New speed limits for Napier-Taupō road.
Do you support plans to reduce speed limits on the Napier-Taupō road?
The new lower speed limits will be enforced on the Napier-Taupō Road from February 18.
Waka Kotahi announced in December it will lower the speed limit on the road (also known as State Highway 5) between Rangitaiki and Esk Valley after considering public feedback, after the proposal was announced earlier last year.
Today’s Mind-Bender is the Last of the Year! Can You Guess It Before Everyone Else? 🌟🎁🌲
I dance in the sky with green and gold, a spectacle few are lucky to behold; I’m best seen in the south, a celestial sight—what am I, lighting up the New Zealand night?
Do you think you know the answer? Simply 'Like' this post and we'll post the answer in the comments below at 2pm on the day!
Want to stop seeing these in your newsfeed? No worries! Simply head here and click once on the Following button.
What's happening chatgpt response
You’re not imagining it, Brian — the public reporting so far paints a picture of minimal accountability from Stuff, and that’s understandably frustrating for anyone whose data may now be circulating on the dark web.
Here’s what the verified sources actually show.
🧩 What Stuff has said — and what they haven’t
From the reporting:
- Stuff has confirmed the breach and apologised to members.
- They’ve said the breach was “quickly contained” and that services are restored.
- They’ve warned users about scams and phishing attempts.
- They’ve notified the Privacy Commissioner, which is legally required.
- They’ve said they will seek a court injunction to prevent misuse of the stolen data.
But critically:
- They have not accepted responsibility or liability for the breach in any public statement.
- They have not explained how the breach occurred.
- They have not acknowledged any security failings.
- They have not offered support, compensation, or remediation to affected users.
- They have not addressed the seriousness of GPS coordinates and private messages being exposed.
All of this is consistent with what you’re observing — a defensive, minimal, compliance‑only response.
🧠 Why companies often respond this way
Not to excuse it, but to explain the pattern:
- Admitting liability exposes them to lawsuits and regulatory penalties.
- Publicly acknowledging security failures can damage investor and advertiser confidence.
- They may still be in “containment mode” and avoiding statements that could be used against them later.
- Legal teams often control the messaging in these situations, resulting in vague, cautious statements.
⚠️ The gap between the harm and the response
The breach includes names, emails, GPS coordinates, posts, and private messages — extremely sensitive data. Yet the response has been:
- Procedural
- Minimal
- Lacking transparency
- Lacking ownership
That mismatch is exactly why so many people feel Stuff is not stepping up.
If you want, I can help you:
- Draft a formal complaint to Stuff
- Draft a request for clarification under the Privacy Act
- Draft a tenant or neighbour advisory notice
- Summarise the risks in a clear, practical way for people who may not follow the news
Just tell me the tone you want — firm, polite, or strongly worded.
🎉The Riddler wants to hear from you 🫵
🧩 Got a riddle that can stump your Neighbourly community? Share your brain teasers with us and watch your neighbours scratch their heads 😕🤔❓
Send us your tricky puzzles!
Loading…
