Fair, I may have misunderstood. I assumed the only way the city could help would be financially.

You likely had something else in mind.

Why on earth would you expect a city to jump in and fix a provincial issue???

I never understand why so many people are constantly making excuses for provincial governments who don’t do their job.

Sponsors pay more upfront. If creators are only using sponsors than their whole back catalogue is basically valueless. If it costs a creator 2-10 cents a month to host a video (based off S3 pricing), but they only made 1000$ on it upfront when the video was made, overtime the back catalogue becomes a pretty significant financial burden if it’s not being monetized

Also it’s worth keeping in mind that many people are also using tools to autoskip sponsor spots, and the only leverage creators have for being paid by sponsors are viewership numbers.

Patreon is irrelevant, that’s just like Nebula, floatplane etc, it’s essentially a subscription based alternative to YouTube.

Discoverability is pointless if the people discovering you aren’t going to financial contribute. It’s the age old “why don’t you work for me for free, the exposure I provide will make it worth your time”, that hasn’t been true before and likely isn’t here. Creators aren’t looking to work for free (at least not the ones creating the high quality content we’re used to today)

The protocol isn’t the hard part. It’s the monetizing that is. Creators aren’t looking to provide content for free, especially if they are also now paying for hosting costs.

Ad spots (like Google does) work well because they can inject an up to date ad into an old video. In something like the fedeverse today a creators only option would be ads baked into the video, but they would only get paid for that up front which isn’t ideal…

I fail to follow how a competitor can pop up if the main users it’s attracting are ones that don’t want to view ads or pay for subscriptions.

Which is totally fair. There is so much misinformation flying around about this tax. The rich are flexing every muscle they have to try to make the general population dislike this change.

This change has no impact of the sale of a primary residence.

If they are selling a secondary residence and that sale is resulting in over 250k in profit than they are impacted, as they should be.

I had read that post already. Even if there are things that she’s doing that isn’t great, it doesn’t really justify a group of people circlejerking hate about them.

From the posts I’ve seen so far, it feels like the community is stating that they only exist to criticize what they see as a misleading influencer, but to me it all comes off as bullying/harrassment.

If they want to encourage change of some sort they could try and do that, but that’s not what the posts are encouraging, it feels like generic woman hate targeted at a single woman.

It’s frustrating because this government didn’t make up the name. This is a well understood system. By calling it by the typical name it should be easier for people to look into it understand it.

But so many people lack the ability to look into things and instead just listen to what politicians say.

But of course none of that matters these days. 😞

Sounds like a good incentive for them to implement the carbon capture they are so obsessed with.

I also hate every part of this and will turn it off as soon as it shows up.

But in terms of who actually wants this. If an AI assistant were to exist, and if it was actually going to be useful to someone, it would need to know just about everything in your life. At least in theory… In order for an assistant to be useful you would want to be able to ask it “what was Italian restaurant I was thinking of trying” and you would want a response.

I’m not sure this privacy nightmare of an implementation is the correct path to that, but that’s roughly what I suspect the desired outcome is.

There already aren’t gas stations in these remote locations. Why would there need to be EV chargers??

The thought of having rail service small campsites is comical.

If we did move to a world where cities are dense enough that public transit did replace cars for most people, cars would still be a viable rental for when leaving the city.

I’m always confused by these criticisms, do I misunderstand how they work?

Reading this article, this 1.7million is an interest free loan, so taxpayers are only covering the lost potential of that money being used elsewhere, unless something happens whichs exempts them paying back.

For the various EV related plants, the majority of the subsidies are tax rebates. Which means the company needs to setup and actively operating in Canada such that they are making enough revenue in Canada that their paying enough taxes to be able to untalize any rebate. As Canadian taxpayers the tax revenue were missing is purely net-new revenue that wouldn’t exist if the company didn’t setup here. It’s not like we’re writing a blank check, we’re just saying that if they setup here and start making money, they can pay us less money for the first while.

Neither of those feel like obvious bad deals for Canadians. Am I missing something?

Ok I’ll bite. How does Canadian policy cause global inflation?

The only angle that I can think of is that we’ve had a larger impact on carbon production than most other countries, and at least when it comes to global food inflation, climate change is having a noticable impact. So one might be able to argue that our role in climate change is causing food inflation. But I doubt anyone has actually done any peer reviewed studies on that so it’s likely just assumptions at best.

CBC responded to this https://www.cbc.ca/news/editorsblog/editor-blog-gaza-breach-1.7189987

adding that she “generally” doesn’t attend flag raising events.

Feels like the most relevant part of the article.

Even with everything said, wikipedia is generally a better single source than anything else.

At the very least, it’s always an acceptable starting point for understanding the concepts in a space.

Yep, being aware of that is part of being able to read anything objectively. Every single thing you read has a political slant.

Wikipedia is great because it does reference out to sources, so you can easily find multiple sources and using critical thinking skills you can distill common themes across multiple different sources.

If you’re savvy, you can even look at the page edit history and the “talk” happening behind the article to get a better idea of what parts are disputed and which are generally accepted.

I’ll go back to my earlier point. Wikipedia is a fine place to start to get a summary of all the different aspects of defunding the police, you’re focused on a single source when there isn’t a single definition of the movement overall.