Notices by Dave Lane 🇳🇿 (lightweight@mastodon.nzoss.nz)

Ok, so the Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) have just asked me, as a "Dear Supporter of Digital Freedom" (I've supported the organisation for a couple decades), to complete a community survey... which uses Microsoft Forms. Are they serious?! What a slap in the face. It's actually gut-wrenching. That's their credibility gone. I'm really disappointed.

Oh dear. I've had a response from the EFF, and they've defended their choice, saying that 'they don't have the resources' to use a more values-compatible (my term) tool for the job. They need to remember that 'expedience is the absence of principle.' I've written a response their attitude undermines their very purpose for existence, but going to sit on it a bit. I'm very disappointed in the EFF - if *any* organisation on the planet needs to grasp this, it's them. Otherwise, they're a failure.

@djsumdog ugh. Ok, now I'm seeing where this is going. I agree with your first paragraph. I partly agree with your second, in that yes, the corporate brigade is trying to game the (vanishingly) small shift towards sustainability. But this shit is happening & unless we change en mass (*especially* corporate behaviour - there're whole classes of corporations that need to die for the rest of us to survive, a sacrifice I'm all too happy to make). But the climate is changing because of us.

@strypey

@djsumdog Also, I'm afraid I don't have a lot of time for Jordan Peterson & prefer to get my insights elsewhere.

@strypey

@djsumdog interesting response. I'm not advocating that approach, however it might be necessary to achieve the needed change in behaviour. You might want to read Kim Stanley Robinson's The Ministry for the Future. He imagines how these things might escalate (e.g. people shooting down private jets & even long-haul passenger jets) if gov'ts continue to be actively counter-productive in the face of existential crisis. Shit has to change & some powerful people will need to accept far lower profits.

@djsumdog I've done far more maths than most. I'm disappointed in your position on climate change.

@djsumdog here's the thing: You're advocating for 'business as usual', aligned entirely with people who're making vast fortunes from fossil fuel exploitation (&, as you say, from convincing weak gov'ts that they're investing in 'green'(washed) energy transfer media like hydrogen & biofuel) . You're throwing us numbers & asking us to draw conclusions from them. 1/2 @strypey

@djsumdog also, I think that likening this initiative to something daft like religion is just going to get people's backs up (i.e. not the accomplishing result you desire). But this is probably going to end up in violence because most people happy with their blissful ignorance.

@djsumdog The best way to convince me that climate change is happening is that those who are flagging the result of their research, adding to the chorus, are in direct opposition to the interests of some of the wealthiest, most entrenched, & self-protecting people (oil industry) around. You'd have to feel *very* confident in your results to take on such a powerful and prone-to-evil group. I'm afraid your position doesn't compel me, convenient though it would be.

@djsumdog I think there's more nuance to it than that. I'm very cynical about the EV industry (even so, given that I have PV on my house, I'm keen to have one when my ICE car dies) & I agree that many corporations are trying to push bullshit like hydrogen conversion. I get a lot of stuff. But the issue is that our society's economies are in lock step with fossil fuel exploitation & that needs to change.

Fascinating: https://mastodon.social/@Snoro/111009719372820276 But not sure I'd take this approach without direct provocation from drivers. That said, it might influence people's vehicle purchasing decisions... Disclosure: I've used this (non-destructive but inconvenient) approach on a couple occasions when I've come across cars whose drivers have previously put my safety (as a cyclist obeying all road rules) at risk for their own convenience or out of ignorance of their responsibilities...

Just listening to RNZ and Peter Griffin. Why does anyone think 'Startups' are a) a good idea, and b) deserving of taxpayer funding? Isn't that just trickle down economics?

@alcinnz @aral @j thanks for the credit - and well done Aral - it's a good term to have in the arsenal.

@j I'm thinking of 'Startups' as being companies that are built to be sold. And 80+% of them fail. They take investment, and most investors lose theirs. To me they're wasteful. I prefer service companies that don't make as much profit and bootstrap without external investment. Some folks, like @alcinnz, refer to them as 'Stayups', which i far prefer. And I definitely don't think Startups should receive a cent of gov't funding. That's just trickle down economics.

@aral looking into it... haven't yet got a pilot of the Open Schoolhouse for AotearoaNZ yet... hoping to find educators with sufficient vision to have a crack at it, though. The search continues. @gemlog @waldoj @osdc @bigblen @alpinefolk @elias

@gemlog here's another way tech could be used in education: https://davelane.nz/openschool @waldoj @aral @osdc @bigblen @alpinefolk @elias

@alpinefolk wow, *so* with you on the Adobe thing. They're another really shit corporation. @elias @gemlog

@alpinefolk fwiw, my #FOSS dev company used exclusively FOSS tools for all web design, and never had issues (except having to inform ignorant people in other organisations that we were completely compatible despite their lack of knowledge) Saved us quite a lot of $ over 14 years. @elias @gemlog

Holy crap, the hype is ludicrous. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/486951/ai-era-regulation-required-to-protect-workers-council-of-trade-unions-says This is 'blockchain'-level breathless handwringing.

The Digital Strategy Report https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/7-Publications/2-Reports/20230329-Digital-Strategy-Report.pdf mentions the word 'privacy' once in conjunction with 'security' with no real depth. It mentions shore (as in on-shore) and sovereignty 0 times. It mentions 'jurisdiction' 5 times, all related to how 'tech is used in other jurisdictions' and nothing about the jurisdiction of the data hosting. It looks like a pretty hopeless report with respect to all the really important issues.