Caveat emptor is today just another word for legalized fraud. A similar claim was made by the financial industry a decade ago when the world was made to pay for their fraudulent activities.
284 posts • joined 31 Dec 2014
"Long waiting times are the bane of hospitals worldwide."
That is the disease. Treat that and such symptoms will disappear.
That disease is easy to find, it even suggests where we should start looking: " particularly in publicly-funded healthcare systems".
Elsewhere in society when people rush and kill others we hold them accountable.
Why give publicly-funded healthcare systems a double oh license? Because they are in a rush to save money for special government projects?
Remove that freedom from accountability and many of these symptoms will disappear.
These issues are greater in Canada which has outlawed competition in many areas of healthcare. If a Canadian wants timely effective treatment they have to leave the country, risk underground options or even illegal treatment. Which is not all bad, it reminds those Canadians what it was like to get an abortion decades ago.
I think the most telling part of the article, when it comes to Canada, is the ruling that determined it was fair and reasonable that Canadians, Citizens, not have access to their own legal system but must instead use the companies system to settle disputes.
Even when a companies system requires Canadians to travel outside of Canada and face rules made in a foreign country a Canadian provincial supreme court justice thinks, and ruled, that is reasonable.
That ruling did not only drive up the cost of accessing the Canadian legal system for the plaintiff but further empowered all other companies to fight workers as they know the Canadian legal system is very much on their side when it comes to certain issues, like compensation.
Thanks to the Canadian legal system that fight is not over. There will be yet more delays and costs. This appeals court ruling is just one step in an ongoing process designed to generate what feels like endless costs. The appearance of a legal system for all in Canada disappears quickly for the poor and middle class that try to use it.
Which should be expected in Canada where the ideas of Democracy have never been accepted. Of the three branches of the Canadian government two are appointed.
Those two appointed branches of the Canadian government, the Court and Senate, have a veto over any bill coming from the Elected House which is controlled by party rule. Party rule in the House often results in elected members abstaining or voting against the interests of their constituents.
The Senate, an appointed body meant by design to protect Canada's elite from the drunken masses, regularly uses it's veto as seen recently in the legalisation of Cannabis.
The Canadian "4thEstate" fails to point out that a system should not be considered democratic when every bill has to be crafted to be acceptable to an appointed body that is not accountable to citizens.
All bills from the Elected House face veto by an appointed assembly with the stated mandate to be the sober second thought against the democratic wishes of the drunken, and now stoned, masses.
The Canadian legal system, like it's political system, is largely appointed and with a similar mandate, to protect our elite.
Court judges are federally appointed. Even for provincial courts like the Ontario Supreme Court, the appointments are made by the Federal government, with no input from citizens or their representatives, not when it comes to the judges or the rules and laws under which they operate.
The effects of the Canadian system and it's lack of accountability can be seen in Canadians lack to access to the legal system and rulings made by those courts.
Those effects are on full display with this case and will continue to be because it ain't over yet, not for those footing the bill.
Contracting in Canada, as it is in most places, has been a key part in driving down wages in some sectors and the over all decline in the Canadian standard of living which should be the highest in the world. Canada has more varied and valuable natural resources per capita of any country yet most live off less than $40K a year half of which is used to pay in taxes and fees. Uber would like to drive (pun) down that average income even further.
So you caught my friends at your house, with a moving van, shifting everything that wasn't nailed down, even after you said you didn't want us to take stuff.
OK we'll stop, it's just a cock-up not a conspiracy to steal stuff of value.
Have a nice day.
Whats that? You want your stuff back? HAHAHA, it was worthless sitting in your house, we stole nothing, it was just a cock up.
CCTV didn't record and keep images for months, and ever longer, some clips are now permanently stored.
CCTV should have been highly regulated and outlawed in public areas decades ago, unless people think living in a surveillance state is the definition of the freedom and respect for individuals that allowed the West to prosper.
But most citizens believe or accept that being under 24/7 surveillance will end all crime, even government corruption.
That there is still crime and corruption, increasing corruption if anything, is not reported as part of the story. Neither have we been growing more confident of our democratic systems but pointing that out creates cognitive dissonance so best to just accept.
In a democracy people must be able to not only vote as they see fit but also be free to discuss issues without reprisals and they must have a transparent government that isn't spying on them.
What this government and most Western Governments are doing is creating the ability to have full, easy and automated surveillance over all citizens. That should not exist, even if they "promise" they would never use such power.
The reason is obvious, this government believes they should have and look at everything, there is nothing that should be hidden from them.
In the world they are trying to create there will be no truth. All communications could and would be monitored. Lying will be the only defense left to people. Everybody will be lying all the time.
We don't need Facebook to destroy democracy, our "leaders" those in power are already creating a future in which democracy will not be possible.
There should have already been a tariff structure in place to ensure products are being made under similar environmental, human rights, and labour laws.
Allowing manufacturing to move from countries with enforced environmental, human right, labour and workplace laws has resulted in punishing those concerned about people and the planet.
Bring in massive tariffs, move manufacturing, stop punishing those Nations that want a better planet and all people to have basic human rights.
Free trade isn't fair trade unless both markets operate under the same rules.
Similar issues in Canada. Obvious violations of Canada's anti-combine laws are seen everywhere but are often most noticeable with New Canadian business owners.
That may not be the case in the UK but in Canada about 20% of Canadians were born elsewhere and another 20% of Canadians are their children. That is a large chunk of our population whose culture and business practices originate outside of Canada.
New and Non-Canadians have more programs and incentives to encourage them to buy and create small businesses and as a result own a large percentage of our industry and businesses. The result are stereotypes but that does not change the facts. 20% of Canadians not born in Canada, 20% with a parent not born in Canada and 20% from Quebec.
With so many different cultures running our businesses we cannot assume a common understanding of the many laws involved. Each will operate according to their own ideas, how else could they operate?
In such an environment what is enforced decides what the real laws and business culture will be. This was made clear to me when I successfully pointed out some of the illegal business practices being used by a friends family business.
In that case the New Canadian was adamant they were breaking no laws until I proved otherwise by finding a copy of the acts and some rulings on the practices they were using. His response was to point out that Canada is a fool, they wouldn't change a thing. I was a little set back but now see his point.
From his POV if Canada was taking those laws seriously there would be regular inspections by government agents and regular enforcement. In his culture and home country the government does just that. His home country does not expect citizens to follow the law just because it is the right thing to do (which was/is the case in Canada).
From his POV it is foolish to think citizens will generally follow laws just because the rulers said so. Citizens follow laws because they are actively enforced, because governments actively looks for violations and make punishment public when they do find violations.
To him, and maybe most people around the world, the assumption that citizens are willingly following laws is foolish. The under enforcement that results from such thinking would allow the mice to play, so to speak, and the mice should not apologize for that.
He pointed out that his home country has many more laws than Canada but the only ones of concern are those that are enforced and only the very expensive really matter.
Publicizing charges, identifying those companies and officers who are convicted is political so we rarely hear about them.
Other enforcement agencies rarely make any public announcements about enforcement or punishment. Business owners cannot easily look to enforcement and it's results to determine what is or isn't acceptable.
For those that doubt I'd suggest searching "Canada white-collar crime haven".
Canada has some of the worlds best laws, particularly when it comes to business, but they mean nothing if not enforced and the results made public. That they are not enforced is IMO an ongoing failure of our democratic systems. Current practices are dangerously insidious hiding behind a non-transparent bureaucracy. The result is a rotting of our foundations and may be hastening an "uncontrolled restructuring".
Seems to me the CMA are on the right track, as long as fair and equal enforcement with the results being made public is part of their ongoing campaign. I'll not hold my breath or comments waiting for that but hey they might lead the free world when it comes to ensuring business act in the interest of citizens, they might save us all. Thumbs up for that possibility. .
Late reply but I was here changing password so why not.
Of course governments use appointments but not all governments are controlled by those appointed. Most are appointed to do a job, not decide government policy or action against the wishes or interests of the citizens (in a democracy).
In the case of Canada the appointed rule without the ability of those being ruled to stop or limit them.
Our Senate is an example as is the CRTC who have given Canadians some of the highest communication costs with the least selection and in the digital age some of the slowest connections. In many areas of Canada even 20Mbps costs 10hrs of average take home pay.
But I did not respond just to agree that governments use appointments. I want to point out that the Canadian system is not working fairly well for anyone other than our Elite and those with special status, based on race, ethnicity, language and location.
Those distortions due to Quebec privileges are little different than those due to Ontario privilege. If you live in a province that gets more than it gives to Confederation of course the current system is fine.
But then maybe not.
Sure Ontario thinks it is great that national economic policy is decided by the needs of Ontario rather than Canada (the Confederation as a whole). After all that means car parts from Asia are transported across Canada for assembly and then shipped back to supply the largest market in North America. It means that the loss of a few thousand jobs can result in billions in support from taxpayers. Better than being outside of Ontario where even 100,000 lost jobs result in little more than 'suks to be u'.
But even in Ontario some Canadians must be asking why Canadians have to pay in USD for their own products and resources? Having Canadians pay world price, in USD, for their own products while getting paid in CAD isn't working fairly well at all, it isn't even fair.
Canada has increasingly far more valuable and varied natural resources per capita than any other developed nation yet our standard of living falls generation after generation. Our wealth or treasure is most notable when looking at energy per capita.
Fairly well would not have Canada selling it's oil for less than half the world price and yet paying full price, in USD, for gasoline at the pumps. Fairly well would not have Canada importing oil from Saudi Arabia and importing gasoline and other fuels from the USA, nor would it have Canadians paying USD for products refined in Canada.
Even in Ontario people must have noticed the price at the pump increases as our dollar falls.
EVEN if we were doing fairly well being ruled by an appointed, who answer only to the Elite, it is an old system, we know it's failures. It isn't a good system for average people and it is a very bad system for those targeted by government or weak minorities.
IMO defending such systems can only be defended by the simple or those with a blinkered view of history. ;)
IMO Nations that can do their own manufacturing, should do their own manufacturing. That is also true for food and other basic services. Supplying such basics should the measure of which countries are Nations and which are just territories or puppets for the more powerful.
We are not living in a play nice world where Nations can trust that other Nations will care for them. Being dependent on other equally, or worst yet more powerful, Nations is and always has been a predictor of capitulation, defeat, even destruction.
The law of power governs the world. Trade agreements and intertwining of economies does not change that and history has shown many times, such arrangements do not protect the weak or vulnerable.
To be secure, to have a defense, in the 21st century is to ensure a Nation can feed itself and protect itself from psychical and digital threats, without that there is no Nation, just a subsidiary or territory pretending to be a Nation.
As always it is the citizens who will be made to pay the ultimate price for that reality, which is why we tried democracy, we pay we should have a say. The game of Global domination never stops and in many ways is most active when Nations, people, the fodder, think they are safe.
Letting another country build your infrastructure has always been a bad idea, even more so when it comes to our digital infrastructure. Hopefully no one reads this and thinks that just applies to their relationship with China, but no doubt many will and the wheel keeps turning.
A thumb down for not reading up on governments and their latest spy efforts. Then again no need to read material from this decade. Way back in the 1990's officials in the U.S. government officials were being assured that people using commercially available encryption was not a threat.
But still best to read up on what has been revealed in this last decade. I'd suggest starting by searching Snowden as that will give one many rabbit holes including an idea of how extensive the cooperation between business and governments is.
The idea that earth life forms need not worry about off earth life forms because life here has co-developed is flawed, so much so that I think most can see why if they thought about it.
We have only one example of life and can only take educated guesses at what other life forms there could be. Having only one example when there may be many other examples should not inspire confidence that all are similar.
Even if one considers that life forms of similar kind would be contained by distances between systems we should be cautious based on the characteristics of life here on earth, in our own system.
When life here experiences a major disruption it tends to oscillate between extremes, with one life form dominating, then collapsing as another grows to dominate and so on. It takes some time, some long time, before a homeostasis, or equilibrium develops making the system more stable for all remaining life.
Any new life form could cause a major disruption. Our current success as a life form is dependent on earths ecosystem. That is changing and hopefully it will not be too long before we are not so dependent but until we invent free energy of energy "too cheep to meter" we are very dependent on earths ecosystem.
A quick thought of the risk analysis shows that the negative outcome of not controlling the introduction of foreign life forms, at least when we can, is so great that it must be addressed.
At least more so than a confident "Sorry it wouldn't happen".
Although in my experience most people prefer such false confidence and will promote the confident fool offering empty assurances (not that jmch is a fool I thinking of you Bob). Further promotions follow when catastrophe strikes and the same fool (you again Bob) jumps up to claim no one saw it coming and then uses the procedure developed by the person who not only saw it coming, spoke up at cost, and then developed a response just in case. But I digress.
We can't know, the consequences are high, caution is warranted.
I wish an full exchange of ideas was possible but that will result in censoring here. I'll risk one response to an oft felt if, not so reasonably said response (thumbs up for that!).
""Discrimination is foundational to being Canadian, it is a requirement." I would add to that the Constitution is effectively chiseled in stone in Canada and cannot adapt to the changing needs of the Confederation. Racial discrimination, and the others, will forever be required regardless of the horrific outcomes, which in the case of Canada is ongoing. That is also by design, to change we would need to change the union itself.
".....non-discrimination in any direction should give an ideal outcome if starting from a level playing field. But the playing field is already tilted towards a certain group of people based on history. For the US and Canada, that's mostly the white males whose ancestors' patriarchical society killed most of the original inhabitants of the land and enslaved a whole bunch of other people from somewhere else to work that land....."
All successful societies, particularly those in Canada when Europeans started arriving after 1000AD have been patriarchal. By successful I mean "able to endure longer than others" because that is the only measure that matters before the modern age.
That history is something to keep in mind when looking at those killing most of the original inhabitants of Canada. The proper legal term in Canada are Aboriginals which include, Indian, Inuit and Metis. Those are the terms in our foundational documents so I tend to use those when suggesting we change our laws.
If ancestors committing mass genocide precludes a person from having equal rights we need to revisit the special status of Indians and Inuit as both have a foundational history, of mass genocide. Those groups are here today because they purged their land of all others.
Genocidal conflicts horrified the Europeans that saw it first hand and that it has been well recorded, including the attempts to use those genocidal conflicts to European military advantage.
Today we have more evidence than the writings of a person from hundreds of years ago.
Recent DNA studies have shown that the Beothuk were distinct from the Mi'kmaq. It now appears that the original reports of the Beothuk being under threat of genocide from the Mi'kmaq were accurate. Given what we know of the situation with other groups at the time of European arrival that shouldn't be surprising and should bring into question the claims being made by the Mi'kmag that they deserve compensation due to Beothuk genocide.
DNA has been even more revealing of genocide than recorded history when it comes to the Inuit. In Canada we use the term "Culturally Displaced" when referring to the genocide of the Thule or the "Proto-Inuit" but generally we do not refer to it at all. Our history books will avoid the topic when they can. Many (most?) Canadian school children are told that "Whites" in Canada committed genocide but are not told of other larger and more complete genocides of North America.
So complete was the Thule genocide that today there are no Thule left in Canada and the DNA studies have shown that there was less intermixing between the groups than between todays Europeans and the Neanderthals. Some Canadian classrooms have been told that, Neanderthal displacement, was genocide but not the Thule displacement. Smart Canadian students know not to ask why but the treatment of those students that do ask shows all others how to be a good Canadian.
The Inuit did not just purge Canada of Thule but also Greenlanders and Icelanders who prior to the arrival of the Inuit had been trading in Canada for hundreds of years. There is a case to be made that the genocide of the Greenlanders by the Thule was the result of the genocidal conflict with the Inuit. That Canadian conflict drove the Thule deeper into Greenland and south where the indigenous white Greenlanders had been living for hundreds of years.
Of course indigenous by definition only applies to those from Asia. Even if a land is devoid of humans Europeans cannot be considered indigenous, so I used that term incorrectly. (sarcasim, yes, but not as much as it should be IMO)
Hopefully the above very different, politically incorrect, views on our Canadian history will give lots of search terms for an individual to find comfort in what they have already been told or begin to question what they thought was decided history.
Either way I hope it brings into question the idea that rights and responsibilities should be given based on being assigned to certain groups.
And bring into question the idea that the different rights and responsibilities of those in the groups should be based on the genocidal actions of that group in the past.
As for level playing fields we are very far from level, that is most easily seen in access to education and job placement which for some groups is fully supported and not at all for those in other groups. More racism is not the solution to racism.
Tagline (because this is a site with those that have used them): "Judging people by their gender, race and social satus is wrong, I wish those privileged white men would get that."
Privacy is a necessity for democracy, for revolution via ballot rather than bullet. Individuals must have privacy and governments must be monitored and transparent for democracy to work. The issue is that important.
Innovation and growth stops when individuals are monitored. Even if someone didn't care about rights and freedoms they should be very concerned about a system that prevents innovation, limits our ability to react to the many unknowns we as humanity will be facing.
We have known for a long time that just having people believe they are being watched 24/7 makes if far easy to control them. It is the foundation of many religions and ideologies and why they fight freedom and basic rights even today.
Everyone should know and understand the importance of basic rights and privacy. Instead it is a side discussion at sites like this and produces ineffective, minor government programs more concerned about optics than rights and freedoms.
We can teach 5yr olds gender and ethnic diversity basics but have no programs to integrate understanding of the basic rights and privacy needed. Rights and privacy needed for democracies to benefit individuals and produce a healthy society for all.
Appealing to governments beholden to power and money to protect us from power and money does not feel promising but what else is there? So Thanks Brave, which reminds me to top up my Brave Payments, it's the least I can do, it might be the only thing I do but at least it's something.
It is censorship of ideas presented in a way that looks acceptable to those that don't care or don't want to think about what they are reading. Those were very likely actual people, not bots.
Try to set up a FB account, I've had an FB account in the past but I can't create one today. FB has lots of data on who I am, my family, far more data and pictures than any company should be allowed to have but they have so many hoops to jump through that I just give up. Hard to buy into the idea that those Iranians are anything other than real people, unless only bots have the patience and understanding to create new FB accounts. Which might be the case as it seems only bots have the patience for CAPTCHA.
The claim of inauthentic, working together, having a playbook and network is also being used against individuals who hold unacceptable political or religious views. I've been censored with similar claims. Just having similar political views as others is all it takes to be accused of having a playbook and network.
And it isn't just FB, many maybe most conversations on the Internet are being controlled, including this one. If you are reading this it is because it has been deemed acceptable. If it had been censored you wouldn't know why and wouldn't be able to look at the content to see how the conversation was being controlled.
The implications for democracy are no less than catastrophic.
I'd disagree with that because the copyright holder showed everyone that they had better capitulate or face massively expensive litigation which the company has endless money to fund but can do so for longer than those involved may live.
It was yet another loss when it comes to open discussion and posting on the internet.
Which is now the default. Even these posts have been deemed acceptable by this site, those that were not acceptable are invisible making the censorship opaque, hidden, damaging to the open informed discussions needed in functioning democracies. Of course that is of no matter to companies or sites like YouTube.
Canada is very far away from having to be so concerned about AI in the medical field. Our systems have yet to adopt basic ideas adopted by industry generations ago.
The ideas of science, that have proven so effective in other parts of society, are rejected by much of the medical industry. Even measurement or collecting basic data on performance is resisted not only by those in healthcare but by healthcare itself.
A doctor visit in Canada has no follow up, no data is collected to measure performance or effectiveness. Basic questions such as what is the success rate of a procedure at a facility is either ignored, avoided, or answered with a quess or stats from other countries, usually the USA.
A computer program following proper even a general algorithm would be a huge improvement over the diagnoses and treatments most Canadians have today. Of course that is to be expected in a system that is not accountable to patients who have no other choice if they want treatment in Canada. And that helps with the liability questions. Little accountability in our healthcare means little risk of being sued for any real money in Canada.
As always keep in mind that we cannot see the comments that have been removed or failed pre-moderation at this site. This is not an open conversation on the topic.
Such questions should not need to be asked because responsibility is clear. If a doctor/hospital makes an error they should be held responsible and be made to pay. They can then turn to their contractors and make them pay as per contract.
It is incompetence that has management saying they do not know who is responsible for what. They should not sign any contract if they do not understand it, even more so if they are not clear on which party is liable for the many seen and unseen situations that will or may occur,
A proper contract clearly states liability, of course shady or incompetent managers avoid those contracts as they tend to hold the incompetent to account. Apparently medical associations avoid them as well.
Companies mine people for data, sell, share or lose the data they find or steal, and happily claim ownership of user supplied content like these comments, which never forget are "moderated" without transparency to ensure the conversation is acceptable, profitable, and meets the sites political standards.
Companies want it all, all the time, we have a responsibility to at least attempt some resistance.
Maybe a solution would be to have a system where business has to follow rules and regs created by a government that answers to citizens? Then companies would be limited in the data they could harvest and held responsible for it's safe handling and those supplying the data would get paid. Money would flow to all instead of being concentrated into the hands of the few and should excessive concentration start to happen, as it tends to do, that government that answers to the people would adjust the rules and regs.
Until then the least we can do is act in our own interest and try to resist when we can.
At least they asked when it came to UK sovereignty and membership in the EU. In much of the Western world voting cannot result in any real change. Most in the West did not want to export their jobs and import more workers, spend more money invading other countries and less on fellow citizens and almost none thought that the wealthy shouldn't pay the same total tax rates as the average taxpayer.
Voting did nothing to change those trends. In the USA it results in Trump in Canada it results in Trudeau.
Of course Canadians that know their country (very few have any idea) know that voting cannot change anything significant and it never has. This is because Canada is ruled by the appointed, not the Elected.
Of Canada's three branches of government two are appointed, the Court and Senate, and the third with elected members are controlled by party rule. The Elected do not vote to the benefit of constituents or their hopes and dreams, they vote as told to by the party even when doing so is very much not in the interest of constituents or Canadians. If democracy did manage to break out in the Canadian House of Commons the appointed Senate and Court are there to protect our Elite.
Canadians can wish and vote all they want for some basic rights to their data and data they generate but that's all they can do. Voting can rearrange deck chairs, change the music even but that's about it.
and of course the usual disclaimer: This site is moderated, all posts including this one meets the objectives of the site, and you'll never see or know which ones didn't.
"In the end, the responsibility lies with us, the readers, the customers. If we refuse to endorse the prevalent business model, in which we are the product, not a principal, and if we withhold our consent to the commercial use of our data, the industries will be forced to offer us different models."
Try that, you will fail, worst that that in many countries you will starve. Even in Britain I doubt you can get healthcare without supplying your data, data that is you, or allowing the healthcare industry to use and sell the data you create with them.
In a real democracy the people, individuals, might have some power and rights but that system does not exist at any scale, would citizens have voted to export jobs and import workers, to stagnate wages and increase taxes? No, and on occasion when they get the chance to say that in a ballot they do.
Any Canadian technical expert with a concern about their future will identify these documents as our appointed rulers want them identified. Standing up and telling the truth, even an honest opinion, will limit their access to appointed positions, positions controlled by the appointed, and access to government contracts.
Outside of Canada you might think that an overstatement but inside we can see it very clearly. The higher ranks of our departments, and Crown Corps ruled by those appointed, are homogeneous in their political views (even among those few claiming to support other parties) and all of them know the rules of advancement.
Canada is a country where even access to government programs can depend on agreeing to the values of the government. Access to any career connected to government goes much farther than just agreeing to "values". The Tech Expert will know what is good for them or they will not be consulted.
It's even more complicated for this teen than it appears. To see that it helps to have an understanding of Canada.
On the federal level the government does not have to act in the peoples interest.
Of the three branches of government 2 of them are appointed and the third with elected members controlled by party rule that prevents the elected from voting in the interests of their constituents. Although there are 10 provinces the appointed Supreme Court of Canada has only 9 judges, 6 of which are appointed from only two provinces and the other three appointed are now effectively required to have received their legal training in one of those provinces and meet certain ethnic and/or linguistic requirements. Comments from this tiny clique have shown they view provinces like Nova Scotia as a region of Canada, or part of a region, rather than a province on equal standing with others. That's problem if there is a problem.
Thanks to the Government by appointment system the Supreme Court, like all branches and departments of government, almost always have the governments back. Failure to do so, even as a Senator or Judge, has consequences, and far more so further down the very long line of very many appointments that effectively rule Canadians, regardless of how they vote.
That pattern of being ruled by the appointed does not change at the provincial level. The secrecy and obscurity of "Royal" appointments, particularly legal appointments, is if anything higher at the provincial level. Provincial legal systems are "old boys" clubs which require all who want advancement of any kind to fall into line or risk not being appointed to any position. There is no public veto or in most cases even knowledge of who is appointed. The appointed answer to those that appoint and can remove them, not the public or any perceived public interest.
It is up against that system, a system of rule by the appointed, this Teen must now do battle with. Even his own lawyers will be from that system, beholden to it if those lawyers want any chance of being appointed to anything. Even Canada's media answers to the appointed, which is why they very rarely point out the lack of democracy or our rule by the appointed.
If the Canada's appointed rulers have said this person has broken the law he is in for a very rough ride even if he is completely innocent, which isn't really presumed as many Canadian believe.
Up against that details as to the public availability of the data or how it was accessed is of minor consequence but still worth trying to get out there. Our government fears revolting peasants might pull back the curtain so a large enough outcry can change predetermined decisions. Best of Luck!
and as usual the disclaimer that comments at this site are censored/moderated, this is not an open discussion of the issue.
That people believe it randomly fell in the exact spot it would if they had control, or that it was just luck they had it on the right path for it to fall in the exact spot shows how susceptible we are to propaganda.
My first reaction was wow the Chinese were really lucky that it was on the exact path needed to land safely when they lost control of it so many years ago. Then I thought of some of the adjustments other space craft needed to hit that spot and realize that it is far more likely that the Chinese never lost total control or did so much later than reported.
Which brings into question all the sources of "news" I believed, and because those were the first stories I read about it still do tend to believe.
Note: Always remember that these posts are moderated, this is not an open discussion of the issue.
Yes and ongoing CO2 emissions from the lakes created, particularly those in the North.
A point of clarification. Canada does not have a Grid. Electricity is a resource and each province is responsible for that. Some have lots of water suitable for hydro-generation, some do not.
If this town is buying cheap power from Ontario, it is due to Nuclear Power which supplies the base load and at this moment is supplying about 10GW while Hydro is supplying 4GW.
When prices are low Hydro shuts down.
Even better would be to require EV's themselves to record charging and discharging data and report when plugged into approved charging stations, either at home or away from home so they can qualify for tax credits.
Charging stations will have to be approved by the government, non-approved stations and methods will have to be outlawed for safety reasons.
Once that system in place, stop offering credits, start with low level taxation and then crank it up until the taxpayers are squealing. Back it down a little to show everyone the government is all about tax cuts and then increase at every opportunity.
Then again maybe this is just the first stage of that process.
Canada has tried to address various forms of racism with yet more racism even though it has only ever created more racism. Today we have a multi-billion dollar Apartheid program that continues to grow and discriminate and segregate based on "choice" of parents.
The solution is less racism, it isn't complicated, except to the majority who are racist or wish to benefit from racist policies.
There are no major costs to selling, or losing, personal data so why should companies care?
Only when companies face major legal and financial repercussions for collecting, keeping and selling (or "losing") personal data our data will be reasonably safe. Until then why would any company spend any money on personal data security? Other than the money suggested by the PR dept so they can tell the public that data security is their top job every dime spend on security is a waste.
IMO careless collection, handling and storage of contract data, data collected as part of the contract, is a major contract violation, involves negligence, and requires more compensation than yet more data collection for useless promises of security. Here I would suggest a full refund, plus costs and compensation and no ownership claims to the products sold.
In this case that would be far more than the annual revenue of Nissan Canada and might force a bankruptcy but with changes to our bankruptcy laws it could serve as notice that Canadian citizens have rights and failing to protect those will cost investors and managers alike.
Of course why would the Canadian government do anything like that? The Court and Senate are filled by Appointment approved by our Elite and the only branch with elected positions, the House, uses party discipline to prevent those elected from representing their constituents. The Canadian government is well insulated from the concerns of Citizens, so Nissan and other companies have nothing to worry about other than dealing with PR issues.
This is one of the most interesting stories on this site.
Interesting that it is a story, that it made it to the site, that people read it. Of the many items on the deficiency list that one of the least important, easiest and cheapest to address, becomes a "news" story is very interesting. If this item made the short list or summary of deficiencies the news story would have been the remarkable, unheard of success of the project so far. So much so that this would truly be a new age of British ship building. f this was was actually one of the most concerning deficiencies, which seems impossible to me i would have no doubt that Britannia is about to once again rules the waves..
But also interesting is that such a story generates comments, even comments about how interesting a story it is. Well done indeed.
The idea that open boarders (illegal immigrants) is good for citizens has been shown to be false many times in history. IMO if you need a study to be told that borders, rules, and regulations, are a good thing you haven't been paying attention.
Legal, controlled, managed, and paid for immigration can have many benefits but those do not apply to illegal uncontrolled and unmanaged immigration which is the result of illegal immigration and now increasingly refugees.
A controlled system of immigration ensures citizens, those whose interest the Nation should be acting in, do not have to compete with the world for jobs in their own country. Controlled immigration ensures citizens are not paying taxes to support the needs of billions while millions of their fellow citizens go wanting. Citizens paying ever higher taxes while their standard of living falls should not be required to give ever more. Managed systems ensure that valued social programs do not fall apart due to overuse or under-funding.
A post on immigration seems off topic in a discussion about net neutrality but the relationship becomes clearer when the source of these issues are considered. They are the result of the same politics, playing played by every side wanting power, every side that sees citizens as little more than products to be sold or voting blocks to be deceived and manipulated.
Business and industry has learned long ago there is far more profit in buying the system, corrupting the system, than competing or allowing free markets. I wonder about the sincerity of anyone making any references to "free markets" or democracy.
When was the last time any major Western democracy put the needs and rights of citizens and their dreams of increased standards of living before that of profits for the few? For those that think free markets and democracy has been the case consider the increase in productivity vs the increase of standards of living over the last several decades. Democracy is not consulting or listening and then doing as paid. Even the pretense of consulting has been lost in most Western Federal Democracies.
IMO anyone suggesting there are free markets or democracies are trying to be sarcastic or are advancing damaging and deceptive political ideologies. Does anyone other than the most superficial of us think we have any reasonable form of democracy or capitalism? Even after 2008? Not likely. Democracy and free markets sounds great, maybe we should try them, they seemed to have worked for some past generations.
He's a politician, a leader, they are our greatest thinkers, people we can trust to act in our interests, in the interests of our nations before all others so I am sure we will have driverless cars.
But some politicians do seem to have a problem with schedules. Still waiting for the massive increase in standard of living promised by globalised open trade, lower taxes, equal carbon taxes/reductions for all countries, and of course flying cars.
I'm sure we will get flying something, after all they wouldn't lie to us.
That incident is exactly why autonomous driving is difficult. It isn't good enough to act like the majority of human drivers who slow down or just give up driving and stop when they are in conditions beyond their ability. Driving correctly is responding to a dynamic situation, not as 2D frozen in time photograph, but as the 4 dimensional situation it is.
New drivers, poor experienced drivers, drive as though slowing or stopping will slow and stop everything around them, software has do better than that.
At least when a poor human driver slows and expects the world to slow for them that poor human driver will sometimes pay the ultimate price. With autonomous vehicles those that force people to sit in a vehicle while being slowly crushed to death by a lorry because there was a threat and the vehicle stopped will be safe and sound and blaming the lorry driver, the passengers, the manufacturer, anyone but themselves.
Many tax schemes are like that in Canada, only helps those with high tax bills to pay, or offset, and rarely applies to the majority even though the government says otherwise. Tax cuts have been promised by every government for generations and percentage of total tax due on income and assets for the middle and lower continue to increase each generation.
Then again in Canada our Prime Minister thinks the average income is well over the 6 figure mark, when it is closer to $40K and almost half of that due in taxes and fees. Our government believes the average Canadian can afford an elect car and a house with a garage in or near a major city so it isn't as though they are lying on purpose and that group has seen percentage taxes decline for generations.
Since fluency in French is a requirement for most such Federal Jobs being educated and trained in the expertise required makes Stephen's interpretation more likely to be correct.
For non-Canadians, and those many Canadians willfully ignorant of Canada, less than 20% of Canadians are French speaking. Outside of one province French is spoken less than many other languages. Languages in more use by Canadians in other provinces include Chinese languages, German, Tagalog and Punjabi. In BC over 8% speak Chinese fluently or at home, less than 2% speak French.
Yet it is those few French that hold special status when it comes to federal jobs.
The Federal Government estimates that more than 40% of positions in the federal public service require French Language skills and increasingly, fluency in French. Bilingualism has become an obvious plan to further concentrate power in the hands of those in the East, particularly those in Quebec and most importantly those French in Ottawa the Federal capital.
Canada has three branches of government, the Court, the Senate, and the House. Of those only the House is elected, the rest are filled by appointment, most often by a Prime Minister from a single province, you guessed it, French Quebec. The single province of Quebec is disproportionately represented in Federal systems. With 22% of the population has 33% of the seats on the Court and is pushing for all other members of the Court to be fluent in French or educated in French. It is an obvious attempt to further concentrate power into the hands of the French Elite in Canada.
Canada has many languages but one minority language is being used to disenfranchise the majority of bilingual Canadians who are not French.
Which is why Stephens observation is far more likely to be correct than any claims suggesting Federal jobs and contracts are awarded based first on ability and second the applicant being French. Even the Federal government makes it clear that being French is the first requirement, both in the application process and in their many statements on bilingualism in Canada.
Until an individuals data is recognized as a basic right enforced with the ferocity of our many moral laws why would a company bother with securing any data? Better to just claim measures are being taken to protect individuals data and then walk all the way to the bank with your own compensation and use other peoples money to start up yet another company.
Far better than getting caught breaking other laws or with contraband that would result in all assets and profits being seized as proceeds from crime.
Only America is large enough to take on such companies but even, based on past actions, the US does not act to protect American Citizens, even when they claim they are.
If we are lucky someone will write about this in a few years and we will find out how Nippon Chemi-Con became targeted. Miss one payment, fail to fall in line, bite off more than allowed, try to compete or do as requested has cost other companies dearly. And there is always the need to remind everyone what can happen if the game is not played by the rules.
Meanwhile smaller countries and their citizens are fodder, geese to be plucked at will. Could citizens of those countries change that? Sure but first they would need to have governments that represent them and their interests before all others. Without that in place our systems will ensure nothing changes. The best that can be hoped for yet more promises, bright flashing lights, new deck chair arrangements and better lies.
It is easy for some people in the West to see through the words being used to describe a system in which individuals will face great difficulty in China, at least those individuals that fail to follow the party line.
At the same time people in the West cannot see through the words being used by their own leaders, business and industry to describe a similar system already in place and being expanded. The West already has many controls in place, to isolate conversations, control the masses, censor and manipulate if required.
Even this discussion is censored, moderated, controlled to ensure the messages meets acceptable standards. Posts at this site are censored because of content (rather than profanity or other reasons) and you are reading this only because this post hasn't violated whatever those content restrictions are.
In this announcement China is following a path well trampled by Western Nations, and while they may hope to push forward they are not changing the direction we are all headed. That will not change until people are able to see through the words being used by their own Nations, and while a few might our systems are self protecting and can handle ever greater awareness by individuals.
The data we as individual citizens create, the data that we generate, the data that is an individual is owned by that individual. That is a basic right that cannot be signed away in fine print.
Yet the systems responsible for protecting our basic rights have instead been selling them out to the highest bidder. We can now see that in the many trade deals and failed promises from the 1980's to present. A time period in which the rich have gotten fantastically rich and Western citizens have struggled to make any gains not taken by taxes and higher costs.
This report and many other incidents are showing everyone that our present forms of governments do not, can not or will not represent the interest of citizens. As a result we cannot fix these issues by bringing in regulation. Regulations are "negotiated" with business and industry without anyone representing the rights of citizens at the table. Regulations made by the very agencies that sold us in the first place cannot be counted on to do anything but "manage the optics" or pacify the masses enough to ensure the fleecing continues.
Citizens are going to have to take action themselves if they want their rights protected. The question is how, where, when, and how to counter the measures in place to prevent such things.
Data the individual generates, data that is the individual, is the property of the individual, that is a basic right that cannot be signed away in agreements.
To have those that rule over us recognize and enforce such rights is the trick. Pretty difficult in an age when "our" governments are busy selling us, our future, our Nations and our economies to local and international Elites.
Barb, please do some reading. Search ruger 10/22 magazine and follow the legal discussion. If you do not believe the police make laws in Canada walk into a police station with one of the prohibited magazines and leave with it. Be sure to post the video showing the police agreeing with you.
The Queen or any Queen has ZERO role in Canadian politics. Again read the Balfour declaration of 1926 and the process of Constitutional changes. Notice the complete lack of any Royalty having any role beyond the ceremonial, beyond the role Santa has in actually putting presents under your xmass tree.
Canada is not a republic, but without an actual Monarch it cannot be an actual Constitutional monarchy. More accurately it is a Constitutional Oligarchy that uses Royal Privilege with it's thousands of appointments, including that of the Senate and the Court combined with party discipline in the only branch with any elected members to ensure the ongoing operation of Canada to it's benefit.
Canadian voters can change nothing without the approval of the appointed Senate and Court and there is no Queen for them to appeal to, no Queen to step in and see that the wishes of the people be reflected in law.
Again if you doubt any of that walk into a police station, read a little about your own political history, and chart the response in Canada, and it's political systems, should any Monarch actually attempt to have any input at all into our political process.
Anyone reading this should do their own searches as it is clear that Canadians have no clue as to how their political system actually works, or at best disagree on it. Is the Senate Appointed? Is the Court Appointed? Does the system answer to the Queen, does party discipline prevent the House from representing citizens? Do your own searches.
Anyone concerned can search for the Balfour Declaration of 1926 but then it is likely they would already know the GG is appointed by and answers to the Prime Minister, the PMO which happens to control the House as I mentioned. There is no mechanism for the Queen to act, the GG does not report to her, even you seem aware of that when you refer to the patriation of the Constitution. Canada is a fully separate country, no Monarch, no Royalty, no asking Britain for permission to change our own laws.
Which is an example of the lack of discussion. Point out facts in Canada and people like Jon jump up and down, dance and lights, anything to avoid Canadians talking about the facts of Canada and how it could be better. Distraction is more important than a discussion on citizens having an ability to have a say in, or even decide, the laws under which they live.
Suggesting Elizabeth II, is "Queen of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand," shows a typical and complete ignorance of Canada, how it is ruled and governed.
That level of ignorance was causing enough trouble and expense that Britain made it as clear as was possible almost 100yrs ago that their King, or any future King or Queen, had no official role in the governance of Canada.
It could not have been said any clearer, yet people remain ignorant, willfully ignorant, as willfully ignorant as those that believe Santa Claus actually brings them presents and as a result there are no costs to those presents.
SIN was meant for only government, CPP, then Social programs and Income Tax use. Canadians were assured repeatedly that it would never become a universal identification number for business and government it is. Today it is part of many private and corporate databases. In Canada getting a new SIN, usually due to abuse, is all too often undone by a private company linking and referencing databases.
Often a person is only identified enough to find them on one of many databases and then that information is used to populate the new database, information that contains SIN and other data often in violation of provincial privacy laws. Seen that first hand. IMO If any Canadian thinks otherwise they need to ask more questions, pay more attention and stop thinking the government and industry has their best at heart.
In Canada any company dealing with any of your money in anyway, including just receiving it as payment, can claim a need for your SIN and avoid legal action. Some claim they need it because while they do not directly deal with an individual and their money the companies they work with do.
In Canada many private companies still have and use SIN as an identifier but things are better than a decade ago when there were more active SIN than Canadians. The government at the time was trying to reduce the most obvious abuses but the political climate has changed IMO we can expect increased abuse of the SIN and related government systems.
And of course we can expect more lies about the information being collected and stored on Canadians both by governments and businesses.
Comments at this site are censored and this is, IME, the most sensitive of topics so if you are reading this it is because there are those wanting an appearance of open discussion, which is all that can exist here.
Many other commenters here have touched on this but hiring someone for reasons other than their ability to do their work undermines those hired only because they can do the work. This becomes apparent in emails like the one in the article but also every interaction with management and HR. Hire someone for their Gender or DNA and they are always in partial compliance. A minor advantage but it becomes a major advantage when leveraged well.
Of course pointing that out results in career limiting attacks, soon people are not questioning the right and wrong of their company or it's actions, they just follow orders. What could go wrong with that?
I'd like to remain employed so I say, Nuthing! Nuthing is wrong with that!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019