Canada Strong isn’t about just withstanding this crisis, it’s about coming out of it stronger, more resilient, and more independent. It’s about ensuring that...
Thanks for elaborating your point. I’m not sure there’s any point in replying because some of what you’re saying is just bizarre to the point of surely being disingenuous. You’re upset that it’s scripted? It’s a speech from the prime minister. What do you think a speech writer does? Or do you think he’d be a better leader if he just adlibbed his address to the nation?
You’re upset that he uploaded a video? We all know that he will reach more people with a video than with a press release because more people watch videos than are willing to read. Hence keeping more of the public informed is achieved with a video.
You’re upset that it’s shot on two decent cameras and has production value and you’re upset that we the Canadian public are paying for it like we’re footing the bill for a Marvel movie - or even 1 second of a Marvel movie. Again, essentially nonsense. Would the prime minister look professional if they shot it all in one take on an old digital camera? Of course not. This is an important address to the nation pretty sure we can spend 1/10000th of a Doug Ford private jet on this.
No shit it’s propaganda, as in:
information, ideas, opinions, or images, often only giving one part of an argument, that are broadcast, published, or in some other way spread with the intention of influencing people’s opinions 0
Churchill’s wartime addresses on British radio were “propaganda” - was it bad? No. Were they false? No. Is it the same as Russian/MAGA propaganda to you?
Regarding the AI point, that’s a whole different kettle of fish - but ignoring AI or only having access to the “facts” presented by American or Chinese tech LLMs regarding history, geopolitics or social issues is not a satisfactory scenario.
If you don’t want Canada to invest in energy, military or even make videos addressing the nation - out of interest, what do you think Canada should do to stop the US government trying to use economic force to annex Canada?
I’m not upset. I never suggested that this too expensive for a government spend. I’m pointing out that this is blatant manipulation. I cite the cost of this video as evidence that they wanted to obfuscate their intent while providing the illusion of transparency. I thought I communicated that clearly, but if you didn’t get that, I’ll accept the blame.
Your last comment is ridiculous though. The fact that the Americans want to annex us has absolutely no bearing on whether it makes sense to burn the planet or cripple our economy by throwing billions into the pockets of weapons companies. There is zero long-term benefit to these policies, and incalculable long-term disaster.
Form a national housing agency for the federal government to start building homes again.
Build an alliance of other nations to operate as a trading bloc for countries living up to their climate agreements. Membership in the bloc awards reduced trading friction, while non-members are hit with tariffs.
Or, you know, we can just double down on fossils and ensure that our grandkids live in a hellscape.
It’s hard to take you seriously my friend. To begin with, I don’t think you’ve explored the topic of AI very deeply. For sure the industry and the technology is out over its skis right now, but there is no putting that genie back in the bottle. Your ‘solution’ is naive in the extreme. AI will change society whether we want to ignore it or not. Do you suppose that we could have ignored or reversed the agricultural revolution, or the industrial revolution?
Our effort is better spent growing with it, understanding it, and merging it into our society in a way that respects our values and our goals.
You’re making a lot of assumptions that have yet to be backed up with evidence. There have been a lot of inventions that people claimed were revolutionary and “here to stay” that have since been confined to history has a bad idea: blockchain and NFTs most recently, asbestos & DDT somewhat further back. Just because boosters like yourself have drunk the kool-aid is not sufficient evidence for your claim.
But that’s beside the point. The Canadian government doesn’t need to pour public funds into “AI” for it to succeed. Indeed if it’s as revolutionary as you claim, the public will spend their own funds or demand their taxes cover it… but they aren’t, are they? The public overwhelmingly hate it save for base entertainment. That’s not revolution, it’s very expensive porn, temporarily subsided by billionaires.
The cost of “AI” is astronomical, and I’m not just talking about the finances. The environmental cost is civilisation-crippling, and the benefits produced so far amount to [checks notes] a net loss in the hundreds of billions of dollars, stolen culture, skill atrophy, loss of agency, oh! and psychosis.
Put the kool-aid down friend and try looking at this more objectively. It’s a non-solution for a problem we don’t have that’s causing incalculable harm. Public money should not be funding it.
Thanks for elaborating your point. I’m not sure there’s any point in replying because some of what you’re saying is just bizarre to the point of surely being disingenuous. You’re upset that it’s scripted? It’s a speech from the prime minister. What do you think a speech writer does? Or do you think he’d be a better leader if he just adlibbed his address to the nation?
You’re upset that he uploaded a video? We all know that he will reach more people with a video than with a press release because more people watch videos than are willing to read. Hence keeping more of the public informed is achieved with a video.
You’re upset that it’s shot on two decent cameras and has production value and you’re upset that we the Canadian public are paying for it like we’re footing the bill for a Marvel movie - or even 1 second of a Marvel movie. Again, essentially nonsense. Would the prime minister look professional if they shot it all in one take on an old digital camera? Of course not. This is an important address to the nation pretty sure we can spend 1/10000th of a Doug Ford private jet on this.
No shit it’s propaganda, as in:
Churchill’s wartime addresses on British radio were “propaganda” - was it bad? No. Were they false? No. Is it the same as Russian/MAGA propaganda to you?
Regarding the AI point, that’s a whole different kettle of fish - but ignoring AI or only having access to the “facts” presented by American or Chinese tech LLMs regarding history, geopolitics or social issues is not a satisfactory scenario.
If you don’t want Canada to invest in energy, military or even make videos addressing the nation - out of interest, what do you think Canada should do to stop the US government trying to use economic force to annex Canada?
I’m not upset. I never suggested that this too expensive for a government spend. I’m pointing out that this is blatant manipulation. I cite the cost of this video as evidence that they wanted to obfuscate their intent while providing the illusion of transparency. I thought I communicated that clearly, but if you didn’t get that, I’ll accept the blame.
Your last comment is ridiculous though. The fact that the Americans want to annex us has absolutely no bearing on whether it makes sense to burn the planet or cripple our economy by throwing billions into the pockets of weapons companies. There is zero long-term benefit to these policies, and incalculable long-term disaster.
What would I have him do? Well I conveniently have a list I’ve been maintaining for a while now. The TL;DR though is to:
Or, you know, we can just double down on fossils and ensure that our grandkids live in a hellscape.
It’s hard to take you seriously my friend. To begin with, I don’t think you’ve explored the topic of AI very deeply. For sure the industry and the technology is out over its skis right now, but there is no putting that genie back in the bottle. Your ‘solution’ is naive in the extreme. AI will change society whether we want to ignore it or not. Do you suppose that we could have ignored or reversed the agricultural revolution, or the industrial revolution?
Our effort is better spent growing with it, understanding it, and merging it into our society in a way that respects our values and our goals.
You’re making a lot of assumptions that have yet to be backed up with evidence. There have been a lot of inventions that people claimed were revolutionary and “here to stay” that have since been confined to history has a bad idea: blockchain and NFTs most recently, asbestos & DDT somewhat further back. Just because boosters like yourself have drunk the kool-aid is not sufficient evidence for your claim.
But that’s beside the point. The Canadian government doesn’t need to pour public funds into “AI” for it to succeed. Indeed if it’s as revolutionary as you claim, the public will spend their own funds or demand their taxes cover it… but they aren’t, are they? The public overwhelmingly hate it save for base entertainment. That’s not revolution, it’s very expensive porn, temporarily subsided by billionaires.
The cost of “AI” is astronomical, and I’m not just talking about the finances. The environmental cost is civilisation-crippling, and the benefits produced so far amount to [checks notes] a net loss in the hundreds of billions of dollars, stolen culture, skill atrophy, loss of agency, oh! and psychosis.
Put the kool-aid down friend and try looking at this more objectively. It’s a non-solution for a problem we don’t have that’s causing incalculable harm. Public money should not be funding it.
Ok cool but I guess it’s a good thing nobody cares what you think
Weird. You explicitly asked what I thought. Twice in fact. So I guess at least one person does!