Critics have also warned that the government could issue directives compelling companies to weaken or bypass encryption tools. The CCSPA does not prohibit such orders (McMillan, at para 3).
Unlike NIS2, which places significant emphasis on transparency, institutional accountability, and harmonized enforcement through national authorities, Bill C-8 consolidates authority within the federal Cabinet and delegates sweeping powers to the Minister without creating any independent regulatory body.
Maybe that's the point - they provide all the hosted but privacy friendly services you need
The literal meaning of the law disclosed by the coverage only emphasizes the prohibition of blocking the access to a religious or community center. That's what's added. If they are still using the word "hatred", it won't include more groups unless they have this overt action.
Conversely, I concur that the police's response to hate crimes has been severely inadequate.
Moreover, while the lawfulness of a protest will not be changed by the law if the protesters don't block the access, the right to protest is disproportionally restricted by the existing legal system.
Although the exact wording hasn't been released, the news coverage says
To avoid infringing Charter rights, the source said, there would be an exemption so people can advocate and protest as long as it's lawful.
So unlike the Ontario one, it seems that protests are not prohibited?
You are right. I think they should make it more clear.
In the FakeSpot privacy notice, Google Analytics, Social Media Platforms, Contact Info, and Identifiers are not collected by Firefox, among others. So it's fair to say the data collected is not linked to the user.
The browser.shopping.experience2023.ads.enabled flag is intriguing. So I took a look. It turns out that the recommendation is only based on the current page you request the review analysis.
In general, I believe that it is primarily ambiguous legal documents rather than a genuine invasion of privacy.
In OP's screenshot, you are only going to agree to Mozilla's privacy policy and FakeSpot's TOS. So the FakeSpot's privacy policy is not involved.
Because treaty rights are parallel to human rights