SmartVoting isn’t simply data, however. They have a “proprietary algorithm” that they refuse to share.

Not only that, but if the true goal of the site is strategic voting to keep Conservatives out of office, then you’d think that in a tied race between an NDP and Liberal candidate, with the Cons a distant third, there wouldn’t be a strategic vote recommendation at all.

And yet, in a riding in that exact situation, with a NDP incumbent tied with a Liberal candidate yet to be named, it was recommending people vote for the Liberal up until a day or two ago (Hamilton Centre, Matthew Green’s riding).

Then you start digging a little deeper and realize that the SmartVoting site is mostly (but not entirely - they have their secret algorithm!) based on the projections from 338. Which are reasonably accurate overall. However, in the recent Ontario election they under-projected the NDP’s seat count significantly, projecting 16 seats, whereas they actually ended up winning 27.

I’m not a statistician, but that seems like a remarkable jump. If I had to guess, it’s that 338’s model is not capturing something about the NDP or their voter base, whether that’s the party’s ground game, incumbency, or some other hard-to-quantify aspect.

So I mean, if it were just data then sure, don’t shoot the messenger! But the problem is more that the modeling and recommendations seem like they have real flaws, probably unintentional, but flaws nonetheless. And projections and recommendations can and will influence voter behaviour.

Hey just FYI when you type in alternating lowercase & capitals it makes it impossible for blind or sight-impaired people using screenreaders to understand you

This is an interesting comment, because on the one hand, you’re saying that Carney’s plan is not likely to be very effective, but on the other hand you’re saying he sounds smart and that’s reassuring.

To me that sounds like the definition of an emotional response … no?

Without knowing how serious your relationship is, it’s hard to say.

I would advise not doing this if the main reason is to save money, especially with one person being the sole owner. The power dynamic is too unbalanced.

But if you’re both pretty sure this is a long-term, perhaps lifelong, relationship, then no one here can give you the correct answer. Set aside some time, sit down with your partner, discuss things from both a practical and emotional perspective, do this again in another week or two, and find an arrangement you both feel good about.

“Independent media should be allowed on the precinct, there’s no reason why it should be a small cabal of government approved mouthpieces,” Poilievre said.

Hmm ok yeah that’s a fair point I guess

“I would love to see a scenario where every different kind of journalist from all backgrounds, of all opinions, is given a chance to report on what happens on the hill.”

Interesting, sure, go on

Poilievre’s spokesperson, Sebastian Skamski, did not respond to multiple requests from PressProgress seeking clarification …

Ahhhhhh there it is

Oh wow - did not know that!

Bit of a weird choice, given that routers usually allow limiting connections to specific MAC addresses as a security feature. Everything’s a trade-off, I guess…

Dunno, I found it pretty easy to set up different rules for different devices.

"Some people are going to get their heads cut off. "

Funny he should say that

Yeah out of many changes that distorted or outright altered meaning, one of the worst bits was that the second version eliminated the crucial first few words - which acknowledged the original post and therefore set a particular tone.

Communication is way more complex than statistical relationships between words, and I sincerely doubt that any of these systems will ever be able to fully mimic that complexity

“Zuckerberg’s interaction with the page was first noticed by Gazpacho Machine, a man who posts reviews of food he eats while taking showers.”

the internet was a mistake

OK so, I’ve only read Stephanie Kelton’s The Deficit Myth and listened to some interviews with a few others, so I can’t speak for all MMT proponents, but a lot of the critique from Roberts sounds flat-out wrong to me.

I don’t think I’ve heard anyone claim that governments can create infinite money without consequences; the idea that there is no theoretical limit to the number of dollars in existence is simply a conceptual point, and the practical limit of government spending is inflation, which, if I understand correctly, happens when you keep spending money into an economy that has reached its productive capacity (something that it sounds like Roberts claims MMT does not address)

I’ll absolutely grant that there are aspects of MMT that bother me (often there seems to be a focus on productivity and boosting the private sector) but I have never once heard of someone proposing to create jobs that pay less than the minimum wage. The phrase “setting a wage floor” AFAIK is usually framed as a way to ensure that jobs in the private sector are treating workers decently, because bosses will know that workers aren’t risking destitution if they quit/get fired.

The critique that MMT does not offer a theory to nations without their own currency is fair, and I agree that MMT doesn’t offer much in the way of a critique of capitalism.

What I think it does do - I see it as a step in a dialectical process - is show us that there is no magic fiscal obstacle to us collectively determining what society’s resources should be put toward.

Like, national budgets to not have to balance; national debts do not have to be paid off. The government always has the money to pay for something, because there is no theoretical limit to the number of dollars in existence; the real limiting factor is whether or not that thing is available to be bought with the government’s currency.

So really, discussions about budgets should be about our collective values and the availability of resources, and not about arbitrary fiscal constraints. Imagine what we could do!

Glad this says ‘photo-op’ and not that they ‘met with’ Trump, because it really looks like they just got a handshake and this weak thumbs-up picture

I have no idea what the views of the person in the article are, but the Idea of a supposedly federated platform like blusky banning people is a bit ridiculous

This take is ridiculous, more like.

The whole point of federation is that each provider is responsible for moderation on their own service. Bluesky is indeed running a service, not just writing the AT Protocol specification. It shouldn’t be controversial to boot people who have explicitly said they’re there to promote bigotry.

And, because federation, then those bigots can make their own instance, right? Sure, and the Bluesky instance and everyone else should then defederate that instance due to harassment.

That’s how federation works.

After having recently restored some stuff from an aging external hdd, i’m seriously considering getting a few dvdr discs and burning the important things every now and then.

I know they don’t last forever either, but - just as a random example that has definitely never happened to me hahaha - you can drop them from a height of 3 feet and still get files off them!

deleted by creator

I mostly agree - however there are physical/mechanical reasons behind the use of some of those. For example, Phillips head screws will ‘cam out’ (driver will slip out of the screw head) rather than get over-torqued, which is useful in various situations - although TIL this was not actually an intentional design feature!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cam_out

Hex keys are better than a Robertson (square head) in tight spaces with something like an Allan key, and, in my experience anyway, Robertson can take a fair bit of torque, so they’re great for sinking into softwood - and also for getting out again, even when they’ve been painted over.

Flathead screws, on the other hand, should launched into the sun

This is horrible.

It would be reasonable to assume that the lack of LTC supply is at least partly because it’s not profitable to have extra spaces you’re not using.

That lack of supply makes it more likely that seniors would have to look at places further away.

Plus, the people profiting off LTC are folks like former Conservative Premier Mike Harris, who not only used to be chair of the board of Chartwell Retirement Residences, but has also owned millions of dollars in company shares (as of 2022, Harris no longer controls >10% of the company, so he doesn’t have to file public disclosures of his holdings).

https://burlingtongazette.ca/its-time-that-we-take-the-words-private-and-profit-out-of-how-we-care-for-our-seniors/

While premier, Harris also pushed hard to privatize the industry that he would later benefit from.

This looks like another case of Ford making sure his buddies rake in as much money as possible, even if it causes human misery.

Unfortunately, Meta is listed as one of their partners

Would be very interested to know if Meta (listed as a “partner” organization) is providing financial support, like how fellow partner the Ford Foundation lists a $50k grant[1] in February 2024 to the Exchange Point Institute, which is the “fiscal sponsor” of the Social Web Foundation[2]

[1] https://www.fordfoundation.org/work/our-grants/awarded-grants/grants-database/exchange-point-institute-149412/

[2] https://socialwebfoundation.org/donate/

Not to mention that their napkin math is wrong by a factor of 12