I spoke to a good friend who works for [insert name of large NZ Telco here] about all this, and he said that it's mainly aimed at people who upload music videos and the likes to YouToob, so as to gain some legal footing/footprint in case of needing to pass the legal buck.
He himself downloads media torrents from time to time, and says that he has no plans to curtail this anytime soon ...
I'm freeviewing it sans Sky but was considering getting Sky solely for the cricket however given that most matches are played when I'm at work anyway and it is a long day I'm not that interested.
Indeed, cricket is a different kettle of fish altogether in this regard. I mean, Twenty20 is one thing, and I can see that form of the game making Sky's pursestring-holders foam at the gash. But even with the 50 over game you're looking at 8+ hours worth, and it takes a bold man to explain to his wife that yes, even though it's an amazing summer's day outside he's gonna spend it all inside in front of the telly, and that in fact it's her turn to look after the kids all day.
That said, listening Waddle's coverage on the wireless is a fine way to spend an afternoon in the garden, just as Cricinfo is a great, clandestine way to pass the working day ... so while Twenty20's a given, even at the One Dayer level the telly ceases to be the optimal way of taking in the match.
... Gayle seemed to somewhat relish facing Southee especially. Makes me wonder how things may have fared if Vettori had opened with Southee [and Mills], and let him play with the harder, more swinging ball?
That said, enjoyed Gayle's stand-and-deliver six off Gillespie earlier in his innings, just after Ryder dropped him at slip ... out of the ground, one bounce in the neighbour's yard, then onto the roof ...
"@danielvettori When Gayle bats and Southee bowls, put more fielders in the stands ..."
They two documentaries are nowhere near equivalent. The fact you can't even be bothered to spell Gore's film correctly speaks volumes.
... and the fact that you can't get a basic Blackadder reference -- and the obvious kudos that implies -- also speaks volumes.
The makers of AIT 'highlighted the bits they wanted you to see' just as much as the makers of GDWS did, as evidenced by the fact that details of the former are winding their way through the US judicial system. No boffin worth their funding grant would ever accept such a study as it was, pretty pictures and all, simply because it doesn't critique itself internally, and doesn't supply the controls needed to give you perspective.
Oh, and speaking of perspective, Mr. Grumpy-pants, you might wanna re-read the bit where I said that I didn't think GDWS was by any means the be-all and end-all of it, but simply how it represented there being two points to the story. AIT is *not* the last word on the subject by any means, just like the Heartland Institute is *not* the only group artificially inflating their numbers.
No need to get so defensive over it, man ... although you might wanna try stepping down from your 'Holier Than Thou' box every now and then.
This simply isn't true. The science is clear, if complex.
I rampantly disagree.
The documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle does the same thing, kick off proceedings by making great pains of how many scientists that are listed/cited as directly supposedly the IPCC's findings are outraged at being so, on account of them being heatedly against the current hypothesis of global warming.
And while I am by no means citing this documentary as a) being the be-all and end-all on the subject, or b) being completely clear, concise, factual and trustworthy, it is on the same level as Gore's An Inconweenient Truth in that it makes the information it wants you hear sound very palatable indeed.
This whole debate is still wracked by the same problems that it always has been - too little actual, reliable data is available for the non-meteorologist/ecologist thinker to ruminate on. Everything we have is heavily biased, and insufficiently peer reviewed.
The science is most definitely not clear, Sir.
Yeah I got the 'Go Large' plan too. Now I can't get a fixed IP address because that would interfere with Telecom's ability to switch your IP any time you start peering. Still, at least it doesn't cost me hundreds every month now.
... eek, does this mean peeps on Go Large can't set up their system with a static IP address? Does Telecom poo-poo this by making something not work if you do?
And how, prey-tell, could one tell if Telecom was 'switching your IP' ..?
Our language can be quite brutal and war can mean struggle as in a war on poverty.
. . . and war can also mean a handful of fanatics blowing a group of innocent people to buggery just to make a point/gain attention.
The questions is: which are you more comfortable erring on . . ?
Would you prefer the police mistakingly arrest a poet for a bit of literal verbosity, or leave all potential nutters lie until they actually take innocent lives in the name of whatever-cause-was-alleviating -their-boredom-today . . ?
Curious. I'd think dope would be a better drug for such dull work
. . . except you'd never get around to actually doing the painting. And then the munchies would set in. Unless you're anorexic.
Reminds me of Anderton's big fizzle when he was on the Nitrous Oxide crusade, about how youths were 'inhaling the stuff and then driving around in their cars while high on it' . . . kinda helps to actually research the effects of the drug before making up statistics about it, Mr. Progressive New Zealand, Sir . . .
Had to smile during the opening sequence of the new Simpsons movie, with what Bart was writing on the blackboard . . .
. . . mainly because everyone sitting in the room watching it cheered and applauded the irony of it all.