And the OIA which established that the DIA had access to the Meta takedown portal was chilling.
I will always wonder if (as someone who was outspoken against the government’s response to Covid) my social media was shut down deliberately. The reason I was given was that I had committed a violation so serious that I was to be given no option to appeal. My social media was just pictures of my family at the beach, or my dog playing with the cat etc. Nothing controversial. Maybe it was a system glitch, but just maybe it was the DIA. It’s a chilling thought.
I never used to consider myself as a conspiracy theorist but things like you describe are difficult to frame in any other way. I avoid the whole thing. Having originally joined Facebook because I thought that it would be a good way to keep up with what grandchildren are up to, I've never posted anything and presume the a/c has lapsed. I don't subscribe to any other sites.
I wondered if I was on the edge of a rabbit hole - but then I had the evidence which mysteriously vanished. But as is my practice I took copies and filed them in my work folder allocated to the topic.
"Importantly a detailed document relating to the expectations of the applicant in various key areas which was referenced with a link in the original advertisement is not mentioned."
Neither did I. But the last six years have left me questioning so much, and have shattered my faith in many public systems. It’s the lying - I never realised there was so much lying and obfuscating at a state level. I used to think the OIA system kept things honest - but exchanges like this one (regarding the Facebook takedown portal) are common, and Kafkaesque: Oh looks like I can’t link to it. Reference is 79981 on FYI.org. It’s an interesting read.
I'm not sure the DIA can be trusted. This is the Dept that closely helped the Ardern Govt formulate He Puapua in total secrecy from the Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters. And then closely helped in the formulation of 3 Waters and its fine print. The department that nearly doubled its work force over that period.
Oh Bonnie - that was torture along with the vocal slide that characterises many speakers of English. And the reference to MySpace - that was a LOL moment.
Thank you for writing on this. Whilst purportedly having bipartisan support, I also think there's bipartisan concern.
For context, I'm a paediatrician and economist. My practice includes able-bodied and disabled children and young people.
I would encourage people to read this letter from Ezra:
I’m 15 years old and have a disability. Social media has been a lifeline – why is the government kicking me off? | Ezra Sholl | The Guardian https://share.google/sYGTabmvAj9HBZi8w
Ezra is a survivor of childhood cancer whose treatment resulted in severe disability. As he says, SM is a key way in which he socialises. Without detailing this, are we willing to trade the wellbeing of the many, for that is the few? That said, disability is not uncommon, so it's not really just a few.
Let me draw you an analogy. Children who go to preschool frequently get sick. They pick up colds, and flu's, and gastro. It's one of the economic benefits of vaccination- positive parental externalities from reduced time off work. But some parents understandably remove their kids when they're constantly getting sick. There are also those children who don't do to childcare, because they have a parent who stays at home or because they have friends or family. In each of these cases, children are socialising. So one of the common responses to early presentations of developmental delay is to reintroduce socialisation through childcare, to speech, language and social skill development. Think of this as "development stretch". They are stimulated and challenged, and they develop and learn in response.
Now think about our world. SM is the norm. What will delaying the introduction of SM do? Who knows. Will they still get the same social and developmenal stretch? Like early child development, do we need to support capacity building such as the development of coping strategies, to deal with the relatively controlled stimulus that SM is.
I guess the last thing I would say, is to recall the 90's. Does anyone remember bulletin boards and rotten.com? These sorts of things were wild. They still exist but they've moved to places like the Dark Web and private communities. Contrast that with SM, or even with "commodity" adult entertainment. Behaviourally, these policies would create barriers to accessing regulated content and content with monitoring and controls, to content that is potentially dark. Performatively we could say our children are protected but even our 10-15yo boys (I'm assuming this is gendered), instead of mischievous access to platforms like PornHub etc., they'll seek it elsewhere. Or they'll bypass age-controls, meaning that their behaviours will unmonitored and unnoticed by content providers.
I'm sure the people who are advocating for the ban want what's right for children and young people. I just don't think the ban is going to give them what they think it will give them and are creating a whole separate bunch of risks that aren't fully known.
I entirely agree with the developmental issue. All people learn from theior mistakes (hopefully).
I approach the matter from a slightly different perspective - that of recognising paradigmatic change. The promotors of the Bill do not understand that. They would prefer to live life looking in a rear view mirror
That both of these things are happening - the DIA recruitment and the government making this of all things a slap dash legislative priority - in the 3rd year of a democratically elected centre-right government should be of great concern to every person that voted this government in.
Thanks David. Yet another case of the bureaucratic takeover by the legions of right-thinkers that populate our civil service. Definitely chilling and very dispiriting.
Not defending any ideology, but I think this is coming from both progressive (social justice) and conservative quarters. Hopefully ACT stick to their Libertarian roots. In Australia it was a Labour Govt who introduced it, who I would argue are more progressive than NZ's Labour.
Your usual excellent analysis and red-light warning about a deliberately secret process - and likely outcomes, David. Now let's watch as the election grows ever closer and the Bill is trumpeted as the way we need to save our innocent children from ourselves - vote for us to make sure it becomes law. As usual, populism and expediency will combine to bury the true consequences of the legislation, and the probable future misuse of it.
It's a good point. You'd think having commissioned a second Royal Commission on COVID, the govt would have learned a lesson on public engagement and deliberative processes related to policies that restrict autonomy...
It was fun to research and write, although navigating through bureaucratic goobledygook is a challenge.
I wonder if we could use ChatGPT to translate it into plain English.
I say that because an English colleague and I have been posing problems for ChatGPT like - render Trumps war in Iran in the words and style of Caesar. It did just that and in the sparse prose that characterised Caesar - and in Latin no less. We asked it to do a cruise review around the Greek Isles in the style of Homer - it did and in Greek script. Brilliant
OMG that's classic. Literally. I've been asking it to write poetry which would get sizeable grants from Creative New Zealand, works which take into account diversity, equity, and inclusion. But leave out the em dash.
I'm concerned about the "Te Tiriti o Waitangi considerations" bit. How one is treated under any online safety regulations should not be conditional on race.
This has to be a huge concern for democratic rights in the future.
IMO one of the most important issues ahead of the next election; I hate to think what Jacinda et al would have done with those powers....
I like to give Luxon the credit of being naive, when he takes such a simplistic approach and states "the parents want it", but ......
Also, reinforcing your concerns about the DIA; their CEO is also the GCDO (Chief Digital Officer) despite the fact he has no work experience in the tech sector.
His assistant may be a capable woman with relevant experience, but.....
The proposed bill is very unnerving.
And the OIA which established that the DIA had access to the Meta takedown portal was chilling.
I will always wonder if (as someone who was outspoken against the government’s response to Covid) my social media was shut down deliberately. The reason I was given was that I had committed a violation so serious that I was to be given no option to appeal. My social media was just pictures of my family at the beach, or my dog playing with the cat etc. Nothing controversial. Maybe it was a system glitch, but just maybe it was the DIA. It’s a chilling thought.
I never used to consider myself as a conspiracy theorist but things like you describe are difficult to frame in any other way. I avoid the whole thing. Having originally joined Facebook because I thought that it would be a good way to keep up with what grandchildren are up to, I've never posted anything and presume the a/c has lapsed. I don't subscribe to any other sites.
I wondered if I was on the edge of a rabbit hole - but then I had the evidence which mysteriously vanished. But as is my practice I took copies and filed them in my work folder allocated to the topic.
I should very much appreciate if you publish that document.
Which document. The article went out in Law News this afternoon . Or do you mean the advertisements
This one:
"Importantly a detailed document relating to the expectations of the applicant in various key areas which was referenced with a link in the original advertisement is not mentioned."
How do you suggest I do this. Do you want me to send you the docs?
Neither did I. But the last six years have left me questioning so much, and have shattered my faith in many public systems. It’s the lying - I never realised there was so much lying and obfuscating at a state level. I used to think the OIA system kept things honest - but exchanges like this one (regarding the Facebook takedown portal) are common, and Kafkaesque: Oh looks like I can’t link to it. Reference is 79981 on FYI.org. It’s an interesting read.
I'm not sure the DIA can be trusted. This is the Dept that closely helped the Ardern Govt formulate He Puapua in total secrecy from the Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters. And then closely helped in the formulation of 3 Waters and its fine print. The department that nearly doubled its work force over that period.
Bureaucratic talk reminds me a bit of the mockumentary Twenty Twelve and the parody of PR speak: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjY0784vHN8
Oh Bonnie - that was torture along with the vocal slide that characterises many speakers of English. And the reference to MySpace - that was a LOL moment.
Gold.
Thank you for writing on this. Whilst purportedly having bipartisan support, I also think there's bipartisan concern.
For context, I'm a paediatrician and economist. My practice includes able-bodied and disabled children and young people.
I would encourage people to read this letter from Ezra:
I’m 15 years old and have a disability. Social media has been a lifeline – why is the government kicking me off? | Ezra Sholl | The Guardian https://share.google/sYGTabmvAj9HBZi8w
Ezra is a survivor of childhood cancer whose treatment resulted in severe disability. As he says, SM is a key way in which he socialises. Without detailing this, are we willing to trade the wellbeing of the many, for that is the few? That said, disability is not uncommon, so it's not really just a few.
Let me draw you an analogy. Children who go to preschool frequently get sick. They pick up colds, and flu's, and gastro. It's one of the economic benefits of vaccination- positive parental externalities from reduced time off work. But some parents understandably remove their kids when they're constantly getting sick. There are also those children who don't do to childcare, because they have a parent who stays at home or because they have friends or family. In each of these cases, children are socialising. So one of the common responses to early presentations of developmental delay is to reintroduce socialisation through childcare, to speech, language and social skill development. Think of this as "development stretch". They are stimulated and challenged, and they develop and learn in response.
Now think about our world. SM is the norm. What will delaying the introduction of SM do? Who knows. Will they still get the same social and developmenal stretch? Like early child development, do we need to support capacity building such as the development of coping strategies, to deal with the relatively controlled stimulus that SM is.
I guess the last thing I would say, is to recall the 90's. Does anyone remember bulletin boards and rotten.com? These sorts of things were wild. They still exist but they've moved to places like the Dark Web and private communities. Contrast that with SM, or even with "commodity" adult entertainment. Behaviourally, these policies would create barriers to accessing regulated content and content with monitoring and controls, to content that is potentially dark. Performatively we could say our children are protected but even our 10-15yo boys (I'm assuming this is gendered), instead of mischievous access to platforms like PornHub etc., they'll seek it elsewhere. Or they'll bypass age-controls, meaning that their behaviours will unmonitored and unnoticed by content providers.
I'm sure the people who are advocating for the ban want what's right for children and young people. I just don't think the ban is going to give them what they think it will give them and are creating a whole separate bunch of risks that aren't fully known.
I entirely agree with the developmental issue. All people learn from theior mistakes (hopefully).
I approach the matter from a slightly different perspective - that of recognising paradigmatic change. The promotors of the Bill do not understand that. They would prefer to live life looking in a rear view mirror
That both of these things are happening - the DIA recruitment and the government making this of all things a slap dash legislative priority - in the 3rd year of a democratically elected centre-right government should be of great concern to every person that voted this government in.
Thanks David. Yet another case of the bureaucratic takeover by the legions of right-thinkers that populate our civil service. Definitely chilling and very dispiriting.
Not defending any ideology, but I think this is coming from both progressive (social justice) and conservative quarters. Hopefully ACT stick to their Libertarian roots. In Australia it was a Labour Govt who introduced it, who I would argue are more progressive than NZ's Labour.
Your usual excellent analysis and red-light warning about a deliberately secret process - and likely outcomes, David. Now let's watch as the election grows ever closer and the Bill is trumpeted as the way we need to save our innocent children from ourselves - vote for us to make sure it becomes law. As usual, populism and expediency will combine to bury the true consequences of the legislation, and the probable future misuse of it.
It's a good point. You'd think having commissioned a second Royal Commission on COVID, the govt would have learned a lesson on public engagement and deliberative processes related to policies that restrict autonomy...
Good analysis David! Cheeky bastards
Thanks Bonnie
It was fun to research and write, although navigating through bureaucratic goobledygook is a challenge.
I wonder if we could use ChatGPT to translate it into plain English.
I say that because an English colleague and I have been posing problems for ChatGPT like - render Trumps war in Iran in the words and style of Caesar. It did just that and in the sparse prose that characterised Caesar - and in Latin no less. We asked it to do a cruise review around the Greek Isles in the style of Homer - it did and in Greek script. Brilliant
I love Chat GPT. I tease it mercilessly.
Here is the passage about the Iran War in the style of Caesar
De Bello Iraniensi et Americano
Exercitus Americani fines Persarum transgressi sunt.
Dux imperavit ut oppida munirentur et commeatus pararentur.
Persae, audacia veteri, copias in collibus collocaverunt.
Missilia utrinque iacta sunt, nocte et die sine requie.
Terra tremuit, et civitates metu vacuae factae sunt.
Senatus Americanus deliberavit de pace, sed arma manserunt.
Multi captivi ducti sunt, quorum fides incerta erat.
Mare Rubrum classibus utriusque partis fervuit.
Post multos dies, legati convenere ad verba vana.
Concerning the War Between Iran and America
“The armies of the Americans crossed the borders of the Persians.
The commander ordered that the towns be fortified and supplies prepared.
The Persians, with their ancient boldness, stationed their forces on the hills.
Missiles were hurled from both sides, night and day without rest.
The earth shook, and the cities were emptied in fear.
The American Senate deliberated about peace, but the weapons remained.
Many captives were led away, whose loyalty was uncertain.
The Red Sea seethed with the fleets of both sides.
After many days, envoys met for empty words.”
Should we try and translate into te reo or would that be either a bridge too far or culturally insensitive
OMG that's classic. Literally. I've been asking it to write poetry which would get sizeable grants from Creative New Zealand, works which take into account diversity, equity, and inclusion. But leave out the em dash.
Delightful!
It might be culturally insensitive but it would also be a hoot considering that many of the words etc had no reality in Maori culture eg missiles.
I'm concerned about the "Te Tiriti o Waitangi considerations" bit. How one is treated under any online safety regulations should not be conditional on race.
Thanks David
This has to be a huge concern for democratic rights in the future.
IMO one of the most important issues ahead of the next election; I hate to think what Jacinda et al would have done with those powers....
I like to give Luxon the credit of being naive, when he takes such a simplistic approach and states "the parents want it", but ......
Also, reinforcing your concerns about the DIA; their CEO is also the GCDO (Chief Digital Officer) despite the fact he has no work experience in the tech sector.
His assistant may be a capable woman with relevant experience, but.....