He’s waiting for the federal government to solve it for him. That way he can both get away with not spending much, and having someone to pin the blame on if things go sideways. So right now I think he’s waiting for Carney to start these federal initiatives so he can play the partner.
We can’t stop sovereign countries from banning services. We can however have external Fediverse services not comply with cutting off access to users from those sovereign countries, leaving it up them to ensure their citizens don’t have access. Since we’re not making off of doing business in those countries we can ignore non-legal requests instead of voluntarily complying. Then some of the more technical people in such places could use the existing tools for blocking circumvention in order to access the Fediverse if they really want to.
Oh yes, much better than the original article.
So fucking annoying. Not that I believed he’s reformed or anything, but I low-key hoped maybe something has stuck with him during his Trump heartbreak.
Ah yes, Berta looking at the effects of money in politics down south and saying - yeah I want more of that. This doesn’t bode well for Canada as a whole. A corporate-supercharged runaway clown car in Alberta can do a lot of damage to the rest of Canada. Perhaps the damage the UCP is doing is eventually going to snap some Albertans out of it.
Typical Quebec win.
Apart from running many instances which keeps copies of other communities which happens automatically when a user on an instance subscribes to a community; organize larger instances into well funded non-profits that can weather attacks. Lemmy.ca, sh.itjust.works and Lemmy.world already have non-profits formed. An example of what this could look like is the Wikimedia Foundation. Obviously won’t be as wealthy at least not in the short term.
And then when the other party is unhappy with some judge’s decision they go with “RADICAL DEMOCRAT JUDGE!”
Looks like iOS.
Totally. I was thinking about China the other day, how crazy they seemed for building the Great Firewall fifteen years ago. I felt sad for their citizens being cutoff from the internet. Now I’m sitting here looking in and I’m all like - fuck, this has been a major contributor to their sovereignty. Both in that this allowed their own strong digital economy to develop instead of getting hooked on American Big Tech, and in that it keeps the propaganda that’s threatening us at bay. I’m not saying that censorship is amazing all around but just like you said, had they gone with free speech online, they’d be subject to whatever Big Social makes money from that day. It’s crazy how the tables have turned from this perspective. I’m not optimistic that there’s a solution that both keeps speech free and protects us from this problem.
They would have swept the election if they ran without a leader.
Don’t set your hopes too high. Ebike chargers wattage typically starts where the most powerful USB-C chargers end.
“Last time I checked there hasn’t been any judges elected. Maybe that’s the problem — we should do what the U.S. does,” Ford said at a news conference announcing proposed changes to bail reform. “Let’s start electing our judges, holding them accountable, and that’s my rant for the day, because I’ve just had it.”
Remember when he disavowed Trump a couple of months ago? I can hear this in Trump’s “UneLEctED JuDGeS!!” voice.
What happened?
Aha, so what they’re getting is some form of continued weapons delivery. Do you know if they’re getting all the weapons they need? Rory Stewart says US would be stopping the deliveries of some of the important missile systems. I haven’t checked that independently.
I think US companies have and still do operate in regions with active conflict, so their operations don’t seem to provide the shield Magno Mussolini suggests. All Putin has to do is … not target them. I’m not implying you’re saying otherwise, I’m just filling in the detail.
Why, cost of labor?
I didn’t downvote btw.
So if there’s no security guarantees here, why are they signing this? I understand that this would let American capital flow into these ventures in Ukraine, but I doubt only American firms want to mine those resources. I’d imagine they can get a better deal if they shop around. Smells like a grift by some in Ukraine’s top brass.
I would keep away the bits about fascism and the choice between similar parties and all that. Instead I’d frame it around a simple argument about making it easy to elect them instead of losing seats to vote split. Every candidate/MP understands vote split and how it can deprive them from holding their seat/job. Also add in that context that you want to make it easy for you and your family and friends to elect them. Framing it in simple terms that describe benefit to them instead of moral / ethical terms should gain more traction with anyone looking at it, from the staff member reading the email to the MP if they get to read it. Staying away from fascism avoids potentially thought halting terms. If the audience already knows the problems with the current system in the terms described in OP’s blob, chances are they’re already on the electoral reform boat.