Premier Doug Ford's Ontario

[goreckm]

Fair enough and perhaps Bluesky is an emerging alternative, but it's still US-based. It may not be linked to the current regime administration but it is always one buy-out or Board change away from it.


For data critical to national security, I can get on board with having the data stored domestically. However, outside of that parameter, that proposed level of state surveillance is something I doubt most Canadians would find acceptable (and our Charter would have trouble with). "Fake news", in and of itself, isn't a national security concern. People have always been free to say, and believe, all sorts of stupid stuff.

Bluesky is different enough that it is decentralized, and therefore anyone not involved with Bluesky itself can create ways to interact with Bluesky outside the official channels.

And I wasn't talking about Canadian surveillance on the platforms, just ensuring they are following Canadian laws. for example, we could create more stringent pricacy laws, and what kind of data can be harvested and sold from Canadians. And also, there are many cases of these platforms directly impacting the stability of countries, including the US itself, and we shouldn't be afraid to regulate that. At the very least, we need to ensure the Americans aren't making the rules for us.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Bluesky is different enough that it is decentralized, and therefore anyone not involved with Bluesky itself can create ways to interact with Bluesky outside the official channels.

And I wasn't talking about Canadian surveillance on the platforms, just ensuring they are following Canadian laws. for example, we could create more stringent pricacy laws, and what kind of data can be harvested and sold from Canadians. And also, there are many cases of these platforms directly impacting the stability of countries, including the US itself, and we shouldn't be afraid to regulate that. At the very least, we need to ensure the Americans aren't making the rules for us.

There is also the additional matter - considering the current tariff situation, and that ICT present one of the key areas of US export, why shouldn't we target it heavily as a retaliatory measure? On top of the fact that we have a massive amount of homegrown talent.

AoD

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Fair enough and perhaps Bluesky is an emerging alternative, but it's still US-based. It may not be linked to the current regime administration but it is always one buy-out or Board change away from it.

For data critical to national security, I can get on board with having the data stored domestically. However, outside of that parameter, that proposed level of state surveillance is something I doubt most Canadians would find acceptable (and our Charter would have trouble with). "Fake news", in and of itself, isn't a national security concern. People have always been free to say, and believe, all sorts of stupid stuff.

Do Canadians find it acceptable for the NSA to do it to them then? Let's get real here - anything you put online - particularly through US-based providers - are filtered through NSA's PRISM. It's a bit ludicrous to argue Canadians wouldn't find it acceptable when we have always been in a situation that allowed other nations to do exactly that. By and large Canadians didn't give a shit - so to raise it as some boogeyman because our government require the repatriation of our data and datasystems on our soil, subjected to our own laws - is somehow an affront simply doesn't fly. Now it is one thing when the we are in the same SIGINT alliance with broadly comparable priorities, values and outlooks - but I think you'd be hard-pressed to say that this is the case now, and will be so in the near future.

It is also highly questionable to equivocate stupid stuff as it was in legacy media from the sheer potential for large scale, high speed and difficult to trace manipulation via social media. Can you say stupid stuff like misdirecting people to the wrong polling station with legacy media (much less finely tune this misdirection based on an umpteen amount of variables, correlated to subsegments of the population in order to achieve certain outcomes)? Can you do the same with social media? Can a foreign adversary with a vested interest do the same? Can you even tell quickly enough to prevent it from happening?

AoD

 

[Mihairokov]

Supreme Court strikes down Doug Ford’s controversial campaign finance law

In a 5-4 ruling Friday, the high court found it was unconstitutional for Ford to limit pre-election spending by unions and other third-party groups in his 2021 legislation.

www.thestar.com

March 7, 2025

Supreme Court strikes down Doug Ford’s controversial campaign finance law​

In a 5-4 ruling Friday, the high court found it was unconstitutional for Ford to limit pre-election spending by unions and other third-party groups in his 2021 legislation.

It’s a major legal triumph for a coalition of labour unions and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, which opposed the Progressive Conservatives’ bill that limited their spending to $600,000 on advertising and other political activities in the 12 months before an election.

 

[picard102]

Fair enough and perhaps Bluesky is an emerging alternative, but it's still US-based. It may not be linked to the current regime administration but it is always one buy-out or Board change away from it.

Bluesky is a public benefit corporation, based on an open, decentralized network for building social applications. So while it could be bought, though not quite as easily, its underlying technology is not ownable. If Bsky was bought by Musk, the content and user base would be able to move to a new service much more smoothly.

 

[PL1]

Supreme Court strikes down Doug Ford’s controversial campaign finance law

In a 5-4 ruling Friday, the high court found it was unconstitutional for Ford to limit pre-election spending by unions and other third-party groups in his 2021 legislation.

www.thestar.com

March 7, 2025

Supreme Court strikes down Doug Ford’s controversial campaign finance law​

In a 5-4 ruling Friday, the high court found it was unconstitutional for Ford to limit pre-election spending by unions and other third-party groups in his 2021 legislation.

It’s a major legal triumph for a coalition of labour unions and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, which opposed the Progressive Conservatives’ bill that limited their spending to $600,000 on advertising and other political activities in the 12 months before an election.

I mean, the PCPO was running non-stop ads during the pre-election period. It's only fair that other groups can (obviously this is my opinion, and is not based on legal requirements)

 

[evandyk]

Sure, but it's a bit funny that it's the unions who are going to the Supreme Court arguing for the right to spend unlimited money on political ads. Usually it's billionaires who make that argument.

But there are federal campaign finance laws that have received the approval of the Supreme Court, so Ford can use the court's guidance, redraft and try again.

 

[Northern Light]

I mean, the PCPO was running non-stop ads during the pre-election period. It's only fair that other groups can (obviously this is my opinion, and is not based on legal requirements)

I think the issue here really is one of over-reach, they extended the previous restriction, drafted by the Liberals from six months prior to a scheduled election to one year, and didn't bump the spending limit.

My take:

The correct version of this law should limit the money is speech and unlimited money is unlimited speech idea.

But to make that fair, spending limits on ads should apply to political parties as well, and to the government itself; which I'll permit a waiver for communicating essential, non-partisan info, with the requirement that the opposition sign off on the ad.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I think the issue here really is one of over-reach, they extended the previous restriction, drafted by the Liberals from six months prior to a scheduled election to one year, and didn't bump the spending limit.

My take:

The correct version of this law should limit the money is speech and unlimited money is unlimited speech idea.

But to make that fair, spending limits on ads should apply to political parties as well, and to the government itself; which I'll permit a waiver for communicating essential, non-partisan info, with the requirement that the opposition sign off on the ad.

There should be a ban of ads, from government (quasi-informational), parties and all third parties. You want to reach out? Use riding and televised debates and outreach.

AoD

 

[lenaitch]

Do Canadians find it acceptable for the NSA to do it to them then? Let's get real here - anything you put online - particularly through US-based providers - are filtered through NSA's PRISM. It's a bit ludicrous to argue Canadians wouldn't find it acceptable when we have always been in a situation that allowed other nations to do exactly that. By and large Canadians didn't give a shit - so to raise it as some boogeyman because our government require the repatriation of our data and datasystems on our soil, subjected to our own laws - is somehow an affront simply doesn't fly. Now it is one thing when the we are in the same SIGINT alliance with broadly comparable priorities, values and outlooks - but I think you'd be hard-pressed to say that this is the case now, and will be so in the near future.

It is also highly questionable to equivocate stupid stuff as it was in legacy media from the sheer potential for large scale, high speed and difficult to trace manipulation via social media. Can you say stupid stuff like misdirecting people to the wrong polling station with legacy media (much less finely tune this misdirection based on an umpteen amount of variables, correlated to subsegments of the population in order to achieve certain outcomes)? Can you do the same with social media? Can a foreign adversary with a vested interest do the same? Can you even tell quickly enough to prevent it from happening?

AoD

And maybe you guys are right. I just have a hard time believing that, with the way things are inter-connected now, having domestic platforms will somehow build a moat around our data. Even with Bluesky or some invented 'CanadaFaceBook', foreign influences could still sign up and create havoc.

I'm curious how the government could have the legislative reach to mandate IBM Canada, TD Bank (which operates in the US) or Serco (UK) or even myself to exclusively use domestic data systems and storage. Does any liberal democracy currently do that?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

And maybe you guys are right. I just have a hard time believing that, with the way things are inter-connected now, having domestic platforms will somehow build a moat around our data. Even with Bluesky or some invented 'CanadaFaceBook', foreign influences could still sign up and create havoc.

I'm curious how the government could have the legislative reach to mandate IBM Canada, TD Bank (which operates in the US) or Serco (UK) or even myself to exclusively use domestic data systems and storage. Does any liberal democracy currently do that?

Nothing is 100% foolproof, but we would be negligent knowing the risks and not act.

EU comes close under their General Data Protection Regulation and Digital Services Act

AoD

 

[Admiral Beez]

Never been a Greztky fan or an Ontario reds fan. Gretzky's recent antics just give me one more reason not buy his product.

Some funny labels…

https://www.reddit.com/r/ontario/s/qVwZOxhbRj

 

[Mihairokov]

Ontario suspends 25 per cent export tax on electricity sent to U.S.​

Ontario has agreed to suspend its 25 per cent surcharge on electricity exports to the U.S., a joint statement from Premier Doug Ford and U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick states.

The statement notes that Ford will travel to Washington on Thursday to meet with Lutnick and discuss “a renewed USMCA ahead of the April 2 reciprocal tariff deadline.”

The pivot comes after U.S. President Donald Trump said that he would double planned tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum to 50 per cent in retaliation for Ontario’s energy export tax.

Ontario suspends 25 per cent export tax on electricity sent to U.S.

Ontario has agreed to suspend its 25 per cent surcharge on electricity exports to the U.S., a joint statement from Premier Doug Ford and U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick states.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[txlseries4]

Ontario suspends 25 per cent export tax on electricity sent to U.S.​

Ontario has agreed to suspend its 25 per cent surcharge on electricity exports to the U.S., a joint statement from Premier Doug Ford and U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick states.

The statement notes that Ford will travel to Washington on Thursday to meet with Lutnick and discuss “a renewed USMCA ahead of the April 2 reciprocal tariff deadline.”

The pivot comes after U.S. President Donald Trump said that he would double planned tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum to 50 per cent in retaliation for Ontario’s energy export tax.

Ontario suspends 25 per cent export tax on electricity sent to U.S.

Ontario has agreed to suspend its 25 per cent surcharge on electricity exports to the U.S., a joint statement from Premier Doug Ford and U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick states.

www.ctvnews.ca

From a Globe and Mail journalist:
Speaking to reporters, Ford says he does not speak for other premiers, Washington delegation will include Finance Minister LeBlanc
Said Lutnick needed to “bounce it off the President” but he believed threat of Trump's added tariffs Tuesday would be withdrawn

 

[lenaitch]

Man, with the whipsaw, on-and-off policy uncertainties on all sides, no wonder the markets are grumpy.