn't a debate, it was an interview. JC should have been there to ask questions to elicit facts, basic journalistic skill.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 504 posts Report Reply

  • Trevor Nicholls,

    Basically (perhaps this is too simple, if so, someone can eludicate):

    a. Everything the GCSB is doing is legal.
    b. This bill is not changing any protections citizens have under the law.
    c. We need to pass this bill under urgency.

    Seems to me you can accept any two of the above, but not all three together.

    Wellington, NZ • Since Nov 2006 • 324 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    But the problem is, this is NOT a high school debate.

    It is NOT some game where it doesn't matter if you "win" a debate by successfully defending an amoral position.

    Sure all the media types are going "wow wasn't Key amazing", all the politicos are saying how could National lose with this man leading.

    But that totally misses the point that John Key was defending an amoral position.

    Sure he did better in the "debate" than John Campbell. But this is real life. These are real events occurring. It is your real privacy that is being sold off here.

    This isn't a high school where you can grade John Key highly for being a really good debater. This is John Key talking over someone who is raising concerns about a law that will allow future Prime Ministers to use the GCSB to spy on New Zealanders with no oversight.

    Far from being impressed, we should be disgusted by him.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4458 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    And we should be ashamed that we can be taken in by a slick media 'performance' when the issue is so fundamentally about power and control by an elite - surveillance not vigilance.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3214 posts Report Reply

  • Scott Gamble, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    Far from being impressed, we should be disgusted by him.

    Indeed. I couldn't even watch the whole interview.

    Australia • Since Apr 2011 • 13 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    I expect to get shat on for saying this, but it looks like someone sat Key down with a stack of videos of Clark “on the front foot” (as she was fond of putting it) and told him to take notes. Wouldn’t be at all surprised if Campbell was having Corngate flashbacks today.

    But that totally misses the point that John Key was defending an amoral position.

    No, I don’t think anyone is “missing” that point – presuming, of course, you actually find his position any such thing. Whether you agree with him or not, it’s hard to argue that he did a much better job of defending (or at least asserting) his position than Campbell did of refuting or challenging it.

    And it’s not a game at all when Campbell was a geyser of Churchillian eloquence compared to the sodding leader of the Parliamentary opposition. It’s all very nice for Labour to preach to the choir that already thinks Key is Rosemary’s Baby, and the peasants are eventually going to come to their senses, but that’s not good enough. It’s not only being a ratshit Opposition, but a basic failure of the Opposition’s fundamental duty to act as a check and balance on the Government of the day and the Executive.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Graham Dunster,

    One good thing is that it will be even more unbelievable when Key goes back to the forgetful doofus routine

    Yes; It has been difficult to watch such contrived fluffing of his lines recently without wondering why the PM had become such easy meat all of a sudden.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2898 posts Report Reply

  • Gary Young, in reply to Scott Gamble,

    Just barely managed to watch it to the end myself, though my TV came perilously close to getting my foot through it.

    It's not often we get to witness the smug, aggressive arrogance lying behind the bland, smile and wave persona.

    Glenfield • Since Jun 2013 • 39 posts Report Reply

  • Martin Connelly,

    I thought John Key did a good job last night . And whats the point about complaining that he might have had some training - are you trying to claim John Campbell has had none? His main advantage, though, - IMHO - was that Key exposed the fact that Campbelllive and gone a long way past finding out and checking, and have been playing a political game of their own. Will be interesting to see how/if John Campbell can recover?

    New Zealand • Since Jun 2012 • 28 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Martin Connelly,

    Thank you repeating that talking point. I hadn't heard it before, and am always keen to hear what lines NACTNSA are running for us.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • DaveC,

    At one point he even proposed to a submitter that if people didn't want to be snooped on, they could just use encryption (not under his government's own Telecommunications Intercept Bill, they couldn't).

    Yes they can, just use any means of encryption that the network provider doesn't have keys for, as explicitly described in the Bill. Techliberty's only objection to it is based on an ambiguity in the wording, but it's irrelevant to encryption that is provided by the client rather than the ISP.

    Since Nov 2007 • 22 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22830 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh,

    On a purely playing the game level: Yes, Key was good. I liked Campbells' "So sue us! Lay a complaint with the BSA!" moment, but so far as I could tell that was the only punch he landed. And why did he ask Key to comment on operational matters?

    But having said that, I agree with Hillary.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    It’s not only being a ratshit Opposition, but a basic failure of the Opposition’s fundamental duty to act as a check and balance on the Government of the day and the Executive.

    Absolutely agree.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Russell Brown,

    A not-quite-complete-yet transcript of the interview.

    It really was a bunfight in the OK chorale...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7943 posts Report Reply

  • Andre Alessi,

    Telecommunications users can encrypt content easily enough, but not so much network activity, which is likely to play an important part in any surveillance activity. And (as so often with this debate) the discussion around "encryption" really only applies to internet activity, not standard voice or SMS activity.

    Devonport, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 864 posts Report Reply

  • Karen Adams, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    I vote this best suggestion of the thread!

    Under your bed • Since Oct 2012 • 16 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    Campbell and Key also had different motivations. Campbell's was about information, logic, implications, honesty and the law while Key's was only about keeping power. What came through in the travels around the country was that people didn't trust the government. I don't think Key has done much to change that. Slickness has nothing to do with trustworthiness.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3214 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 7 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.