planet.linuxchix.org.nz

New Zealand's Ministry of Economic Development have released from documents on the ongoing ACTA negotations.
http://news.business.govt.nz/news/strategic/article/9761

Smarter people than me have read these, and found nothing new revealed.

The last round of negotiations was in Mexico - the next round of talks is right here in New Zealand.

quick recap:

ACTA (anti counterfeiting trade agreement) is a treaty currently being negotiated by the world's weathiest countries, including New Zealand. It is officially about things like stopping the fake prada handbags trade - but there's also been leaked documents showing that big media have been asked for their wishlist such as 3 strikes internet disconnection that we protested so loudly against in NZ's s92a of the Copyright act.

It would be disastrous to have stopped such New Zealand laws that give out punishment (internet termination) without trial or appeal, like the s92a did, only to have it implemented anyway via a treaty that our parliament ratifies. Now is the time to make noise.

This need to stop fake prada is so important, it's been classed as "National Security", so none of us lowly citizens are allowed to know what's actually being negotiated. This also is not standard practice for treaty negotiations to be secret.

All Official information act requests, in several countries, have been unsuccessful in finding out what they're putting into this treaty - cos, you know, national security.

The next talks are in Wellington in April - standby for more info later on citizen action.

Quotes from the MED release make it clear, this is a internet copyright treaty:

Section 4: Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement in the Digital Environment

This section of the agreement addresses some of the special challenges that new technologies pose for enforcement of intellectual property rights. Elements under discussion in this section include the availability of remedies:
in cases of third party liability, without prejudice to the availablity of exceptions and limitations;
related to infringing material online, including limitations on the application of those remedies to online service providers;
related to the circumvention of technological protection measures, including the availability of exceptions and limitations;
related to the protection of right management information, including the availability of exceptions and limitations.

Some recent press
NZ trade may face closer scrutiny under ACTA - computerworld NZ
Acta talks in 'bits and pieces' - Dominion Post
NZ has no place in anti-democratic ACTA dealings - Tech Liberty

My blog post from last year on the leak of a draft version of this treaty: http://coffee.geek.nz/acta-its-bad-very-bad.html

»» Submitted by Shiny at 09 February 2010 00:42

Q: why do baby clothes have pockets, but women's clothes do not?
A: bebe can carry my cellphone for me.

»» Submitted by Shiny at 07 February 2010 22:59

btw, i won again.. i wouldn't mind being defeated by Jo, but couldn't let myself lose to mauricio.

It was my first evening out on my own since Casey was born - i was mega tired, and i had no time to prepare. basically had to make it up. sadly I missed out a bunch of stuff i wanted to say about OLPC and ACTA.

my summary of the other speakers:

Miraz: apple will take over the world
Mauricio: microsoft will take over the world
Me: robots will take over the world
Jo: non-geeky people will still not take over the world
Phillip: you're all predicting the obvious

this was organised by the ppl at http://up.org.nz, who alas haven't updated their website with anysummary 2 weeks later. there was someone filming the talks, but these never seem to make it to the web either.

so, you'll have to take my word for it

»» Submitted by Shiny at 07 February 2010 01:11

The verdict is out in the case of numerous media/entertainment companies versus an ISP over in australia.

The entertainment companies wanted a ruling that an ISP is responsible for the actions of their customers - so they sued an ISP for "allowing copyright infringement to occur".

Now, we can't have that. If someone breaks copyright then they should be responsible for their own actions, not their ISP, not the mail service, not the maker of the fax machine, not the people who built a photo sharing website.

Commonsense prevailed, and the judge ruled in favour of the ISP. The entertainment companies now must pay the ISPs legal costs.

I've picked some of that commonsense from within the judge's ruling:

In summary, in this proceeding, the key question is: Did iiNet authorise copyright infringement? The Court answers such question in the negative for three reasons: first because the copyright infringements occurred as a result of the use of the BitTorrent system, not the user of the internet, and the respondent did not create and does not control the BitTorrent system; second because the respondent did not have a relevant power to prevent those infringements occurring; and third because the respondent did not sanction, approve or countenance copyright infringement.

On the incorrect use of the word "theft" to describe copyright infringment:

As an aside, the Court notes that AFACT, the organisation which the applicants use to aid in enforcement of their copyright, itself blurs the distinction between tortuous copyright infringement and criminal acts involving copyright, as seen in its name: Australian Federation Against Copyright _Theft_.

yup, copyright infringment is copyright infringement. Theft is something else. There are many illegal actions that deprive others of income, such as crashing a car into their work vehicle; blocking the entrance to their shop; slander; violence; - many actions that can cause someone to lose income, but that doesn't magically make their actions equal to theft. It's illegal, but theft is a different crime. The language we use to describe copyright infringement is important. We should not let extremist frame the debate in incorrect language. They're not thieves, they're not pirates, they're "copyright infringers".

Scenarios where I firmly believe that copyright infringement is not wrong include: Copying a movie you own on DVD to your ipod touch to view on a long plane flight later; Quoting from a text book to prove a technical point; Circumventing copying restrictions so the visually imparied can access a text/artwork; Backing up your ebook collection;

AFACT is the Australian version of NZFACT, the group who lobby for draconian laws in NZ

The judge also comments on AFACT's unwillingness to even stand behind the accuracy of their accusations in infringement notices, yet they demand ISPs act on them:

The AFACT notifications are not statutory declarations, nor do they have any statutory basis. At no point did [AFACT director Neil Gane] swear to the truth of the allegations contained in such Notices. At no point does he state that he personally had taken reasonable steps to ensure that the information and statements in the notice were true and accurate.

These folks want ISPs to cut off their customer's internet access, based on accusations that they're unwilling to even declare as accurate. This illustrates one big reasons why ISPs are uncomfortable with these "three strikes" laws. Who is liable when the accusations are wrong? The ISP can see you're downloading some data, how are they to know it is a piece of Sony music without permission, or a recording of your nephew playing violin? If they get it wrong, what next? or an even better question: since when was it okay for your ISP to spy on your internet traffic? Is someone's copyright enforcement really more important than everyone's privacy?

New Zealand's own APRA believes that "Without the content industries, the internet would be empty."
The judge in the iiNet comments on this claim:

T]he claim made throughout these proceedings that bandwidth usage or downloading is somehow necessarily, predominantly or even significantly copyright infringing, is simply not established on the evidence. The Court finds the applicants’ attempt to cast a pall over internet usage, such that it is assumed to be infringing, unless otherwise shown, is unjustified.

Creative freedom have a longer transcript of these inflated sense of self that media companies have

quote from AFACT directory Neil Gane

"[W]e believe this decision was based on a technical finding centred on the court's interpretation of how infringements occur and the ISP's ability to control them."

and response from Boingboing:

Ah yes, technical findings, as in, technically, your theory that ISPs have a duty to spy on all their users and shut down anything that you don't like was technically incorrect, because it is a technically insane idea.

via:
http://creativefreedom.org.nz/story.html?id=462
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/03/awesomely-awesome-au.html
http://robertcorr.com/2010/02/afact-v-iinet/
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090720/0233385600.shtml

»» Submitted by Shiny at 04 February 2010 23:08

i was late to work today (food poisoning all night, not fun), so it was me that answered the phone at 9am.

background info: plunket is new zealand's non-government community support service for babies/infants.

them> I'm calling from plunket. we have a weekly mothers group starting up at [2 blocks from my house], for mothers with babies the same age as your Casey
me> I'm working fulltime right now, would it be at a time i'm likely to get there?
them> oh, no, it's in the middle of the afternoon. oh well, i can still add you to the mailing list.
me> well, my husband is a fulltime father, is he welcome at this group?
them> oh yes, it's for parents, even though i said mothers. we should change the name. infact i'm changing it right now. it's a parents group, not a mothers groups.

heh.

»» Submitted by Shiny at 04 February 2010 22:02

thanks to the ninjas who migrated geekspeakr.com from Drupal5 to Drupal 6, and to a happier server during LCA2010

quote from Liz Henry, who really enjoyed the hackfest:

It was like Christmas – I hung out with kick ass open source people all day long, heard great talks, gave a talk and asked for more coding and development with other women, and then got to do that very thing with people I greatly admire!

and thanks to Catalyst for the use of their boardroom and intarwebs.

»» Submitted by Shiny at 31 January 2010 03:55

I'm back at work now, and the "breastfeeding" continues - i'm pumping the boobies 3 times a day, including all the sterilizing everything in the work kitchen. This has resulted in many conversations in the kitchen, with various working fathers and mothers, on the political world of formula versus breastmilk, and some awful first hand stories of how ashamed they were of not doing 100% breastmilk.

I think it would be good to have more public statements from mothers who did less than 100% breastmilk - you do the best you can, and formula is not the evil some people think it is.

Some people can't, because of milk supply, or they have to work to pay the rent, and I'd like to see more support of those that don't achieve 100% breastfeeding.

If you post a question or statement online (like this blog post) on formula you attract comments/replies, including some reasonable and helpful ones, but also including the "you can tell my kids are breastfed because they didn't die from cot death" statements, and other loveliness. Being a new parent is full of worry, so these eat away at anyone's confidence and selfworth.

We've chosen to do as much breastmilk as possible, but there's a choice we've made to use formula. There are government funded campaigns to ensure that any mother who does that feels as much guilt as can be instilled via national advert campaign on multiple media.

For example, it's safer for Casey's dad to take sterialized warm water and a packet of powder with him out of the house, than to take a bottle of breastmilk that will slowly warm up and bacteria multiply.

I also very sure that the statistics on breastfeeding (and studies based on those statistics) are getting it wrong. The midwife, plunket and a GP all recorded Casey as 100% breastfed, and she's not. They are very quick to write that down without asking too much - that coupled with the shame and guilt instilled in parents who use formula means they're less likely to be corrected.

I want actual scientific method studies to reach my own decision. I'm still doing research on what the actual difference is. There are a few studies that show no statistically significant difference between those full breastfed, and those only partically. There are studies that show all manner of advantages to breastmilk, heralding it as the cure all of everything, and then attempts to independant verify those studies have never happened, or show different results. The only thing that appears scientifically proven is easier digestion. Please note i'm still looking for more info, and my primary source is studies published online.

The most commonly repeated claim, is that breastfeeding results in a higher IQ. A study in 2005 in the USA tried to verify these claims using siblings to try and remove other factors that influence the results. Here's a quote from that study

Despite an enormous literature demonstrating better health and cognitive outcomes among breastfed children, the effects of breastfeeding are uncertain. This is because the vast majority of studies share a common weakness: they are nonexperimental. Their Achilles heel is selection bias. If a variable influences both the decision to breastfeed and the child outcome being studied, then omitting it produces a spurious correlation between breastfeeding and the outcome. For example, worse outcomes among children of younger, less educated, lower-income, and African-American mothers may correlate with their lower breastfeeding rates but be owed partly to disadvantages that cannot be captured in the regressions.

In other words: Those mothers that don't breastfeed have many other things in common, such as low income and less education. These factors can correlate with the child's ability to perform well in an IQ test or not. (i'm unconvinced that IQ tests are good measure of intelligence, but i'll save that for another post).

There is the UN/World Health Organisation statement that "breast is best", and New Zealand has signed up to this.

There was a time, long long ago (aka before the 1980s) when breastfeeding in public was not a right, and breastfeeding in the workplace was never tolerated. It became a feminist issue to regain the right to breastfeed. That battle continues and I wholeheartedly support this, especially for those that breastfeed way beyond 6months. We need to not make mothers feel ashamed breastfeeding a 2 year old in a cafe. It's their choice so either support or butt out.

It's also important to remember this is a political and cultural campaign - at some stage it turned into pseudo-science, in which any study that shows a slight benefit in breastmilk was heralded loudly, and any study that was inconclusive or disagreed was left quiet. These selective studies are used well to lobby for the right to breastfeed - but at the cost of shame for those that don't.

We live in New Zealand, and have a some of the cleanest watersupply in the world. This is important as many studies compare breastmilk with formula made from contaminated water - or prepared with less than enough powder because of the high costs of formula.

I am not a medical professional, but i do understand both statistics and the importance of scientific method.

My own conclusion: Breast milk, according to the statistics, is probably better, but not by much.

Please note: comments on this post will be heavily moderated.

»» Submitted by Shiny at 27 January 2010 23:52

Tonight i defend my claim to a sparkly pink tiara at Bloggers Predict 2010
Thursday 28 January 2010
5:30pm - 8:00pm
Where: Wellington Regional Chamber of Commerce, level 28, The Majestic Centre, 100 Willis Street

The 2010 lineup
Brenda Wallace (@br3nda) Current tiara-holder, Brenda was UP Visionary of the year for 2009, can she defend her title in 2010? The Capital City’s geek girl extraordinaire and queen bee of the software community, Brenda is to mobile technology and open source what honey is to brown bread, she makes it taste better! Brenda blogs on Coffee.geek.nz about coffee, gadgets, opensource, wellington, new zealand, music, and above all things: freedom.
Philip Fierlinger (@skyrize) From Silicon Valley to Silicon Welly, Philip’s web design expertise and has been eagerly sought after by online businesses and conference-goers alike. Currently design chief at Xero, blogger at Turntable Media Philip’s passion for web usability also led him to establish his own consultancy.
Mauricio Freitas (@freitasm) Geekzone head honcho and microblogging enthusiast. If there’s a new gadget being launched you can be sure Mauricio has an opinion about it. Been renovating his kitchen for last 6 months and has forgotten how to cook, however is on first name basis with all the (good) cafe owners in town. Possibly Wellington’s most avid “Tweeter”.
Miraz Jordan (@miraz) From MacTips to community I.T. and other “Oddities”, Miraz must surely be one of Wellington’s most prolific tech bloggers and professional web content authors. From Bach to Buying a Car to Battlestar Galactica Miraz shares the full gamut of cultural experiences.
Joanna McLeod (@JoannaTMcLeod) Editor of Wellintonista, THE blog about Wellington, Joanna has started calling herself the Empress of the Internet because she can. Other parts of her media empire include her beauty blog Pretty Pretty Pretty and her guide to partying You Are So Entertaining.

I'll be posting my predictions up on the blog, just as soon as i finish writing them :-)

»» Submitted by Shiny at 27 January 2010 22:30

Why you should go to LCA, by Selena Deckleman
http://www.chesnok.com/daily/2010/01/27/why-you-should-go-to-lca-2011/

LWN articles (subscription required while the stories are new)
An LCA 2010 overview http://lwn.net/Articles/371044/
LCA: Static analysis with GCC plugins http://lwn.net/Articles/370717/
LCA: Cooperative management of package copyright and licensing data http://lwn.net/Articles/370308/
LCA: How to destroy your community http://lwn.net/Articles/370157/

Another brilliant LCA! by Tridge http://blog.tridgell.net/?p=21

Computer World NZ http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/devt/376AB6C5B174B722CC2576B2007B7F93

75% of Linux code is written by paid devs http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17365/1/

Smarter Linux file structure aims to ease software management http://www.techworld.com.au/article/333549/smarter_linux_file_structure_...

Make Meeting Times Inconvenient To Get Better Results http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2010/01/make-meeting-times-inconvenient-to-...

That rather counter-intuitive suggestion came from Leslie Hawthorn, a program manager at Google. during a presentation at linux.conf.au on how to get involved with open source software

Illuminating the elephant in the open source room http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2010/012110-illuminating-the-elephant-in-...

Speaking at the annual Linux.conf.au event, which is being held in Wellington, New Zealand, one of the lead developers for the Samba Team and Google employee, Jeremy Allison, described Microsoft as a real threat to the open source community.

Why There is no Kernel Hacker Sell-Out by Glyn Moody http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=2753

and here's a photo of Casey at her first LCA:

»» Submitted by Shiny at 27 January 2010 22:18