Maybe BlueSky has changed since last I looked, but it used to very progressive activist politically. On Twitter I can see right wing, centrist and left wing commentary.
Are you talking Twitter or X? X is in many ways much closer to TruthSocial than any other platform currently is [1] [2]. The only thing that grounds X a bit is the (old) Twitter user base that’s still on there, which is and has been declining.
It’s also interesting that your view of progressive might be different than mine. In this current age, I guess even advocates for DEI are considered too “progressive”. Which (in my opinion) relates more to a shift of right to far right, which shifts the balance, and people mistake it for what are really just centric viewpoints being “leftist”.
To me, BlueSky is the best current alternative to what Twitter originally was.
It’s not exactly what I meant. I meant that any form of DEI is now considered “too progressive” by some, which has to deal also with right shifting to far right, which in turn shifts what is generally considered centrist.
Ultimately, DEI can mean thousands of things, and what is “progressive” left or “extreme” right to some may be centrist to others.
Yeah, I’d consider checking in again. In the very beginning, some viewpoints used to be more dominantly represented than now, as many new people have joined BlueSky from X since.
This^ and to add to that, at the very least MITRE assigned IDs which is great. Plus they did an initial scoring, which, well… will never be perfect like you said and I’m sure these things evolve throughout time and get better (not talking necessarily CVSS vX).
What a shame on this current gov. administration, if you can even call it that.
In addition this is maybe a good option (haven't looked into it) for people (like me, actually) who are just not interested in the formal aspects. I profesionally have nothing to do with electronics whatsoever, but am still naturally interested in it. Learning stuff with formal literature takes away all that natural interest for me and makes it work, so I would eventually stop doing it. Learning it in a practical way though would work way better and keep me interested and motivated.
I agree options are good as no single solution fits everyone, but I feel I too often hear the sentiment that school/uni/courses is useless. And that is just not true.
You took the $165 / 12 and arrived at 13 bucks per month per taxpayer.
But if you had read the rest of the transcript, you’d arrive at this beautiful part:
“The numbers we came up with, the $165 per person and the $11.25 per person, aren't really real because they are based on this idea that everything we sent to Ukraine and everything we sent to Israel came from tax revenue, and that's just not the case.
MCMANUS: The revenue that goes in is not necessarily connected to how the government is actually budgeting. What we're paying in taxes just does not have to match what we spend. So the whole exercise is sort of irrelevant.
GONZALEZ: It's irrelevant because of one big elephant in the room, which is deficit spending. We spend more than we bring in as a country.”
And from who is the US borrowing most of their money from? It currently owes China roughly 850 billion USD, and it has to pay interest on this.
And how does it pay this interest?
Either it borrows more, growing the problem, or it is a portion of your taxes going straight to China <3.
>And from who is the US borrowing most of their money from?
The American people, largely. China owns roughly 3% of America's debt. The overwhelming majority of American debt is hold domestically (and thus eventually returns to US citizens) But if the 13 bucks weren't precise enough for you, the 4% interest America pays on 10 year bonds I suppose bring the monstrous bill up another 50 cents per decade, truly a game changer when it comes to defending the free world.
> It sounds like we’re attaching a few conditions in hopes to end the killing
You really believe that the current administration is acting out of “hopes to end the killing”?
What do you think Greenland is about? About spreading christianity?
The current administration is failing and the top % is profiting off it; eating itself up. It’s a pattern that’s well known.
Internationally, the US is rapidly losing allies all across the board. And internally, facing its facing increasingly extreme inequality in terms of wealth distribution.
The current administration doesn’t even have interesting cards that it can play.
One theory is that Trump waving his tiny dick about Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal has to do about who holds his leash: Putin. The canal doesn't allow Russian ships through it. Canada and Greenland border the Arctic Ocean, which importance rises along with the temperature of the planet. I can imagine Trump fantasizes about letting Putin plant Russian bases in the new states of Canada and Greenland...
It's just 100% about oil oil oil. He's "waving his dick" about Canada in order to try to topple and/or destabilize our governance here and reinforce vassal state status and also shore up the oil industry's political allies here (Danielle Smith, Pierre Poillevre), get carbon taxes etc off the table here, yada yada yada.
The tariffs are intended to be asymmetrical, attacking Central Canadian manufacturing with a 25% import tariff while only applying a 10% tariff to Albertan oil exports (if that even) and simultaneously making noises about reviving Keystone XL.
It's the same crap with the Russia stuff. Oil oil oil.
The asymmetry in the taxes is related to US dependency on Canadian oil. If the US were to tax our oil at 25% every American would feel that at the pump and in their pocket. They're gonna feel it anyways but more so.
The Canadian conservatives are not going to play ball with Trump either. Poilievre is going to win because the current government is terrible. If anything Trump's actions are strengthening the liberals because it forces them to actually do something which they always try to avoid. To some degree this mirrors the poor governance by the democrats in the US that lost them their elections but at least Poilievre is not a moron.
The whole let's tariff Canada is just plain stupidity. There is no logic. There is no way that Canada is going to yield to the US in any way.
The US is in no way dependent on Canadian oil, or any other country's oil. The US under republican administrations is a massive net exporter of oil, and if they buy yours, they do it by choice. The reason for the tariffs is that Canada has a very trade-protectionist foreign policy on everything from maple syrup to cars.
The "it's all about oil" crowd is as stuck in the 1990s as the "we're still in the cold war crowd." This is probably much more about rare earth minerals.
I (obviously) did not mean "dependent" in the sense of can't survive without it. The energy prices in the US reflect the low price energy products they buy from Canada.
It's ridiculous and false to say that in general Canada has a protectionist policy. There are some areas (like maybe milk and maple) where Canada is protecting its local producers but in general Canada is pro free trade. Most of the the trade skirmishes between the countries were around things like soft woods where IMO it was the Americans who were violating the trade agreements.
The insinuation that Canada is somehow taking advantage of the US in trade is just nonsense. The trade imbalance is a reflection of the slower growing Canadian economy (because obviously we are taking advantage of the Americans) and the energy/resources we sell to the US (too cheaply).
Yep. If oil is removed from the equation, the US would have a trade surplus with Canada, so I'm not sure what this person is on about.
The US produces plenty of conventional crude, but imports cheap heavy crude from Canada because it's cheap and the refineries are set up for it. They could eventually transition refining, but ... why? In the end it would just hurt the consumer and provide no strategic advantage.
Like many things, oil and gas pipelines zigzag across the border. Continental integration has been the order of the day for 3/4 of a century at this point.
Yes Canada protects its agricultural sector just like the US does its. We protect dairy especially, but the US massively subsidizes cash crop agri in the US. And in any case, Canada imports more agri from the US than it exports, so, again, it seems very bizarre to try to present some kind of case that Canada is some sort of protectionist parasite.
Are these the talking points the GOP is putting out to try to cover Trump's verbal farts? Because they make no sense. Oh, and governors of GOP states that trade with Canada have also made this very clear, and are not happy with Trump around this issue during this term or the last term when he played these games.
Until literally 5 weeks ago, it was common knowledge and not debated that Canada has a very protectionist attitude toward its local industries, but I see that this has now become contentious because the orange windbag said something about it. Here is a list of several Canadian trade protections:
* The agricultural products that are well-known, including milk, lumber, and the famous Canadian maple syrup cartel
* Similar protections on minerals and other natural resources (including oil), and bans of foreign ownership of natural resource extraction companies
* Canadian TV and radio stations must play a certain fraction of Canadian content
* Significant restrictions on movement of goods between provinces of Canada, and inter-provincial tariffs that add up to quite a lot
* Canada's limits on foreign ownership of companies in the telecommunications and digital equipment sector, as well as companies involved in defense
* A ban on foreign ownership of residential property
* Canada's data localization laws and digital goods tax
I am fine with Canada having a lot of trade protections, but it does.
As the other reply said this is literally nothing. The Canadian maple syrup cartel. I'm literally laughing out loud. Common knowledge in what circles?
Most trade between the US and Canada is free. There is a free trade agreement.
Yes. Canada doesn't want to lose its artists so it supports local musicians. I mean everyone still listens to local TV and Radio stations here. We don't have the Internet in our logging camps.
There is no ban on foreign ownership of residential property. You must be confusing us with Australia.
[EDIT: Sorry but as you noted I am at least partly wrong here. Since 2022 [actually 2023] there are limitations on foreigners buying residential housing in Canada. It has a lot of loopholes but it still exists. You can still own residential property if you acquired it before even if you are a foreigner. This isn't really a trade question anyways].
There's some inter-provincial friction. Not sure what that has to do with anything. Gives the US an advantage.
You pay sales tax on stuff you buy online. That's true in the US as well. I know Amazon really wanted to get around that but hey.
The US supports US companies with various subsidies. It also has lower tax rates. Not fair.
US-Canada trade is a relatively free, win-win. It's not a zero sum game. Now the US administration wants to turn this into a lose-lose zero sum game over some imaginary drug and immigration issues with the border.
All of this adds up to jack-squat, diddly-nothing, when measured against the hundreds of billions of dollars of actual trade. And all represent existing pieces carved out at the time FTA and NAFTA were signed when I was like... 14 years old. And I'm old.
And all of them have corresponding restrictions within the US. You think Lockheed Martin isn't protected? That any Canadian company would be allowed to dominate aerospace or defense or telecoms (not that they could)
And what is this nonsense about "ban on foreign ownership of residential property"? Sounds like a good idea, but it does not exist
Where are you from? Because if you're from Canada, you sound woefully uneducated about your own nation.
(Interprovincial trade limitations are mostly on alcohol and are a remnant from prohibition era laws. And yes, they suck. The other area where the provinces have barriers is around professional certifications.)
I am not a Canadian, but I hope that if you are, you learn more about your own nation's trade policy than a foreigner.
Once again, I am not convinced that these protections are bad for Canada, but they absolutely are a huge subsidy for local business, and a very common tool for Canadian government.
Said "ban" is recent and full of loopholes and in response to a housing emergency
I can tell you that buying residential property in the US as a foreigner isn't a cakewalk either, my dude.
Ask yourself -- Why are you playing into this rhetoric about Canada? You seem like one of the people who 6 months ago would barely even acknowledge we exist, yet now you're an expert...
Not to take away from your accurate point about oil, but I think it's silly to say the "we're still in the cold war" crowd were out of touch in this of all threads.
The cold war view is sophomoric in my opinion because this Russia-Ukraine situation is more of a proxy war between the US and China. In the cold war, Russia was the real geopolitical adversary. In this one, they are more of a geopolitical nuisance and a puppet for a foreign state who wants to test the limits of US capabilities and doctrine in a foreign war like this.
Russia is no longer the big bad guy it used to be. Before the war, they had a crumbling economy the size of Italy's.
What evidence have you seen that this was somehow instigated by China, and not Russian ethnic nationalism/imperialism for its own sake? Remember that this started well before 2022. This is a recap and prescient analysis from 2014: https://www.fpri.org/article/2014/05/putins-greater-novoross...
And you can see a premature declaration of victory along similar lines from the Russian state media, which was then taken down when Ukraine did not in fact fold in three days: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60562240. You can see the archive.org capture of the original article linked there if you wish to see the primary source.
Yes, their GDP is weak (nevertheless, Russia persists). No, it doesn't make any sense if you look at it through a normal Western lens, which is why there was widespread disbelief that Russia was to imminently invade Ukraine. But, as the saying goes, "Russia can't be understood by the mind alone"
Usually, I feel like Jupyter gives both worlds—- flexible scripting and support for os commands (either through !/% or even os.system()