You know what would restore integrity? consequences.
Well, we’re the top boss. We hired the MPPs, who hired the Premier. Either we have to get on our MPP employees to tar and feather him, or we have to do it ourselves. The underlings beneath won’t. That is not how power dynamics work. It must come from the top down.
I come to the fediverse to talk to people
What vetting mechanisms do you use to ensure that you are talking to people? It is certain that LLMs are being used on here as some of the accounts are explicit that they are LLMs – but being explicit about that is not a requirement. It would be pretty silly to come here to talk to people and then unknowingly end up talking to an LLM.
I don’t think it matters, though. I’m not here for people, I am here to use the software, which can be implemented however its developers see fit. How it is implemented is not relevant to me, only those who deliver the software.
and to have my ideas and ideals challenged
Yes, that is a prime example. Writing notes to a piece of software so that it can feedback new information to further your understand of a topic is a solitary activity. Nobody else cares one bit about what you think. It is done for personal benefit, not for the benefit of a group. If there are humans pulling the knobs and levers behind that scenes to make that software work ,so be it, but that is but an implementation detail.
I suspect you are using that word to mean something it doesn’t.
Langauge is fluid. Words can mean whatever you want them to mean. And since I am alone, I don’t even have to worry about a shared understanding.
only the truly stupid can engage like you have
Makes sense. Even if we assume all the accounts here are truly backed by real people and that they are engaging with each other as if it were real social setting – the fact remains that they are anonymous strangers who mean nothing to the world. Of what value would someone with intellect find in speaking to literal nobodies? Smart people have access to talk to other smart, notable people of interest who are proud of their identity and accepting of relationships around that identity. What would draw them here?
Everything will eventually cause health issues. Some substances are quicker to the punch than others, though. To avoid label fatigue, there is merit in limiting use to the worst offenders.
It has only been in the last few years that we are starting recognizing a greater danger in alcohol than earlier realized. And, indeed, Health Canada labelling requirements for alcohol have become more stringent in that time. As we learn more, it is likely the labelling requirements will continue to evolve as well.
He clearly didn’t forget, unless you think tobacco also carries the same family and relationship damage and driving under the influence problems?
Economists: The high price is meant to scare you away.
Lemmy users: $16 and the same as every other IPA? Pour me another!
Presumably he means that Canada didn’t handle it, aside from lifting the prohibition, as it is a provincial matter.
It is likely that they are people, but that is, again, just an implementation detail. One does not come to Lemmy – or the Fediverse in general – to engage with people, they come to write their own thoughts for themselves as a solitary activity. When one seeks to engage with people, they go to where people are found, not where there are anonymous usernames that might be people, but who knows, or cares?
We never started. My alone time has always been just me.
It is possible that the software requires more than one participant to function, or perhaps it uses an LLM under the hood (more likely given how frequently hallucinations seem to occur), or who knows what else – there is really no indication of how it works at that level, nor would it matter. The specific implementation details are beyond the user’s concern. It is quite true that the tool is a micro-journaling platform which provides additional prompts to spark one’s imagination for additional entires into the diary. And being a micro-journaling platform, it is designed around solitary use.
But fail to actually explain what tax Canada currently has in place that results in owners of multiple homes being taxed more based on how many homes they own.
I would not explain that as we have no such tax of that shape, nor has the conversation ever been about such a tax. Your logical fallacy is ill-conceived.
Other commenters have specifically named the taxes we do have. I’m not sure stealing their thunder adds anything. Did you somehow forget to read all the comments before you thought flailing around like one of those whacky blow up men things you find at the used car lot was a good idea?
I assume nothing about you, nor do I give you any thought at all. A solitary activity has no reason to pay mind to anyone who may be peering through the bushes. My alone time is for me and me alone. Comments are written for my entertainment, not for anyone else’s.
If the metaphorical creeper behind the bush gets a rise out of something he saw as I take in some alone time, good for him, I guess? I don’t know. I have no reason to pay attention to him or his motives. He too is doing his own solitary thing, and it is up to him to figure out how to enjoy his own alone time. If that’s what moves him, cool. Whatever floats one’s boat. It has nothing to do with me.
I have no fucking clue what you just think you said.
I know. That’s what makes it is so funny.
Just please, don’t bore me.
It is up to you to ensure you are enjoying your alone time. Have you considered a social activity with other humans if the solitude of writing messages to a computer program is no longer doing it for you?
It seems to me that increasing supply alone is not going to cut it.
Well obviously you also need to increase demand. Without that, most Canadians will remain out of the market. The hope is that more home options will encourage increased demand.
Did you know that looking at your comment doesn’t cause your comment? Such an interesting point to make, right?
Oh wait.
“point of order, what xyz said yesterday was a lie and here is the proof”
And how do you establish that is not a lie? Proof that a statement was false does not prove that the falsehood was stated intentionally. The person may have simply been misinformed, misspoke, or otherwise didn’t know any better, in which case it would not be a lie.
Interesting use of the /s[erious] qualifier here.
The problem always lies with money
Money is just an IOU. The only thing it introduces is the ability for trades to take place over longer periods of time.
If, for example, we agree that you will fix my sink and I will feed you lunch for your efforts, but you’re not hungry while you’re at my place, I can give you an IOU – money – to redeem for food at a later point in time when you are hungry. Without money, I would have to feed you when you are full in order to satisfy our deal, which is less than ideal.
Why is that beneficial deferral at the root of of all problems?
remove the need for money and power and government will act a lot differently than it does now.
The Communist Manifesto suggests that once we enter a state of post-scarcity, government will no longer be needed. Why do you think it got it wrong?
Except my concrete asset is worth negative hundreds of thousands
Did your house burn down and you didn’t have insurance to rebuild or how the hell did you manage that? The market has softened a little, but not that much. Well, maybe if it was a $30,000,000 home?
Well, I should hope I am doing the opposite of changing minds. That would be fucking weird to change someone’s mind. The mind they already have is what makes being around them worthwhile.
But, yeah, I agree to your second point. Computing is one of the largest greenhouse gas emitters going, so we are, indeed, destroying humanity by being here. Worse, unlike food, it provides nothing of actual value. But, at least I’m in good company.
To be fair, St. Catherines has lower unemployment than Montreal. It may not be as fun, but people will also pay to be able to access work.
Oshawa, though… Yeah, that doesn’t make sense. Toronto and area has the highest unemployment rate in the entire country, save Cape Breton and Newfoundland. You aren’t going there for jobs… or fun.
No, they are not. The defining feature of a commodity is that it is interchangeable.
If you in Ontario try to charge me too much for a bushel of wheat, I’ll laugh and buy it from a guy in Saskatchewan selling it at a reasonable price instead. Makes no difference to me. The product is the same either way.
If I try to charge you too much for a house in Ontario, it would make no difference to you to move to Saskatchewan? I suspect not. They are not equivalent products. Living in the Ontario home will be a very different experience to living in the Saskatchewan home.
If housing were a commodity, a lot of our problems would be solved. But, housing is not. It even has a popular slogan to remind you of that fact: Location, location, location.