Daryl

joined 1 month ago
[–] Daryl 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Sometimes it is very difficult to tell the difference between human-generated and chatbot-generated responses.

 

Take that, America.

Never underestimate the strength of Canadian resolve in the face of enemy action.

[–] Daryl 1 points 9 hours ago

Apparently, young-uns today do not know what the Schlieffen Plan was. When Germany attacked France, they went through relatively undefended and relatively weak Belgium to reach around the French flank. The Belgium-France border was undefended. Any country seriously thinking of invading the US would first attack either Canada or Mexico, then go through and attack the US through this relatively undefended border, instead of attacking the US directly. The ONLY reason another country would even think of attacking Canada would be to just pass through and attack the US.

If the Americans did not stop them in Canada, the entire US would be vulnerable. The US-Canada border is just too long to defend completely. That was the entire purpose of the Ogdensburg Agreement.

[–] Daryl 4 points 9 hours ago

I am not sure what your question actually is.

[–] Daryl 8 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Only because the Americans attacked us first.

[–] Daryl -5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

The fact of the matter is, now as then, America will not tolerate an enemy on it's Northern Border, and the rest of the world knows this.

America HAS to defend Canada against foreign aggression, as their main defense against what the Germans did in the Schlieffen Plan during both world wars.

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

 

The irony is, the only country that has EVER, in Canada's entire history as a nation, shown any intent or interest. either by word or deed, into attacking Canada is ... the United States of America.

No other country has even hinted, ever, that it wants to or will or is planning to attack Canada the Nation.

England and France had a tiff over who would control the land that would be called Canada, and both ended up having a partnership in the new Nation of Canada. After that, they showed no interest. Well, maybe a comment or two from Chuck DeGaul.

Not even in either of the two World Wars.

In fact, it was not until the mid 1940's that America proposed that Canada and the United States should be friends and partners in the military sense. Before that, we always had a healthy fear of the military intentions of America towards us.

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

And here a slightly different bias

https://tbaw.ca/2024/05/08/the-ogdensburg-agreement-part-i-introduction/

[–] Daryl 1 points 15 hours ago

This also shows how to make money on YouTube, step by step.

https://www.wikihow.com/Earn-Money-on-YouTube

[–] Daryl 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

What the article dances and skips around is the profit motive for doing this. I wish there would be an article that clearly outlines how these mills or farms or bots are clearly making a lot of money on each click to the site. They do not care the content, their only concern is the number of clicks and how much they make on each click.

For instance

"How a content farm works

A content farm works by producing a large volume of content on a range of different topics. Since they create lots of pages, which are optimized during the writing process, content farms tend to rank for a large number of keywords. Although there are content farms that focus on a specific industry or niche, many publish articles on a broad range of topics. These articles are usually produced by freelancers, but they can also use aggregated content from other sites. There have been a lot of claims that content farms pay freelancers very low rates for the content to ensure it is profitable.

Content farms monetize their websites using ads. This results in them needing a high number of website visitors to earn a good return on their investment. Content farms used to perform extremely well on search engines, which led to a lot of clutter and near-identical articles ranking. However, back in February of 2011, Google announced [1] they had made changes to their algorithm to increase the number of high-quality search results. This algorithm update had a large impact on content farms, causing their rankings to drop and many of them losing a large portion of their website traffic.

When is a site considered a content farm?

When exactly a website is considered a content farm is something not everyone agrees on. However, there are a few important things that indicate a website might be a content farm. Some of these are:

A broad website covering many different, unrelated topics
Many short, low-quality articles posted each day
Much of the content is rewritten content that can already be read on other sites
Many ads on the site, often without a clear separation between the content and the ads

The difference between scraper sites and content farms

Scraper sites are websites that automatically scrape and post content from other websites. These sites directly copy the content using software, without rewriting it in any way. The main difference between these sites and content farms is that content farms rewrite the posts before publishing, or just create low-quality articles that aren’t copied directly. Scraper sites copy the content exactly and post it on their site. "

https://www.seobility.net/en/wiki/Content_Farm

[–] Daryl 3 points 1 day ago

Maybe the world UN organization would come up with a method to tax any EMF radiation sent over one country by another for purposes of obtaining data? We now have the technology to detect and track this back to source.

[–] Daryl 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

We should charge them rent and a user's fee. Fee to use our airspace. Per flying object they send over it.

[–] Daryl 2 points 2 days ago

'Pressure mounting on Poilievre to fire Poilievre.

Wait, his riding constituents DID fire him.

[–] Daryl 3 points 2 days ago

A significant portion of the US military budget is spent on graft, kickbacks, and outright fraud, disguises as research. Boeing is a case in point.

[–] Daryl 1 points 3 days ago

Metro is far worse than Loblaws. I have never found their prices anywhere close to being reasonable.

 

Could THIS is the beginning of Canada finally standing o its own two feet in national Defense, after the Avro disaster? A home-grown defense industry using home-grown technology?

The public sentiment is ripe for this initiative to NOT be suppressed by American narcissism.

 

Dontcha just love it when Trump tries to tell CANADIANS what we want and don't want?

 

Rather than collapsing, the Canadian economy seems to be holding up quite well to the American fascist aggression.

Canada survives and prospers, America falters and their decline continues.

 

Another news article I am not sure what to make of. There are just so many levels of complexity to this.

Since the carbon tax comes off one time only, for a one time price reduction. and thus only offset price increases this time only, will we see inflation resuming its normal limb next report?

And will we see price reductions in the supermarket to reflect this? Or was in mainly gasoline for transportation and heating that led the offset?

 

Housing crisis? There ain't no stinkn' housing crisis.

There is, however, an 'overabundance of stupid' crisis.

 

Any excuse for Loblaws to raise their prices even higher than they have been.

 

Can anyone make sense of this article? Seems absolutely full of contradictions.

Trump threatens to increase imports of pharmaceuticals into America. Trump threatens increased tariffs on pharmaceuticals. Somehow, American pharmaceutical companies will export drugs cheaply to Canada and then import them back to America and sell them cheaper than they can sell the drugs kept back in America. The world is seemingly dependent on American pharmaceutical firms. India makes most of the world's generic drugs. Canadian drug plans are, by and large, really pushing for the substitution of generics for brand names for reimbursement purposes. Drugs are a lot cheaper in Canada. Somehow, Canada is supposed to import the drugs made in India through American channels, paying American tariffs, instead of directly from India. So Americans can buy them back cheaper than Canadians pay. The ''free enterprise' system, as exemplified by the American drug producers, will always result in the lower price. No American government, Republican or Democrat, has been remotely successful in bringing down American drug costs. There are too many rich people who can afford to pay absurdly high costs for drugs. The top 10% of American income earners is still equal to the entire population of Canada. That is a LOT of demand for drugs-at-any-cost. The Republican "Keep government out of private enterprise" party wants the American federal government to be more like our Canadian government in being able to regulate pharmaceutical profits and drug costs. Instead of wanting Canada to join America, several States want to join Canada when it comes to securing lower drug costs. Trump wants Canadians to pay more for drugs so Americans can get them cheaper. Somehow, wait for it, according to Trump's non-logic America is subsidizing the costs of drugs in the rest of the world, and 'The National Security of America' is at risk.

 

Have you noticed how many AMERICAN owed corporations are now claiming Canadian connections?

McDonalds is claiming Canadian ownership, because their franchises are owned by Canadians.

Lazyboy, which has no manufacturing or assembly n Canada, is claiming a 'buy Canadian' slant because the Lazyboy stores in Ontario are licensed to Canadian owners.

Even saw an add where ESSO is claiming Canadian roots, for over half a century.

Next, Walmart will be touting that it has Canadian roots.

 

For better or for worse, what better indicator is there that this government is defining itself to be very, very different than anything we have had before.

A complete break from the American state department.

Right up there with Canada and Cuban relations.

 

This is an idea that needs to be revisited. A shorter marine route from the prairies to export markets.

It would open up the West to greater trade with Europe.

view more: next ›