Victor Villas

u/villasv@lemmy.ca
25 posts · 1.0k comments

Recent posts

Recent comments

I agree this is just a tweet, but how do we know there's "zero" action behind it? What available options are not being pursued by the minister?

If he actually does it, then it will be there… Taking up space… I don’t think anyone is going to buy it.

This is exactly why it isn't tone deaf. He can just issue the ask, hope that not all premiers will follow, and even the provinces that do follow, consumption will still not recover fully; he can say "hey I did all I can, Canadians just don't wanna drink it" and the US loses a negotiation leverage.

I do think a significant amount of people will buy it, though. They US booze will come out cheap and in droves. And we have a dumber third of the country that's actually a fan of the US still

No, my dude. It's an open ended question in the sense that it purposefully asks a question about a concept which is inherently personal. That's how this goes for this kind of research.

The whole point is to let each person define what their own version of gender expression is, and answer based on that. The fact that more (or fewer) people are choosing a charitable and supportive definition of gender expression is, that's the signal being measured.

If this number goes down, it signals that people are increasingly holding definitions of "gender diversity expression" that are harder for them themselves to accept. No measurement is perfect, but they can still be useful. If this "flawed" question carried no information, we wouldn't be seeing trends on it.

For one, many Albertans who would otherwise be your allies are now offended.

Meh, I kind of agree that the parent comment is needlessly antagonistic but I doubt that this would be the thing that tips someone over, someone this easily swayed would have found other reason to not be an ally already.

So agree on "making the situation worse rather than better" because it degrades the discussion, but highly doubt the "many Albertans who would otherwise be your allies" part.

I always knew they were into this kind of thing considering how much they shill for crypto, private equity, direct indexing, leverage, option trading… literally every product offered beyond the basic ability to buy ETFs is a scam. The financial industry is by and large financed by scams. We had old school scams like selling trash mutual funds to retirees (TD style), and we have new scams like Private Equity where you get "exclusive" access to trash mutual funds. And now instead of getting people addicted to gambling with stock options, they are straight up aiming for regular gambling with prediction markets.

I'm disappointed but not really surprised. If anything, I'm thankful they made it a separate App instead of shoving it into the main Wealthsimple App, at least for now.

The issue is that regardless of how Meta markets this product, making it sleek and inconspicuous was the whole point. Meta glasses succeeded because they latched on the Wayfarer design which was already widespread and accepted.

Unfortunately being inconspicuous and fashionable also lends itself as means to use these to record covertly. Whatever Meta does to fix this, folks will find a way to work around and disable. The glass already has a flashing light to indicate that it's recording; it's not enough. Creeps are going to creep.

Maybe society just isn't ready for "affordable" recording-capable wearables.

Yeah that's a good use case too — though I do remember seeing folks use it to take pictures of things you weren't supposed to (like temples interiors).

The "covert recording" aspect of it is a big problem, but from the privacy standpoint I honestly think this is less worse than walking around with an Insta360 that is literally recording everything. At least for now the Insta360 is less problematic because it's so bulky that it's not as useful for perverts; but in terms of filming a bunch of people out and about without consent it's worse.