this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
208 points (99.1% liked)

Canada

10122 readers
636 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

  2. Misinformation is not welcome here.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] baggins@lemmy.ca 80 points 2 years ago (2 children)

These boomers have lost their fucking marbles.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 years ago

You have to have marbles first to lose them

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I think most of the government isn’t boomers.

[–] jadero@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I was born during the baby boom era. I've concluded that "boomer" has long since lost its literal connection to "my" generation. It is now used as a metaphorical disparaging label that means "selfish and clueless because of age."

It's kind of like the trope of technologically clueless grandparents. At this point, the only grandparents who are technologically clueless are those with the same mindsets and experiences as all the GenX and Millenial people who are technologically clueless. And there is certainly no shortage of them.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And there is certainly no shortage of them.

The problem is that they are the majority in every generation. The majority of people don't understand the distinction between http and https, that PMs on Facebook are readable by Facebook staff, or that there in an entire sector dedicated to collecting and selling personally identifiable information.

It's hard to drum up support for a cause that most people can't even understand.

[–] jadero@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Yes, good points.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Pat@kbin.run 57 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If it's legal for women to be topless in public, why would pictures of topless females be in this law?

Our government really is dumb. Plus, it's only going to expose the kids to sketchier and possibly illegal stuff. If big porn players step up and do verifications, there would surely be dozens of sketchy sites popping up left and right to fill the void of providing porn.

[–] zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 2 years ago

But it distracts from our fucked up immigration and housing issues

[–] chuck@lemmy.ca 45 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Ok I don't understand this push to block porn at a country wide level.

Who wants this and why?

I honestly don't see why. Most to the time they tell you follow the money but I can't think how blocking porn helps anyone but VPN providers, and old school porno mag and video publishers.

Maybe this is a fundamentalist puritanical thing? But how is it getting such wide support? Are there that many but hurt virgins in the Senate and House of Commons?

Argh so many questions and this feels so absurd.

[–] stephan262@lemmy.world 62 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think they want the precident of being able to require id verification to access websites. It's a great spying tool for the government, if they can legitimise it's use. First they go for the porn sites to 'protect children'. Then they've got a foot in the door with the infrastructure in place to expand it to other 'objectionable' sites, and perhaps even further.

Maybe I'm just being paranoid and it's just puritanical BS pushed by out of touch politicians who are trying to appeal to the moral busybodies in society.

[–] chuck@lemmy.ca 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

No it's not paranoia if they are actually out to get you.

If they are out to get us it's just baffling to me. The internet was originally designed as a communications tool to survive large parts being damaged in the event of a major disaster/attack.

It got hijacked by people first who used it to share less and scientific information and more for the lack of a better word human information. Then corporations came and wanted to extract value from it some how. So we had the Dotcom bubbles and pop-up ads.

Now I don't have the hindsight now to succinctly explain what happened next but then Facebook became a dominant social media platform. And everyone gave them info about themselves contrary to the previous advice about never using your real name on the internet.

Now we have governments world wide actively trying to police porn a good 50 years after it existed on the internet. 20 years since it was freely and widely available as streaming video? What's the goal trying to tax free porn somehow?

I think the genie is out of the bottle at this point.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

What’s the goal trying to tax free porn somehow?

Almost like taxing someone else for linking to your website...

[–] sbmc29@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

The conservatives along with the NDP and Bloc are apparently the ones who want this.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I think its a step towards decentralizing the internet and requiring government backed profiles to access it by having all your online access linked to a profile that is linked to your real world information.

[–] chuck@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's wild because back in the day they told us don't let anyone know your real name or where you live if you can help it. Now it's let's see your driver's license to verify you before you can look at cat videos...

But how much of this is actually new trying to build a world order and how much is just ignorance in the capabilities of the technology of the members of the Senate and House of Commons

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If someone is incapable of understanding or respecting the capabilities and implementation of a technology, they are unfit to govern it.

[–] Grimpen@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's why they have lobbyists...

In theory there are also panels and advisory boards for technical things. Of course, the same monied interests who pay the lobbyists also try and get people into those roles. Heck, I would wager a good chunk of the lobbying is in the form of a non-governmental policy advisory group.

Elected representatives don't need to be experts in everything, but they should be able to get technical advice. Unfortunately this is where much of the lobbying comes in.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Anyone who can't install nvidia drivers on Debian is unfit to govern the internet.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

decentralizing the internet and requiring government backed profiles

Requiring a centralized auth is not decentralization.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

You are right, I meant centralizing.

[–] EmergMemeHologram@startrek.website 36 points 2 years ago (2 children)

First, this is so obviously going to be used against the LGTBQ community. Second it’s dangerous as fuck.

Third, if they actually cared about this they need to actually think about this rights restricting law. You could use browser attestation or APIs and not violate anyone’s rights, but our MPs don’t know shit about technology.

I’m not in favour of this option either, but it’s better giving the government a list of everyone who wants to access Grindr or buy a trans rights book, or read a forum about guns, or whatever other hot button issues the government decides is controversial.

Creating such a list is the most dangerous thing a government could possibly do.

[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Already implemented in my home state here in the US. I’m glad I am more tech literate and constantly run a VPN (as well as other privacy software) but most people don’t. These laws are so horribly invasive and open dangerous doors.

[–] guyrocket@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Just curious: what software besides a VPN?

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

Tails on a usb key for OS, Tor browser for everything, all under protection of VPN and spoof the device MAC address between sessions.

[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

Little snitch + Firefox + uBlock origin + proton VPN

[–] dgmib@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

You’re dreaming if you think there’s a technological way to enforce access restrictions. You can’t do it with “browser attestation” or “APIs”.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If they require a valid govt ID on the server side then your options are your ID or the ID of someone else.

[–] Jako301@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago

On what server side? If 1 in 100 sites asks for your ID, then you simply use the other 99 that don't. There are so many clones of different porn sites that don't give a single fuck about regulations, why would they care about that law.

If lawmakers won’t piss off and iPad parents keep demanding we protect their children from their own responsibility as parents, then we’ll get shitty laws about this.

[–] sndmn@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 years ago

Anyone supporting this should be volunteering for test trials.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Everyone wanting to look at porn needs to send a letter to their MP first, requesting permission.

[–] chuck@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It would be funny if people just sent a letter to their mp every time they accessed those sites something like:

Dear honorable insert MP name

In advance of bill S-210 I am writing to inform you of my internet usage habits what follows is a list of hyperlinks to videos I have accessed today:

  1. ...

I hope this information helps you in determining my sexual interests to aid in your reelection campaign.

Sincerely xyz ABC of qwerty riding

And in the smallest print capable of your printer ( if you would like to unsubscribe from this mailing list please consider your vote on this matter)

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

honestly its not as bad as the masterbation list.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

Oh I hope your compliant. You know you can go blind if your not properly registered.

[–] asg101@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

VPN and torrents will get you anything you want.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago

Websites not in the system will get you anything you want

[–] MooseGas@kbin.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's like they are trying their hardest to have no chance of winning the next election.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] MooseGas@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

I was being mostly sarcastic. I realize its a non-partisan bill. But still, I don't see how this is popular.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago

We're lucky the biggest porn monopoly in the world is based in Canada (much as I loathe monopolies and think the government should break them up)

I'm fairly sure MindGeek will lobby for this not to pass. Corrupt cronyism will get us a win for once.

A broken clock is right twice a day

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Anyone who wants to monitor how everyone else jerks off should automatically be required to have their Internet activity monitored, because they sound like perverts.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago

Anything a politician does in relation to their position should be recorded on a bodycam, same as police. You work for the public, being paid with public funds, your actions and decisions should be 100% auditable.

[–] HopingForBetter@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago

Do they want a barage of global requests for porn? Because this is how you get a barage of global requests for porn.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Bro if you want some links, just ask.

[–] willybe@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 years ago

Think of the children. That poor Thirteen yo boy who doesn't have the luxury of Sears catalogs on the coffee table. Or hustler magazines on display in every corner store. He just wants the see a pair of boobies /s

[–] trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Not that that will stop them from doing something completely retarded. It hasn't before and the pieces of human garbage in power will continue to push any regurgitated trash thrown their way by corporate entities so long as it comes with a fat bribe.

Keep in mind these are the same people selling weapons from Canada to every single dictator and authoritarian in the world, with our weapons somehow still landing in enemy hands more than a decade after the initial inquiry into how US soldiers were being killed by Canadian weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan (See russia/afghanistan list of weapons by both sides)