I would like to begin my talk with a quote from Leviticus 19:18, containing what is one of the simplest yet most important commandments in the Torah: Love your neighbour as yourself.
The question posed tonight is: “Should there be religious limits to absolute media freedom of expression?”
My short answer is “no”, other than the limits associated with existing legislation pertaining to defamation, incitement, and the like.
We live in an increasingly diverse society. Religion is only one aspect of diversity. If you impose religious limits, you would have to consider imposing limits on other aspects, such as gender, nationality, ethnicity, disability, political philosophy, and so on.
We can’t expect the rest of society to embrace, or sometimes even understand the same standards as we do. Example: The Third Commandment forbids us for taking the name of The Lord in vain. As Jews, uttering the name of God is very offensive. And yet, there is a significant quasi-Christian religious group whose very name incorporates this ineffable name of God. How can we manage this conflict? We can’t – It wouldn’t be right for me to demand that they change their name to God’s Witnesses or something else – it’s an integral part of their identity.
Freedom of expression is essential for the function of democracy. Allowing any authority (other than Parliament as interpreted by the courts) to determine the limits of freedom of expression would potentially be chilling, and the temptation for the authority to cross the line into political suppression could be irresistible. On balance, limiting freedom of expression would likely do more harm than good.
We are free to ignore offensive material, and when we can’t ignore it, we can brush it off. We’re adults. Sometimes we need to endure this pain for the greater good of society, and pray that the offenders might become more aware of the consequences of their actions.
So my short answer is, no, there should not be religious limits to absolute media freedom of expression.
There is a longer answer. And that answer is that we’re asking the wrong questions.
The questions we should be asking are:
What self-restraint should the media exhibit when discussing religion and other personal beliefs?
As a society, how do we educate and encourage people to empathise with each other, so that they feel no desire to offend or hurt each other?
When I say “the media”, that’s just about everyone nowadays. Blogging, Facebook, and Twitter, and other social media provide a virtual megaphone to anyone who can gather an audience.
It is emphatically wrong to deliberately seek to offend or hurt others.
It is emphatically wrong to ridicule people’s strongly held beliefs or practices.
It is emphatically wrong to drive a wedge between different religions and ethnic groups by saying or implying that they are unfit to live among the rest of society.
It is emphatically wrong to blame an entire religion or culture for the actions of a tiny minority of their members.
All of these things are terribly wrong, and completely unnecessary.
These things are wrong and unnecessary, but legislating against them would create more problems than it would solve for the reasons I discussed earlier.
Unfortunately, as a society, we have not evolved very far beyond the 17th Century European proclivity for burning cats for entertainment. Pain and humiliation gets people’s attention, and sells newspapers in an increasingly competitive market. Shocking people is a lot easier then providing intelligent analysis, easier to understand, and sells more.
I would like to close with two quotes from the Talmud:
From Baba Mezi’a 59a, R. Johanan said on the authority of R. Simeon b. Yohai: “Better had a man throw himself into a fiery furnace than publicly put his neighbour to shame.”
From Shabbat 31, quoting Hillel, “What is hateful to you, do not to your neighbour: that is the whole Torah, while the rest is the commentary thereof; go and learn it.”
I’m planning on being very involved in the Lightning Lab Christchurch accelerator programme that starts next week, mainly as a mentor. As I look back on both Lightning Lab Wellington accelerators where I mentored in 2013 and 2014, I felt that most of the teams could have used their mentors more effectively.
With that in mind, here’s a brief guide to how to get the most out of your mentors in an accelerator.
Choosing a mentor is one of the most important decisions you’ll make during the accelerator. Choose wisely.
Be clear about what you want from a mentor up front, even though expectations may change during the course of the accelerator, as you and your mentor learn more about unknown unknowns. What are the gaps you’re looking to fill?
Specific skills, eg sales
Contacts (NZ / Overseas)
Potential investment, especially someone you can turn into a lead
Be clear about what your mentor wants up front. Why are they doing this?
Don’t accept any mentor that comes along – even if you’re desperate. A bad fit is a lot worse than rejecting them.
Do “due diligence” on potential mentors. Check their LinkedIn profiles. Ask for references.
Don’t take on too many mentors. Ideally, have one “lead” (or maybe two) that you spend at least an hour a week with, and possibly some others that you use for specific advice
It’s like dating. Do what you can to attract The Right One (or three). And like dating, you could end up being “stuck” (or thoroughly enjoying) a long-term relationship with them.
Look after them, and hopefully they’ll look after you.
Be honest at all times. One porkie can really wreck trust, even if it’s only a minor one.
Keep track of action points for each side from mentor meetings. Ideally, send out an email after each mentor meeting identifying who is going to be doing what between now and the next meeting.
Hold your mentor to account, and expect them to hold you to account. If one or both sides is blowing the other off, it’s not working and you should terminate the relationship and invest your time more productively.
Your mentors are probably extremely busy people. Try to plan meetings and activities well in advance, and establish a regular rhythm if possible. Here’s a typical week in my calendar:
REMEMBER – IT’S YOUR COMPANY, NOT YOUR MENTOR’S. Don’t hold back on pushing back. Be reasonable, and listen to reason, but your mentor is generally all-care-no-responsibility, and you’re the Founder left holding the baby company.
Timing is everything. Use your founder spidey-sense to know when to cut your losses and fire your mentor, and when to double-down on their advice.
Is there anything I missed? Please let me know in the comments.
I’ve just returned from a 3-1/2 month trip, mostly holiday with my wife Kate and 11 year old son Dan, in which we visited Hong Kong, Vietnam, Italy, Switzerland, France, Spain, and the USA, generally avoiding big cities. Naturally, it was important to stay well-connected every place we went, so we employed a combination of mobile broadband through local telco and wifi in the accommodation we stayed at, mostly AirBNB.
In Hong Kong, CSL provided excellent mobile broadband, but the various accommodations I used had pretty terrible wifi.
Vietnam’s Viettel also provided generally great mobile broadband, and accommodations actually provided wifi that was surprisingly good.
In Europe, we used Orange Spain as they had a deal where for they charged EUR 1 per 100MB of data. Problem was, for some reason, in parts of northern Italy they seemed to charge a lot more than that – without any real reporting. Access and speeds in France and Spain were OK but not great, and wifi in private residences was uniformly terrible.
The USA was particularly disappointing. I travel to the USA a lot, and use a T-Mobile sim card. They recently prohibited tethering which made things difficult, and at USD 3 per day (a plan which has been discontinued), it isn’t exactly cheap. Furthermore, T-Mobile’s coverage is patchy and even in urban areas when you can get coverage, I couldn’t ever get download speeds greater than 1Mb/s as measured by Speedtest. Wifi was also pretty average at best, with the odd exception of an AirBNB we stayed at in Idyllwild, California, in the mountains, a long way from anywhere.
Back in New Zealand, using either Spark or Vodafone, tethering is allowed, speeds are regularly above 50Mb/s using 4G networks that are widely available, and it’s relatively inexpensive. Wifi in peoples’ homes is generally good, and I really missed my cable broadband where again download speeds are reliably 50Mb/s.
Who would have picked Vietnam as a star performer, and Europe and the USA as letdowns?
OK, these measurements provide an anecdotal picture at best. I know that:
Speedtest is not a reliable measure of speed
We were staying mainly in rural areas
NZ’s domestic network is super fast for cached and local content, but we’re still 150+ ms from anywhere in the world other than Australia
But still… I regularly hear Kiwi individuals and institutions whinge about how our Internet is both slow and expensive. That may have been true a few years ago, but things have really improved a lot recently. Anecdotally, that’s great for Kiwi individuals, businesses, and the economy.
Every Passover, at least one guest asks us how we made the brisket. Here’s my mom’s recipe for brisket, or as we used to call it af Idish, flanken. It uses the classic Eastern European “gedempt” or braising cooking method.
Slab(s) of brisket, about 100g (just less than 1/4 lb) per serving
Onions, about 1 per serving
Brown the onions in olive oil in a cast iron skillet. Use lots of them, I really mean lots, as in about 10 medium onions per kilo of meat – this is what gives an otherwise bland dish its flavour. To brown the onions, start them on high heat, and reduce the heat as the onions begin to brown to prevent burning. You’ll know they’re done when they are a translucent golden brown. Don’t forget to run your extractor fan!
Cut the slab(s) of brisket into pieces that will just fit into your casserole dish. Preheat your oven to 180C = 350F.
Clean the skillet you just used for browning the onions, and dry thoroughly. Heat a small amount of olive oil in the skillet, and then brown the slab(s) for about 5 minutes each side. Place the browned slab(s) in the casserole dish, smothering the slab(s) in the browned onions. Layer if necessary, slab-onion-slab-onion. Squish any excess browned onion around the sides of the slabs.
Pour in enough boiled water to cover the slabs. Add a bay leaf or two, and as many whole peppercorns as you’re comfortable with. Cover the casserole dish, and bake for 3-4 hours, turning the slabs and adding water to ensure they’re covered every hour or so.
Allow to cool for 10-15 minutes before removing the slabs from the broth and carving into long slices, cutting against the grain with a very sharp knife. Serve with the broth as gravy.
Comments : Comments Off on Brisket, the Classic Recipe
1) Tell me why
Simply asking to connect ain’t enough – let me know why, is it for a particular job, because of my background, due to something of mine you read, looking to connect with someone I know or because you recently met me and think we should be keeping track of each other.
2) Give me a hint at how we might know each other
Have I already met you, were we at the same event, do we have a mutual friend or two that told you that we need to meet, etc … please give me a clue.
Then we can connect, and hopefully do some cool stuff together.
If you don’t tell me how we might know each other, and why you think we should connect, the you start looking like someone who is just connecting contacts for the fun of it, or worse, a spammer.
The above was plagiarised shamelessly with permission from my good friend +Mike Riversdale, aka @MiramarMike, whose many endearing qualities include that he’s still using G+. Thanks Mike!
Should our children be taught Christianity (or any other specific religion) in state schools?
If this is of interest to you, read on…
I’ve been invited by David Hines to join the Secular Education Network’s mediation at the Human Rights Commission, in which they are lodging a complaint against the Ministry of Education in an attempt to remove Religious Instruction in state schools. The scheduled date for the mediation is Monday 23 February.
The objectives of this campaign are to:
Promote an inclusive school curriculum, which does not require any student to withdraw from class on account of different religious beliefs.
Cease the practice of volunteer-run religious instruction during school hours.
Treat all religious organisations who wish to use the school facilities outside of the school day with transparent and equitable policies.
The central problem is that Section 78 of the Education Act 1964 which allows state schools to provide up to 60 minutes of RI per week, so long as it’s approved by the Board of Trustees. Much of the demand and curriculum relate to Christianity. Side effects of this policy include children being separated from their peers (with the potential for exclusion and ridicule) on the basis of their religion, the denigration of non-Christian points of view in state schools which should be neutral, and the unfair use of public property and resources for prosylitising.
SEN isn’t against Religious Instruction, it’s just saying that the appropriate place for Religious Instruction is in the places of worship of the concerned communities, not in public schools which are attended by children with an increasingly wide variety of heritages. The SEN position is that it is appropriate for public schools to teach about world religions, but in an inclusive, neutral way that respects diversity, encourages children to express their own beliefs and develops empathy about the beliefs of others.
My own personal perspective can be briefly summarised as: One of the main reasons we’ve sent our three children to state schools is so that they didn’t have to endure Religious Instruction at school, or any of the “alternatives activities” that might single them out for differentiation.
Although I’m not a member of SEN, I’ve been asked to provide a Jewish perspective at the mediation, but I’d be really interested in perspectives from others.
If you would like me to reflect your opinion at the mediation, please comment below, or drop me a line. If you’re doing the latter, let me know if I can use your name at the HRC mediation.
Thanks in advance for your consideration, and helping Aotearoa/NZ become a more inclusive society.
I took some notes before the panel, of all of the things that I wanted to say – but of course in these situations you never really get to say everything you want to, so I thought it might be useful to share them.
Diversity – leadership, sales, tech, project management. You very rarely get these in one person.
Adaptability – you need to be able to learn quickly from the active and passive feedback you’re getting, and pivot accordingly.
Big enough to support your goals; this generally means going after a market of 7 billion (the world) versus 4 million (New Zealand)
Plenty of room for growth
One in which you have a valuable point of difference from your competitors
Your team has experience in the domain you’re trying to attack. There’s no point in trying to send a rocket to the moon if you’ve never seen the sky.
Track record in the tasks required to launch and operate your business.
This is what will carry you through the dark times and keep you excited about the change you’re trying to affect in the market and the world
You’re solving a significant problem that people actually have
It works, and can be shown to work
Potential customers are demonstrably willing to pay for it
You have a great network of fans and supporters
You’re operating in an ecosystem that supports you
You are making a real difference in your community
You have enough money, or access to enough money to make your business fly
You have the ability and networks to establish and maintain a presence in remote markets. [see note below]
You have a way of getting your product or service in front of people so that they know you exist
You have a supply chain that is interested in working with you
If you’re selling direct, the product has in-built viral mechanisms to ensure your existing users are helping distribute your product
Lack of distribution is a common failure point for Kiwi startups.
You need to make your own luck. It helps to have a plan. Seriously.
Note on resources: “No worries”, I hear you say, “We’re an Internet based business operating from New Zealand, the Internet brings us everywhere so that we don’t need to be there physically ourselves.” If only. Unfortunately, each geographic market has its own cultural, legal, and physical peculiarities, and there’s no substitute for actually being there to establish yourself. Sure, there are pure plays like github or noip to which geography is completely irrelevant, but these are few and far between.
On the panel, Masha said that NZ is a useful test market, in that our demographics are similar to the rest of the developed world. I’d argue that these similarities are usually very superficial. The killer difference between NZ and the rest of the world is the structure of our market. There’s one degree of separation in NZ, and practically everyone knows or has easy access to everyone else. The rest of the world does not operate like that – distribution is critical. As a global startup, every week you spend chasing the New Zealand market is a week spent learning the wrong lessons. To extend Steve Blank, don’t only get out of the building, get out of the country!
Finally, the number 8 wire mentality is killing us. Sure, we’re great all-rounder generalists, very flexible, and very resourceful. This is great for building a prototype, but suboptimal for building a scalable business that can compete on the world stage. By all means build your minimum viable product out of number 8 wire, but plan out which bits need to be shored up to be industrial strength as you scale. And rather than relying on cousin Trev who has a passing acquaintance with a specialist aspect of your business, do bring in some people who have deep experience, rather than relying on mates and mates-of-mates to see you through.