Good point. This is why I pointed out how the system is actually working underneath. It’s all about how the funding and money is flowing in this so called party system. It’s by association and purity tests. It’s not really by “you got in because you have actual good ideas for the greater good of society and humanity”. It’s about “they/him/her scratched his back so now we scratch their backs”.

Then this would lead to the result of - how do we get money influence out of politics? In a simple way of explaining, one way would to do it would be to publicly fund each nominee/contender/incumbent BUT make the funding equal, make the media coverage equal, etc. Have an unified standard of how these metrics are presented. Even their promises presented, measured and compared. These are just ideas, but it’s not impossible to do these. I’m sure there’s many ways we can to level the playing field to an extent where it’s not always big money crushing everything.

I can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not, but cultural protectionism is in a way anti-progress, it sequesters cultural ideas to be almost ‘stuck in time’. But let’s be real, Canadian artists, while talented, haven’t really been backed by the government to push beyond the North American market, or even beyond its own nation’s borders. Look at K-pop and all of what South Korea has managed. It’s clear that language isn’t really the barrier - but rather what companies and governments are willing to back and put money where it matters.

How about we get rid of political parties and ban them from identifying themselves as ‘X party’ to begin with, huh? After all, political parties aren’t even supposed to be part of the system. At the same time, ban these political parties from funding specific member campaigns. At the heart of it is how these MP’s are backed by these so-called parties - which enables these parties to ‘whip votes’. It all functions like a mafia group right now. Money is the reason why these political parties exist, but it also keeps out those that deserve/want to serve Canadians out due to the lack of funding because of ideological purity tests of bullshit.

Would it be a mess? Of course, at the start. But maybe a new system would emerge that would actually represent each constituents better rather than being held by a ideological gun-point via party funding.

We desperately need voting and government reform.

FIFA is corrupt AF. The amount of FIFA advertising and promotion coming out from all of BC’s public services is gross. What makes it even more disgusting is how much our services seemingly rolled over and just signed away every leverage and right and let FIFA dictate all the terms.

Canada - especially the federal government - is balls deep in with Microslop. Policy makers are 100% being lobbied + no idea how to even navigate the clusterfuck of a tech stack that’s been built up over the decades.

But hey they going to keep mandating everyone to go back into the office and use Microslop Teams when US tech companies have already publicly said they cannot guarantee that Canadian data doesn’t get router through US servers. cue applause /s

Just banned from owning Canadian newspapers? What kind of shortsighted headline is that. Canada has been consistently sold off and facilities shut down over time. And this all happened with the stamp of approval from our federal governments (both Liberal and Conservative).

Look at our natural resources sector for example. We ship raw materials out (lumber, oil, minerals) for cheap and it is sold back to us at a premium. We need to keep these resources here so that people here can turn them into goods that is sold at a higher premium. This elevates our wages and allows our government to collect more taxes which in turn improves public services. Alas, our politicians are not only bought and paid for, but love to stick to their neoliberal ideology. It’s all short term gains.

You know what are also a significant problem coming from the US? Their guns, their ideaology, their crap additives in food, and their inconsistent policy making just to name a few.

Yes, but there’s something called scanners - like the ones used in airports - not the old style x-ray. The ones that actually can differentiate materials, layers etc. There are even ones in airports (the last time I encountered this was in more updated airports in Europe), where you don’t even have to take out your laptops etc.

It doesn’t matter what this bill does or doesn’t do or who is for or against. It ultimately is an form of governmental power creep into everyday Canadian lives. We know that one can gather a good amount of information based on meta data alone.

If the police can demand meta data nilly-willy because of ‘suspected’ anything, then this is ripe for abuse - the language in the bill is too vague and encompasses too much. That is the problem with this bill. Just because the U.S. already ‘does it’ because Canadians use U.S. based services is a bad faith argument because that is just where the cards have landed (for better or worse). But it does not have to be so.

It doesn’t require a lot to qualify to be a police officer. Remember the freedumb convoy and how the federal government had to use emergency powers - gee, I wonder why? Now think again of what type of people enter the police force - you think giving them this kind of power is a good idea?

Did everyone also forget that this government has already started to encroach on personal privacy by allowing your parcel to be opened in transit?

So over the development of the internet, what changed? If this is truly about illegal activity (they often like to say drugs, CSAM, firearms) and giving law enforcement better ways of gathering info to stop it - we aren’t getting to the root of the problem. Ask yourself why people turn to drugs. Ask yourself why people turn to CSAM (it’s a mental illness that needs to be addressed). Ask yourself why people need firearms. This bill is nothing but a power grab and does nothing to resolve the root problem.

The only thing I smell from this bill is the fear of boomers. Afraid of losing control.

Just make another / multiple deal. Silly people. Both sides are snakes - so do snake things right?

You’ve proven my point that our unions in Canada are pathetically weak. Sweden’s, for example, strike for each other or make it painful for companies/businesses to conduct unfavourable labour practices.

Sure - but a large number of unemployed, broke and hungry people are going to be very desperate. I believe the saying goes something along the lines of - “every government is just a few meals away from collapse”.

Did everyone forget that the Bank of Canada announced ‘Canadians must accept a lower standard of living’? or the fact their ‘sovereign wealth fund’ idea is literally tax payer funded via debt? or their plan to ‘attract’ 1 trillion in investment (read as ‘private equity coming in and reaping Canadian resources while we give them very favourable terms’). Gee, I wonder why they want to union bust.

This government has forgotten what a general strike is. On the other hand, unions today are so pathetically weak that they can’t even stand up for each other.

The thing is…photonics is a key piece of technology in the grand scheme of things in AI infrastructure. If we are to have sovereign technology within Canada, we need to have inhouse capabilities. I mean, do we really want to pull another Nortel here?

Also, often times the public invests in these technologies since no one else would or it’s not “profitable”. And when it does become an emergent technology or critical piece of capability, the Canadian government always end up selling it off or privatizing it when it’s a critical key component in keeping Canada competitive without being beholden to other sovereign states or companies. Remember COVID and how we don’t have any labs to accelerate research because the previous Conservatives sold or closed all of them? Nortel? Bombardier? I mean, sure none of these are perfect, but better than nothing? Why is it are we always pennywise and pound foolish in the long term? How is it that these governmental policies are so short term sighted when a country should be looking at the long term impacts of not just 4 years, but rather 10+ years.

It started all with Canada Post…the way things are going it’s going to be sell sell sell.

Do it be damned and don’t do it be damned. What a situation they got themselves into.

The wealth gap is only going to increase with this current government and their policies. It all points to something really simple - assets are going up in value, while the dollar purchasing power is going down. Anyone without a good amount of assets are going to get squashed over time. This is by design since the introduction of a central banking system with a target of 2% inflation.

The amount of people that lack basic financial literary in Canada is abhorrent - and I can see why those in power want to keep it that way. If financial literacy was taught in high school in grades 11-12, I think things would be a lot different on how people view government policies and media propaganda.

But hey, let’s back off on these carbon taxes and fuel excise taxes now - I’m sure the common person is going to benefit soooo much! /s. Meanwhile look at the massive fleets of cars/trucks/vans that these businesses have - they just straight up save 5% for the next 5 months. But oh wait, I’m sure big oil and gas is going to gobble up those savings real fast and quote “uncertainty”… It’s all kind of pathetic on every level of government. We know that collective bargaining allows us to gain better prices in the long run, yet we don’t “bulk” buy as a country as a whole. Really stupid.

This conversation chain is hilarious. The guy in the video does a great job, but you don’t want to watch 90 minutes - then watch the first 30 minutes at the very least without skimming. Okay, but then I see you go do long replies - how long did all of that take you in total? an hour? 90 minutes? for what? But it appears that you prefer it presented as a Coles notes version so maybe you learn differently.

To put it in simpler terms for those that still haven’t gotten it, if you were min-maxing for the long game, which one would ultimately come out on top? You must consider the cost of not only capital, but also environmental impacts and how this will affect the general economy as as a whole (agriculture for example rely on stable weather patterns). I am sure the long view is to go for the one that is long term sustainable with minimal drawbacks.

The only common ground that we can agree on is that the best we can do right now is to have a hybridized system. But we need to start transitioning where possible - and fast. The solar tech mentioned in the video has vastly improved since its inception. This isn’t going to happen overnight, nor in 5 years or 10 years. This is an ongoing project for humanity as a whole. Producing usable and store-able energy without killing ourselves in the long term is one of the biggest hurdles we have to face as humans.

Clearly this sub haven’t seen this video from Technology Connections. It breaks it all down for you step by step why the statement is true.

Swapped to Linux Mint over the weekend. No major issues. Steam works, LLMs work, web browser stuff all transferred over…it wasn’t perfect but pretty easy to figure it out with a few online searches. The best part - it actually runs better. No more f*cked up bluetooth and audio as well.

A lot of customization can be done on it, but I think for most people, Linux is fine for the vast majority of users already out of the box. Some criticism is that I think the UX can be improved and a more layman-friendly streamlined partition mounting + file security management.