Comment Re: IoT SSID (Score 1) 31
Comment Re:Government in charge of X makes X political (Score 0) 83
Comment Re: Very fuzzy. (Score 1) 44
Comment Re: Very fuzzy. (Score 2) 44
Comment Re: Why Are We (the UK) Helping Ukraine? (Score 1) 347
The Americans thought so as well.
And it was extremely stupid. This stupidity came to light when Russia staged a lot of troops just outside the Ukrainian border, basically "nyah nyah, you can't touch me" and then invaded Kharkov region the second time. After that even Biden saw how stupid that rule was and relaxed it. Of course now that Ukrainians are making their own weapons, they can do whatever they want with them.
Actually, the way the American aid worked looked like Biden was doing his best to extend the war as long as possible. Every time the Ukrainians started to push the Russians back, the supply of weapons stopped for various reasons. Then the Ukrainian offensive stalled and the front line was stable for a while. After some time, Russia started going forward and only then the various problems with weapon supply evaporated and Ukraine even got some new weapons.
Comment Re:Why Are We (the UK) Helping Ukraine? (Score 5, Insightful) 347
During WW2 why did the UK bomb Germany? I mean why didn't it just defend itself?
Russia invaded Ukraine, Ukraine can hit any military target inside Russia in order to make Russia stop fighting. This is part of defense. Bombing oil refineries, weapons factories and such is a perfectly valid thing to do.Even temporarily taking territory from Russia (that belonged to Russia in 2013) is acceptable. Russia can stop this war at any time - just withdraw its troops from Ukraine and that will be it.
Or do you think that Russia should be allowed to hit targets inside Ukraine, but Ukraine should not be allowed to hit targets inside Russia? Russia seems to think so.
Comment Re:Missing the woods for the trees (Score 1) 39
Comment Re: Meta has an AI? (Score -1, Troll) 52
Comment Re:Vancouver BC (Score 1) 68
Are you suggesting that people migrate to a place to destroy it instead of because they like to adopt the lifecycle of that place?
People have multiple reasons to move to a different place. One of them is money - if the person can earn more money in another country, he moves there.
People also do not change very quickly. If someone comes from a country where it is considered OK to dump trash in a river, he likely won't change his mind after moving. He will likely obey the law that says "do not dump trash in a river" to not get punished, but he may consider the law to be stupid and would still be more likely to dump trash in a river if he was sure he could get away with it, after all, is is used to it being OK to do that..
If it's just a single person (or a single family) moving to a different country, they will be basically forced to assimilate - learn the language, learn the customs and so on.
If a lot of people from some country move to another country and live in close proximity to each other, they start making a miniature version of their home country. After all, why learn another language if you can communicate with your neighbors, employer and the cashiers at the shop using your native language or some other language you know?
People from my country have moved to a bunch of places (mostly the UK) to look for more money. Some assimilated and want to live there. Some didn't and instead just hung out with their own bringing some problems from my country (mainly theft at the time) to those countries.
I have many Muslim friends of my own. They value education, co-operation, healthcare, and have no interest in guns.
There are many people, some of them assimilate, some of them don't. Those who assimilated would be willing to be friends with you, but those who are the more stereotypical Muslims (taking from your example) would likely not want to associate with you and you would likely not want to associate with them. You probably do not speak Arabic or some other language of a Muslim-majority country, so the people who do not care about learning the languages of Canada, won't be talking with you and won't be your friends.
By the way, I am not a racist - I think that different races are equal. I am, however, a xenophobe - I think that a culture that says it's OK to dump trash in a river, a culture that says it's OK to kill someone if he or she offended your honor or a culture that says the appropriate punishment for rape is letting the victim's brother rape your sister is absolutely inferior to the Western culture and I do not want people from one of those cultures near me.
Comment Re: Reverting to third-world status (Score 1) 146
Another way to do this would be deregulation of power generation. Building a new power plant is probably more expensive because of new regulations, where an existing power plant may not have to meet them.
Similar with houses where I live. If you have a house that was built a while ago, it does not need to meet new requirements, but if you want to build a new house, it has to have very good thermal insulation, solar panels on the roof and so on, this makes building a new house more expensive. It may be cheaper to live there in the long run (due to lower cost for heating), but the ROI is going to be very long, because you need a bigger loan to be able to build (or buy) it and then you will pay more interest on that bigger loan.