Read a few more words there and find out. He didn't write that legislation, but he approved of it, has had the power to stop it all along, and has not renounced it.
I guess it serves as a data point indicating what the percentage of Americans who will agree to the craziest shit available on the opinion poll answers is up to now. Seems to me it was as low as 10% not too many years ago.
It's a good speech. He'd be a great prime minister if he weren't so fond of fossil fuels, military spending (as opposed to actual defence,) and authoritarian bullshit in the name of security as exemplified in the infamous "border security" bill.
Oh, Doug Ford. Not the Ford Motor Company, which is the Ford I would've thought more likely to complain about having a competitor that's actually capable of selling EVs at reasonable prices.
The main problem is that 49000 is much too small a number given the rate at which Canadians are buying cars.
Social media takes hundreds of different forms (including e.g. Lemmy) and any study pretending that they're all the same is useless — unless you can simply replace "social media" with "Facebook", "TikTok", or whatever they're actually about.
For example the first of the studies linked above finds that using "Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram" more than they normally would makes people depressed, and the second finds that an unspecified mix of whatever people normally do that they think of as "social media" did not. Those findings do not contradict each other and do not represent a meaningful controversy.
Politically it's a controversy, or a tangled mess of controversies. Scientifically it's just a complete mystery that will — at the speed of science — take decades to unravel. With any luck all the findings about fucking Facebook and Twitter will be obsolete much sooner than that because at some point the enshittification will finally get so bad that people come to their senses and stop using them. The free-world versions of social media, such as the fediverse, continue to get better and will win in the long run.
Thinking back to my own youth when the problem was teenagers talking on the phone for hours at a time, I wonder why we didn't just force the phone company to ban young people from using telephones.
"Sweden, Canada, and the Netherlands have confirmed deployments as part of the same multinational operation" according to Newsweek, citing "multiple outlets." I'm pretty sure I heard about it on CBC radio news.
I don't know, but it would be pretty strange for Canada to be left out.
The technology they've come up with sort of works, some of the time, and can make for an impressive demo if you ignore its failings. If you suspend all disbelief and assume that because computers have learned this one new trick they'll soon be smart enough to magically transform themselves into hyperintelligent AGI monsters straight out of science fiction, if you learn to really believe it, you can convince a lot of people that you might be right. Nobody can prove that it won't happen, therefore it's inevitable. Therefore it is existentially important for the future of humanity and it only makes sense to bet the entire economy on it right away without hesitation.
There got to be enough money involved in blogging that someone finally succeeded in replacing it with a convenient, easy, well-advertised platform that they could enshittify and extract maximum profits from.
I don't trust Mark Carney much and he's doing a shit job of managing things in Canada so far, but if there's one thing he ought to be good at it's negotiating a trade agreement with China.
How else is Science going to pay the rent? They keep raising it. People ask a lot from Science, and to be fair it's always come through for us in the past, but these days Science is working two jobs just to get by. Science hasn't even had time to relax and play Crysis since last August.
"Based on your writing style and recent emails we have decided that you are too old to be asking ChatGPT such stupid questions."