Seems to me that if the Federal government told them where they must live, that government has a responsibility to provide safe drinking water. For nations that are self governed and are able to move around on their traditional lands, I’d argue that it’s up to them to find safe drinking water.
Treaty status and details should also be taken into consideration.
Because what happens when your referent changes? Which direction is Mars from Earth? We obviously need a single navigational system that works anywhere in the universe.
Why? If they were already using Signal, they weren’t about to stop using it when it dropped SMS. If they weren’t using it… any encryption was window dressing anyway.
What they found though was that people were just using it for SMS, not realizing that this meant it was insecure. People kept choosing convenience over security. Removing that support was well messaged almost a year before it was done; that’s the slowest rug pull I’ve ever seen.
Locking it to phone numbers? THAT was an untrustworthy move. But removing SMS meant that people could no longer pretend to be secure when they really weren’t.
RCS requires server-side processing, so it requires the org providing it to be large enough to be able to peer with the other orgs providing it and the telcos routing it.
And the encryption isn’t part of the core RCS soec that’s compatible between providers.
Why would Signal removing support for an insecure messaging platform make you trust them a lot less? They were pretty clear about why it was done and gave plenty of warning.
Hon Chan, B.C. Conservative MLA for Richmond Centre, expressed concerns about the broad definition of reckless driving.
According to the bill, reckless driving could include late left turns in some cases, driving too closely behind another driver on the highway and driving behaviour that intentionally prevents another driver from passing.
I see the concern. Unsafe driving of those types is extremely common in Richmond. Those are driving decisions fully under the driver’s control, and illegal. If someone is intentionally doing something illegal under a government issued license, a temporary suspension while being investigated sounds entirely reasonable to me.
However, I can also see how easily it could be weaponized by an officer. Seems to me the suspension should be handled just like a speeding ticket — still disputable in court.
Because before, they were buying Intel’s chips, many of which were being fabbed by TSMC.
Now, Apple is developing the chips to their own specs, and Intel is joining TSMC as a fab house. Apple controls the design and manufacturing volumes, is the sole customer for the chips, and has an alternative fab house they can turn to if either Intel or TSMC falls down on the job.
Thing is, Alberta is Texas Lite, and BC wouldn’t want to be lumped in with California. Canada has a different view of Nation overall than the US. Our identity would be swallowed up by joining a confederation of states that don’t really even understand what we are, let alone care.
That’s a load of generalizations, but I can’t really imagine the majority of BC being happy even with Cascadia at this point… most of the province would find it too liberal and anti-socialist, and the cities would find it too conservative.
And that’s of course ignoring the fact that most of BC still has no treaties, so the First Nations would want to have a say in how this went down, and aren’t likely going to want to give up their land.
Apple said “no” and they reversed course.