Imposter contacted at least three foreign ministers, a US governor, and a member of Congress
A cable from the top US diplomat's office said the unidentified culprit was likely seeking
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
4 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Stolen puppy recovered
A 31-year-old man driving an allegedly stolen Mitsubishi ute led police to a stolen American bulldog puppy. Senior Sergeant Anthony Bond, of Dunedin, said the man, who was forbidden from driving, was charged with receiving stolen property and driving without a licence. As a result of the arrest, police also located an American bulldog puppy, stolen on July 2. Police returned the puppy to its owners. The man was also charged over the theft of the dog, Snr Sgt Bond said. — APL
Scoop
18 hours ago
- Scoop
NZ's First National AI Strategy Released
The strategy released yesterday afternoon is a signal of 'unwavering support for private sector investment in AI,' the government says. The strategy document says NZ's use of Artificial Intelligence 'shows promise but requires acceleration,' and that the government's role includes reducing barriers, providing regulatory guidance, building capability, and ensuring responsible adoption. The document itself was also 'written with the assistance of AI.' The Science Media Centre asked experts to comment. Dr Collin Bjork, Senior Lecturer in Communication at Massey University, comments: 'This announcement makes plain the government's full-throated support for AI investment across all sectors (especially medical, agriculture, and education) due to its perceived economic benefits, which are almost certainly overblown, and some clearly expressed FOMO. But other than adding their voices to the AI hype train, this government announcement is a bit of a 'nothing burger' on multiple levels. 'On one level, it's a nothing burger because the government promises very little in the way of new policies or investments around AI. Instead, they largely point to existing investments and policies that were already in the works and that they believe will help with AI uptake. 'On another level, it's a nothing burger because it articulates no practical steps to ensure AI safety and ethics because the government prefers instead to take a 'light touch' that relies on existing legislation rather than new regulation. But the problem is that a chunk of our existing legislation is out of date. While other countries have passed media legislation to regulate the Silicon Valley tech giants, Aotearoa New Zealand is behind in this area. And many of these same tech giants are also the largest players in AI. 'This announcement maintains the AI status quo. And the status quo isn't good enough yet. Kiwis would benefit from coupling strategic investment with critical regulation. But we don't need the empty carbs of more AI hype.' No conflicts of interest. Dr Karaitiana Taiuru (Ngāi Tahu, Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngāti Toa), AI and Tech Governor at Taiuru & Associates and Director at the Institute of AI Governance, comments: 'While 'Te Tiriti' does not specifically have its own headings in the strategy documents, throughout the documents are tens of references to Māori and Māori Data, tikanga, cultural considerations and actions. There are also case studies of Māori AI businesses. Overall, these all equate to the principles of Te Tiriti and offer a fair and representative consideration of Māori with AI. 'Research reflects that most big tech and many smaller NZ tech companies are adopting Tiriti and Māori views already, as are about 50% of government agencies in relation to AI and Data. 'In addition to the strategy documents, we must also consider that StatsNZ are guided by ' The Data and Statistics Act 2022 ' which has a Tiriti clause, noting that StatsNZ have an agreement with Iwi Leaders Forum Data Group for data consultation, as does the Department of Internal Affairs, and that both departments have committed millions of dollars to partnerships. 'As well as Te Tiriti, there are also many other legal instruments to protect Māori rights – it's not unusual for them to be left out of legislation or strategies, but they still exist and provide protection for Māori rights when it comes to AI and data.' Conflicts of interest: Chair of the Kāhui Māori at the AI Forum. Associate Professor Adrian Clark, School of Product Design, University of Canterbury, comments: 'The national AI strategy provides a sensible approach towards increasing adoption of AI in the New Zealand private sector, focusing on the application of AI technology within key economic sectors such as agriculture, healthcare, education and business rather than trying to compete with large technology companies in foundational AI. I agree with this approach in the Generative AI space, however I believe NZ can still compete internationally in non-generative AI research. 'Beyond economic initiatives, the strategy presents several NZ case studies in driving AI innovation, including some where New Zealand is uniquely positioned to be a world leader. For example, Te Hiku Media and KIWA Digital are utilising AI technology for Indigenous Language Preservation through speech recognition and media localisation respectively, and Manatū Taonga's 'Amplify' strategy highlights the importance of protecting the creative and cultural sectors from AI-related threats. 'The largest, and perhaps most significant, part of the strategy discusses barriers to AI adoption in NZ and how the government is planning to address them. These barriers include widespread concerns such as ethical and responsible use of AI and replacement of humans in the workforce, however I felt the response to these concerns would have benefited from more detail.' Conflict of interest statement: 'I have a grant application under consideration to research AI in education.' Dr Andrew Lensen, Senior Lecturer/Programme Director of Artificial Intelligence, Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, comments: 'As expected, the Government's AI Strategy is heavy on economic growth opportunities but worryingly light on the ethical and societal issues of AI. The Strategy takes a 'light-touch and principles-based approach', all but ruling out new legislation for managing the risks of AI. The Strategy suggests that new legislation is unnecessary, which I, and many other AI researchers, disagree with. Having 'Principles' is not nearly sufficient to reduce AI-induced harm, bias, and inequity—we need clear legislation and well-resourced enforcement mechanisms to ensure AI does not further harm New Zealanders. 'The AI Strategy does not mention The Treaty of Waitangi—not even once. Māori face unique risks from AI, with most modern AI systems being sourced from overseas Western contexts, which have been designed with Western values in mind. Consider, for example, a healthcare AI system sourced from the USA—how can there be no guidance in the AI Strategy about the need to validate and refine such systems for the unique demographics of our society? 'This AI Strategy sets a dangerous path forward for New Zealand, with an attitude of economic growth above social good.'
Newsroom
18 hours ago
- Newsroom
Buy now, and get a free set of knives in the back
Analysis: All for only 25 percent, plus shipping and handling. Buy now, and get a free knifing in the back. The stream of leader-to-leader tariff letters being posted on US President Donald Trump's social media feed as I write (14 and counting) are rather reminiscent of those late-night TV infomercials of yesteryear. But Trump isn't selling miracle balance thigh and ab trainers made in China. He's selling 'more balanced, and fair, TRADE' – and the US as a manufacturing location. 'We will charge Kazakhstan a Tariff of only 25% on any and all Kazakh products sent into the United States, separate from all Sectoral Tariffs!', 'We will charge Thailand a tariff of only 36%', 'We will charge Laos a Tariff of only 40%'. These are form letters, with only the names and percentages changed. They all rely on the fictional and inimical trade deficits first concocted on 'Liberation Day', in April. 'This Deficit is a major threat to our Economy and, indeed, our National Security!' Trump concludes, on each. 'Thank you for your attention to this matter!' Some of the tariffs are slightly increased on April's announcement; most are slightly reduced. The pause on implementation, for all of them, has been extended from July 9 to August 1. Trump has also threatened new tariffs on any nation supporting the 'anti-American' policies of the Brics group of emerging economies – Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and others. New Zealand isn't directly affected; the tariff for this country is the White House's baseline 10% applied to countries that haven't specifically piqued Trump. That's painful to our exporters (and to US consumers) but is not expected to rise. Yet. Winston Peters' office says they and officials are monitoring the announcements closely. Immediate challenges for New Zealand include: 1) The impact on our trading partners. China and the US have cooled their initial tit-for-tat trade war, but nonetheless, most East Asian nations are being hit with the new tariffs. The trade war is expected to lead to slowing growth in the US and Asia, in particular. That means eight of New Zealand's 10 biggest export destinations are directly affected; only Singapore, Australia and perhaps the UK remain in the 10 percent 'other nations' category like New Zealand. The slowing of those economies will constrain their ability to pay the prices Kiwi exporters might hope for. I spoke with Felicity Roxburgh, the new executive director of the NZ International Business Forum. She was watching the announcements roll through yesterday morning. 'This kind of unilateral action threatens the rules-based trading system that small, export-dependent economies like New Zealand rely on,' she told me. 'They create uncertainty which negatively impacts New Zealand.' 2) Trump has made it clear he doesn't like national drug-buying schemes like those in Australia and New Zealand. Last month he promised that US trade duties on pharmaceutical products (exempted from the initial round of tariffs) were coming 'very soon'. As with other goods, he wants companies to manufacture their drugs in America. And he wants consumers and governments to pay the premium prices that the big US pharma companies believe are justified by the research and marketing they've put into their medicines. This is a problem for drug-buying agencies such as Pharmac, trying to get the best prices they can within inevitably constrained budgets, to make as many good and important medicines as possible available to New Zealanders, whether or not they can afford full-cover health insurance packages. And it's a problem for New Zealand; there's a degree of political consensus over the principles behind our drug-purchasing model, a delicate balance that will be upset if Trump tilts the scales. 3) The big question is how does the New Zealand Government react? Despite Peters' claim on Liberation Day to have won New Zealand the lowest tariffs in the world, the most we can really claim is to not have aggravated Trump into imposing higher tariffs. To that extent, a tactic of keeping our head below the parapets remains attractive – certainly, seeking direct negotiations with the White House would be dangerous. It's at such a point that Trump's advisers might alert him to the existence of Pharmac, or GST, or New Zealand's attempts to work within the OECD on a digital services taxation agreement. But at some point, New Zealand has to stand alongside its partners in the Asia-Pacific, who face great harm from these tariffs. It's low-wage workers in Asean countries such as Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia who have really been targeted by this morning's announcements. New Zealand has been one of the world's strongest champions of free or low-tariff trade within an international rules-based framework. Frameworks like the World Trade Organisation or more recently, the CPTPP, protect New Zealanders and protect those even less able to stand up to the might of the bickering superpowers. New Zealand must walk the fine line of protecting its own export interests, while not selling out the principles on which it has stood so strong, for so long.
