And they're welcome, as a business to swallow those aquisition expenditures, or fund their own Canadian content, or not do business here.

The list of developed countries that don't have domestic cultural protection policies is low. The US doesn't have one because of its size (or I'll throw you a bone - HOW AWESOME THEY ARE) - it simply doesn't need one.

Kind of hilarious in light of how pro-protectionist things have swung there. If the US audience started consuming predominantly anime TV, movies, books, etc overnight (purely just because of how good they are, right?) you'd bet your ass US would do the exact same thing.

What you don't get is that French is useful for many people - it just wasn't useful for you - and you project that because to you, personal experience is reality. Calling Mandarin, Spanish, Hindi, and Arabic more useful languages for living, identifying with other citizens, and employment in Canada is fucking bananas - and I'm married to a Taiwanese woman and speak some Mandarin!! Nothing you've said has changed my mind. Your points are noted, but still remarkably dumb.

so why aren't they given force adoption

I feel like we need a "take Murdoch5 to a real job" day or something. I'd literally pay to sit you down some time and explain how the real world works.

A plastic recycling process that is to expensive to be practical? How novel, it's almost like every plastic recycling process is too expensive to use, has been since the beginning, and the plastic industry knew this would be the case from the start.

So you _did_ understand the post, but you disagreed with it? And decided that because you were correctly called out you have nothing left by ad homineim? Cool, you're not an embarassment to yourself at all.

Do you have a profound reading comprehension issue? I can't imagine how else you were unable to follow that post.

There was a long term vision starting with Reagan. You (and I) just don't like it because we weren't already part of the .1%.

What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Are you under the impression that everyone who uses a slop bot has a high end GPU and the ability to run it on that? Or do you think it's more likely that those models are being run "in the coud" (i.e. a datacenter) for consumption?

Is this a seriosu question? It goes back into the atmosphere rather than aquifers or rivers (i.e. the places we get water from). It goes elsewhere and comes down as rain in places where there is already plenty of water.

Data center water usage isn't a universal problem. It's a location specific issue.

Even if they ran on solar, the resources and energy required to manufacture the data center, contents, and power components is not a reasonable trade off when it's sole purpose is "AI" or "big data" (i.e. consumer surveilance).

There is no cognitive dissonance. Everything he's doing is don'e the wrong way (executive order), un or underfunded (that's the job of congress) and only done to satisfy his narcissism (his name on it). If you aren't smart enough to read past the headline and understand the how and why there is no helping you, but those exact defeciencies are what make a magat. Anyone who has the ability and willingness to think for themselves wouldn't outsource their critical thinking to a cult.

More magat logical fallacy. He's spending money we don't have contrary to his stated position. That's to be called out and mocked. The end. It's really that simple.

Doesn't matter how. Multiple felonies were commited. Intentionaly or negligently. I want to see personal and corporate consequences. If "the AI did it" is an excuse the "justice system" has received it's final death blow in the ongoing oiligarch war against corporate responsibility. It's so perfect for this outcome it would be believable that this was intentional to provoke this exact outcome.

So you still don't get it, or your "point" was so poorly described that it's not possible to understand what you mean. Bravo.

California get a lot more than just those things "simply through geography". It's not clear what your point is. The united states as a whole became a superpower "simply through geography" (i.e. massive river network, massive amounts of natural resources). Most countries are wealthy or not "simply through geography." Is this some unique concept to you? Something you've never reasoned about before? Because it's super obvious to everyone and not some refutation of "not deserving" or whatever you're trying to say here.

"Just let me live the life I want to live, by fucking up others' lives way more than the other party may have mildly inconvenienced me for sound policy. Wait, why is this affecting me now?"

It's a tale as old as time.