I'm torn.

On the one hand, FOSS all the way.

On the flip side, mapquest is fucking based. Straight up "lol no" to trump renames" and now this.

He opens himself up for discovery. If the judge throws it out, he can avoid that AND not look like he backed down. The judge is doing him a solid.

Half-right: South Park,but more recently Alberta separatism.

NDP in Canada became the official opposition in Canada under Jack Layton. Some percentage of people just are drawn to decisiveness, and the dem establishment is just not that.

My point is the floor is lower than 1/3, dems just don't put up leaders who can crack it. Real floor is probably around 1/4

Ottawa has absolutely strangled immigration already.

All of the questions rested on faulty premises to begin with.

The UCP has simply abandoned even attempting to govern. Their whole thing is just blame Ottawa. They're just testing the waters about how cool people would be with also blaming immigrants.

When you are incapable of governing: just blame. Oldest trick in the book. If you think back to all your worst bosses you've had in your life, I'm sure you'll recognize the pattern.

People kept making it sound like there was any question whatsoever to the outcome here.

Before question 10 was even added, I received TWO polling calls on rough versions of the questions, including question 10. Polling on Q10 specifically was consistent after it was officially added, and those results were public. Sensationalist media reporting making it sound conceivable as an outcome was completely self serving click bait.

The answer was in plain sight before it was even added.

It was a stunt. She didn't have to wait to see which was the wind was blowing, she knew how it would land before the question was even asked.

She didn't count on the depth of the stupidity of her useful idiots. She stoked a fire she expected them to applaud her for tending, regardless of the result. She's learning the lesson that if you fire up irrationality, they're loyal to the irrationality, not to you.

DS is a giant POS, she deserves every dunk.

Similar story, but a dude did slip on it, and like a cartoon his legs shot out from under him someone becoming momentarily horizontal in the air.

We were STUNNED.

On the waterfront

Brando just out there setting a bar never to be surpassed

The shape of the argument is nonsensical, no matter what you apply it to.

This question frustrated me because I actually do think senate REFORM is worth investigating.

But that's a federal issue, and I desperately want the AB government to actually govern Alberta instead of acting like the official opposition to the federal government.

Not sure where you're getting "only a third voted" when 43% of eligible voters had voted in the ADVANCED polls.

South Park called it

Rot13 every keyword in and out before the agent sees it (solution for anthropic models)

Keyword replace things to be even more offensive to make grok operate at peak efficiency.

He was unaware, however, that Sweden was among 13 of the 27 EU member states that required Britons living in the country before Brexit to make a formal application to remain. Other countries, such as Spain, did not opt for that system and just required Britons to declare they were a resident.

Not sure who to believe here

I think that's an incredibility compassionate take, and for that I instantly and unconditionally love you.

I think compassionate people tend to trip on something, and I think you're tripping on it right now. I think other people trip in the opposite direction. Let me explain:

When you watch a nature doc where a lion hunts some poor baby antelope, maybe you're rooting for the antelope. It just wants to live. But the lion has to eat. It's incompatible. Just to be a dick I always say to my wife "think of the the baby lions that'll starve if the lion doesn't catch an antelope!".

They're fundamentally incompatible outcomes. You can accept that, choose who you're going to root for (or neither), remain empathetic to both. It isn't NECESSARY to reject empathy for one to root for the other. It's your mind playing a trick on you to save you from feeling bad for whoever gets screwed. You can sit with something bittersweet.

Is this putting ND on blast? YEP. Is it providing a vehicle for people being abused by people with ND to recognize that? YEP.

Fundamentally incompatible outcomes. It's completely reasonable to hold a position like "I hate that this puts ND on blast, but ultimately this leads to the better outcome". I think "this is the better outcome... And people with a legitimate disorder can eat shit" is not.

I expect it would take about 15 minutes with the language definition to simply write a static tool (via an agentic coder, why not, just to prove the point) to evaluate the rules of the language, translate it to another (normal) language. Llm does the work there, then runs it through a mechanic to go the opposite direction.

Identification that this has occurred becomes an evaluation of the prose "obscured" values are embedded in.

I get the intent. I just think the testing methodology answers a very specific question, and forms a conclusion that over claims.

I think you completely missed the point. They're not saying genz should be the adults in the room.

They're surprised that a generation who never drew breath without the internet came of age without the wisdom they hypothesized such a life would avail.

You gotta understand: earlier generations couldn't trivially verify things. Anyone they ever interacted with were the people like... On their street. Diversity of thought was informed by limited contact. The internet, at one point, appeared to promise a radical solution to both. The optimism for the future, as a result, was essentially unbounded.

It's not fair to ask gen z to save anyone. I don't think its what buddy was saying, but if it was, it was unfair.

I think buddy was coming to the very late realization that the optimism of the transformative nature of the internet was misplaced. The hypothesis just didn't pan out. You can give a human for their entire lives the ability to get the answer to any question, verify anything they're told, and meet and talk to people with diverse viewpoints that may challenge what they're exposed to based on proximity...

... And ultimately they're just about as dumb as anyone else.

And I get the impression that, more than anything else, is what makes them sad.

Considering the deadline was 2021, I'm not sure I'd characterize this as a recent change of heart.

Do you have any source for this? I'm having a tough time finding anything supporting your claim that Sweden has changed their position on this since brexit came into effect.

I can easily find bombastic claims from pro-brexit talking heads unilaterally asserting that the EU will continue to extend every privilege in a post brexit world, but I suspect it's possible they were not actually deriving those assurances from discussions with the governments which they claimed they were speaking on behalf of.

Someone ping me when the ADL condemns Trump for this.