Slashdot Mirror
Reactions Split On What Canada's Liberal Majority Means For Tech Policy Future (freezenet.ca)
Dangerous_Minds writes: Few could have predicted the Liberal majority win in Canada's recent election. Now that the Canadian government is in a state of transition, some have speculated what the new government will bring to the table when it comes to a policy on technology. Michael Geist is speculating that the people in the new Liberal government may bring about a positive policy change, concluding "All of this points to real change and the chance for a fresh start on Canadian digital policy in the years ahead." Meanwhile, Freezenet has a very different take. Drew Wilson points out that the last time the Liberal government was in power, the party was very combative on digital rights because they were trying to bring in Lawful Access and the Canadian DMCA before Stephen Harper took power. In one very infamous exchange, Sam Bulte lashed out at people like Michael Geist by calling him and his supporters "pro-user zealots". With digital rights not even on the radar during the election outside of Bill C-51 towards the beginning and the Liberals long history on these files, Wilson paints a very bleak future given that the Liberal party now has a majority government and can push through policies unopposed whether controversial or not.
1. Content owners rule again. 2. Unchecked torrent of "masters" degree "programmers" from Asia.
Enjoy. You deserve it.
It will mean nothing at all.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
During the Liberal's last regime, words like "Canada" were rewritten in our satellite piracy rules to mean "worldwide". That meant paying for US television service became illegal in Canada. I can't imagine a much more regressive set of policies than that. They truly made the Conservatives look like the good guys. Also during their tenure, companies like Bell started doing Deep Packet Inspection to prevent you from using encrypted anything properly (including bittorrent, but it commonly extended to VPNs). It was under Conservative rule that things improved on that. Of course, with Conservative rule you get somewhat OK copyright rules but they're still shitty as well, and TPP with more shitty copyright rules.
Trouble is, Canada has a two party system that pretends to have more parties, but has never once elected them to run the country.
You're fucked no matter which party you choose. Enjoy it and keep voting two-party, I suppose!
Now that the SJWs have taken over Canada, they're going to force everyone to undergo sex reassignment therapy. It's a proven fact that I read on 8chan.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Their citizens actually believe it makes a difference whether a "liberal" or "conservative" is in power.
Heck, here in America "Liberal" is a cuss-word that even Democrats run away from. That's part of why they suck as a political party - they can't/won't even defend Liberal values.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
Well, it can. About the only time I was proud of my country was when Schroeder said no to Iraq war. A conservative government would have followed Dubya without even thinking twice about it.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Canada has a lot of very innovative start-ups such as D-Wave and General Fusion, the former received some federal venture capital, but with regards to fusion Canada turned out the lights long ago. There isn't even anybody designated anymore at the federal level for that file.
Pathetic given that Canada used to be a pioneer in nuclear technology as evideneced by the CANDU reactor design.
How dare you?
Justin has much better hair.
Well, it can. About the only time I was proud of my country was when Schroeder said no to Iraq war. A conservative government would have followed Dubya without even thinking twice about it.
Absolutely! Americans who have only the Republican/Democrat "choice" to contemplate can too easily dismiss the difference made by the party in power. Joschka Fischer and the SPD/Grüne coalition conducted a foreign policy significantly different from that of the CDU.
Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
We don't get to vote for the boss. The boss is the person who fills the lobbyist's pockets and tells them under what conditions to fork over said money. The boss is the person who arranges that little junket Thailand, or the Bahamas, or Las Vegas. The boss is that person who makes sure that congress-critter McTurd's second cousin Tedwina gets an absolutely amazing price on that succulent little bit of property. The boss is that guy who sees to it that post-congress, there's a $$k/event speaking tour waiting the wings. The boss is the guy with that awesome stock tip.
And sure as hell, the boss is not us.
But yes, new boss, same as old boss. Because no change in boss. At all. Has nothing to do with elections.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
It's Canada. Who cares?
It's worth keeping an eye on this: trudeaumetre.ca
How dare he! Doing something for the people. Maybe even by the people.
There is no room for that in our democracy!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Oh they definitely thought about it. Some Steven Harper quotes:
Having this new government is like waking up from a terrible nightmare.
Nothing... Liberal and/or Conservative label and it's correlation to tech policy...
That just seems to wreak of correlation does not imply causation at it's finest. It's not that simple.
First, they are just poor terms that are used as insults.
Second, both "Liberal's and Conservatives" actually have values that range all over the place depending on the issue. Extremely few people I've ever met would be an across the board Liberal or Conservative. (My definition of Republican or Democrat... What part of the Constitution on average one likes to screw)
Third, it's all fun and games until money, staying in power, interest groups, and all the other general crap in "politics" gets involved.
Finally, I actually like when there is deadlock between Reps and Dems in the USA. I don't want either side of the zealots in either party to get things done... That scares the crap out of me. I hope Canada is different, but I doubt it, people are still just people everywhere.
Which Reminds me... My Presidential Platform... I'm running... :D
1) I'm completely unqualified for the job, and I know it. Which makes me more qualified that my competition, as they think they are qualified.
2) I promise to veto every single bill that comes across my desk that contains violates SRP.
3) Shed a big bright light on all the surveillance, and other crap going on that violates the Constitution.
4) Figure out what to do with the obvious violators of H1B's... Yes, Infosys, I get your spam job placement ad's in email, and via Linked IN.
5) Hire people that disagree with me, and don't think the same way as me though out all positions. Fire anyone that can't keep their mouth's shut
6) Beowulf cluster in the white house
7) And bring back the bearded balding dude to the white house
8) Immigration reform... Immigration based on food... If your cultures food is good, you are in, if it isn't, your not. (Glad my ancestors got in prior to this policy)
Well in the case of Canada and my opinion at least we don't really have much of an option. We have about 5-6 parties but 1 only runs candidates in Quebec, a couple don't run candidates in enough ridings to have a chance of being an opposition let alone form a government. Of the 3 left, really only 2 have had a good chance of winning in the last 20 or so years. So effectively 2 party if not actually.
I thing a better solution, which would be in effect the same thing as campaign finance reform: eliminate the party system entirely. Ban party whips, common signage, block voting etc. Every candidate has the stand or fall on their own positions. We'd still have committees to write laws, but those committees would be formed by some combination of qualification and lot (no more education minister with no post secondary for example) but everything would be a free vote.
I say it is effectively campaign finance reform because a single politican wouldn't have the machine to suck in the money from lobbyist. The lobbyists wouldn't have any guarantee who they need to bribe before the election because they'd have no idea who would end up being the strong negotiator at debates.That is one thing Canada has going for it though, we don't have long campaigns and advertising is a faction what it is per capita in the US.
We have what is effectively a 2 party system too and both parties are equally willing to rubber stamp anything the big media companies want (like the recent bill allowing media companies to force ISPs to block pirate websites)
I can't WAIT to check back with you in 6 months to a year, to listen to you whining about how bad the liberals are, and how they sold everybody a big lie, because they're not as liberal as they promised.
President Obama was a new ray of hope and change here... and he's pretty much just kept on with the previous administration's policies.
Enjoy your new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss sweeping reforms, chum.
Oh it makes a difference. Not as much as it should, but it does. Or do you seriously think that Obama is just like George W, or that it will make no difference whether we have Hillary Clinton as President or Carly Fiorina?
In general politicians of opposing stripes tend to be most like each other on issues that their respective bases don't pay attention to -- like intellectual property rights and fair use.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
OK, let's wait around like the rest of Canada and see if you still believe this when he steps down.
Well, considering the immense contrast between when the Liberals were last in power and what happened in our country during the last 10 years under Harper, we don't just believe it makes a difference, we have conclusive proof it does.
Leaders lead, they don't take surveys. A leader should lead from his heart, and if the people don't want to follow him any more, they should follow someone else.
A leader whose actions are dictated by public opinion is not a leader at all, and should be immediately replaced because he has nothing to offer.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Thats the kind of stuff that gets a "leader" like Harper tossed the F out. During the last election, he promised to not make any changes to the Canadian Wheat Board (A crown owned grain marketing firm) without giving farmers a vote first. He won, didn't give them a vote, they held their own plebiscite and voted overwhelmingly to keep it. The "leader" decided to sell it anyway. Farmers wanted to buy it themselves and put in a bid. They sold it to Saudi Arabia for less money instead.
Good riddance to Steven Harper and his tough-on-crime, Reaganesque war-on-drugs. Go far, far away Harper.
The previous Liberal governments that preceded the one we just kicked out, worked out very well. It's very nice to have them back. They balanced our federal budget back in the 90's and used surpluses to fund debt repayment and personal income tax cuts for the middle class mixed with corporate tax cuts. Within a few years the Harper Conservatives turned a 8 billion dollar surplus into a record 56 billion dollar deficit. They gave tax credits and cuts to corporations and the wealthy, and wondered why their trickle down economics didn't work. It was always somebody's fault. Sometimes it was the Americans fault, sometimes Chinas that our economy didn't grow for 10 years.
He promised he'd scrap the F-35 program and instead invest the money in our navy, which is in shambles.
Dear Mr Trudeau,
I voted for you. But one look at that map says you better start making some friends in Alberta if you want to get re-elected. Here's what you'll need to do...
1) Get Elon Musk on the phone. We'll take two hyperloops. First one goes in between Calgary and Edmonton, second one to get you through the GTA in Ontario. Get all the unemployed guys from manufacturing / oil patch to do the work == jobs.
2) You'll need to get Chris Hadfield into your cabinet as Minister of Being Awesome. That guy's a serious Canadian rock star. Then pump a bunch of money into the Canadian Space Agency. If the planet is seriously going to tackle space travel, we're going to need Canada-Arm's - lots of em.
3) Everyone gets a free Blackberry. No more cell phone bill = more money in the pockets of Canadians. That should solve all your people tracking spy agency stuff too. Most Canadians probably wouldn't care if the RCMP had access to their phone stuffs, (especially now that pot's legal) but you better guard our data from the evil corporations beyond our borders. A fleet of Avro Arrow's parked on the roofs of our data centres ought to do the trick.
4) Support the CBC. These guys did a bang up job on the election coverage. I streamed it live for hours, not a single buffering, not a single commercial. Granted it wasn't HD, but seriously, I can live without Rex Murphy in HD. Mansbridge on the other hand...
5) Rick Mercer for Speaker of the House. Then everyone would watch Parliament.
6) Profit!
That $56B deficit is called stimulus, and every other sane developed country was doing it too.
Canada's economy did grow for 10 years, and it's done better than most major nations, except Germany.
There's plenty to gripe about the Harper government without making stuff up.
Harper spent the entire 2008 election saying there was no recession, he didn't know what everyone was talking about. Stimulus spending would be irresponsible. Then after he was elected there was stimulus spending and it was significantly lower than $56 billion that year. It was misdirected spending like building $100,000 gazebos in Tony Clement's riding. Since then and even today we have very little growth. We are the only ones still in recession because everything is about Oil to them, and now oil is cheap.
They were also investigated by the RCMP for Adscam which went all the way to the PMO's office and his assistants, and the funneling of federal tax dollars into Quebec, where the said people in Quebec then donated those federal tax dollars right back into the Liberal party coffers. Sorry man, they're corrupt as fuck and they're not any different than the Provincial Liberals in Ontario, who are involved in 4 different police investigations ranging from destruction of data to engineering an election result in Northern Ontario.
Om, nomnomnom...
Being investigated and being found guilty of something are two completely different things. The Liberals booted everyone involved in Adscam and prosecuted them. They did not give hush money to senators, or prorogue parliament to avoid answering questions about it, or pass laws retroactively absolving people for it like the harper cons did.
The one flaw to this is our prime minister is the head of the party with the most votes. Without parties it would be necessary to come up with a new system to choose the prime minister (direct vote like the US?).
You're talking about the liberal government that suppressed protesters with pepper spray, claiming it tastes great on eggs, right? The prime minister famous for punching a protester in the face so hard he knocked out teeth (and got away with it, too).
Yes, they worked out great if you didn't dissent. If you did, better come wearing a hockey mask and goggles if you have a complaint.
Or maybe you're talking about the liberal government that promised "I will repeal the GST?" Easy to have extra money when you realize your budget kinda sucked, but if you just decided to out and out lie, hey, good to go extra cash in hand!
>They gave tax credits and cuts to corporations and the wealthy
I am one of the "wealthy". My family's income is just a bit more than twice the minimum wage Trudeau proposes. I claim the full Family Tax Cut. I am scared to see what Trudeau believes is poor. Perhaps there's children scavenging garbage dumps? Because, damn, earning well below the average family income in Canada and being able to max out that "Tax cut for the rich" instantly makes ones wealthy.
I worked out what I will lose under the new regime. $1200. That's a lot of money when you live hand to mouth. Trudeau is giving tax cuts to the moderately rich (richer than me! $89,000 a year!!!) and taking it from those earning less but able to use the "rich" tax cut. I can't wait to pay for a double tax cut for those who happen to have two mediocre jobs (totalling more than I earn) instead of one decent one. That will be "rich".
Trudeau was counting on your inability to do math. He was successful. FWIW, the FTC maxxed out at $73,000. The average family in Canada is wealthier than that (go ahead, look it up) and in many of the biggest cities in Canada, that much money just barely pays the mortgage for a shitty condo. Yet Trudeau sold it to you as only being useful for a "filthy rich" doctor making $250,000 while his wife earned $25,000 doing minimum wage somewhere. Not only is that incredibly rare (while the case of a single earner family making below average household income is not rare) but worse, do you really think someone paying ~$100,000 in taxes gives that much of a shit about a 2% break? No. Sure, they like it. But it's pin money. Now, someone at $73k has $57k left after tax. $2k makes a big difference in their ability to meet mortgage payments, pay for food, and perhaps improve their lifestyle a tiny bit. You've been scammed.
Not that the Cons are of any use either, because they were shit too. Or the NDP (Who wanted to take that cash from me and give rich people low cost day care! WTF?!). Probably the worst election ever.
Being investigated and being found guilty of something are two completely different things. The Liberals booted everyone involved in Adscam and prosecuted them. They did not give hush money to senators, or prorogue parliament to avoid answering questions about it, or pass laws retroactively absolving people for it like the harper cons did.
The liberals didn't prosecute anyone that was the RCMP. They even gave diplomatic posts to individuals who were involved in Adscam in order to get them out of the country. The liberals stonewalled as hard as they could until popular opinion in the country was at such a pitch they couldn't stonewall anymore. Sadly, I'm old enough to remember that.
Oh and the liberals sure did give hush money to senators. One of them even spent the last 20 years of his time in the senate, sitting in mexico. And sadly, they also passed laws to retroactively absolve people. You think that the Cons set precedent on this? Pierre Trudeau did the retroactive pardoning first.
Om, nomnomnom...
It made no difference, as the troops sent to Afghanistan 'freed up' as many to fight in Iraq that would have been sent anyway...
There was much talk in the UN to sanction the USA for illegal war; Having 2nd largest; border sharing nation not involved in that sanction might have been why didn't enter Iraq; in-case the unlikely event did happen.
Maybe the numbers have changed recently, but back when I looked it up last; More Canadians PER-CAPITA died in Afghanistan than Americans.. ie: Canada spilled more of'their' blood on American policies than America...
Canada seriously sucks tho, most Canadians just don't know it(So many Canadians were leaving before/in 1970s they arranged serious difficulties getting in anywhere else).. I'd die to defend the American Constitution before 'my own' countries; Actually I'd wish we were absorbed by the USA...
Having this new government is like waking up from a terrible nightmare.
Absolutely right!
licet differant, aequabitur
Given the PM's remarks on Gamergate, it'll be more about left-wing "diversity" policy than tech policy.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
A leader should lead from his heart ...
Like those war movies where the captain sets some near-impossible goal, like dragging a boat through 25 miles of forest, and everyone gladly sweats and slaves to make it so. That's not government or governing. Politics is a team effort and a leader who doesn't follow his supporters is quickly deposed in a mutiny. This is what Australia suffers since the departure of "man of steel" Howard. The first replacement was hurriedly deposed for giving his subordinates too many arse-kickings. The second because she upset the mining industry. The third was number 1 again, promoted at the last minute to undo the the damage of number 2. A change of government brought the fourth leader, who loved to make his own rules, which were either weird or very similar to the US republican party. We're now on our 5th leader in 8 years. On paper, there's nothing noteworthy about him. He is one of the few politicians with charisma and at the moment, he knows what his supporters want, so he is popular.
The last time Canada had a minority government no legislation got passed because the minority parties refused to pass any. Canadians voted for a majority just so there would at least be a functioning government.
Newt - Aliens (1986)
I can't tell if your being serious or not. Compared to the alternative? The largest mass incarceration of Canadians in history:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m...
It was pretty disappointing that a lot of tech issues didn't make the appearance that I would hope they would. Things like how our telecommunications industry has us over a barrel and we enjoy the most expensive experience in the developed world.
There were a few tech issues that were touched upon during the long campaign, however most of them got over shadowed by BS topics used to distract.
1) The first is about the future of Bill 51. Which is a draconian privacy invasion government spying bill under the pretense of "OMG TERRORISTS!". It was introduced by the Conservatives and supported by the Liberals prior to the election. Only the Conservatives were all fantastic about it. The Liberals said they would repeal *parts* of the bill to be re-worded, specifically changing it so that it would require warrants. Which to me is a bit confusing as I was pretty sure the government already had the power to go after just about any information using warrants anyway... The NDP said they would scrap the entire thing. So the real test will be in the details on how far the Liberals will go to castrate Bill 51, a little or a lot. If they are smart, they will realize that a lot of people voted NDP on this very single issue, many of them former Conservatives even, so politically they could win a lot of points by cutting deep with the knife on this one for the eventual next election.
2) The second issue, was in fact introduced by the Conservatives as a distraction, as was initiated with a YouTube video about how they didn't support a "NetFlix Tax", which absolutely no one had heard about until watching that video. What this was actually alluding to was a issue that was brought up by the CRTC about a year ago with NetFlix, which I believe NetFlix basically told them to go take a hike. It was about the release of subscriber information, the amount of Canadian content being distributed, and the fact that they do not charge tax on the service (not being physically located in Canada). It is also sort of about the CRTC trying to fit the TV model on the Streaming service which isn't quite the same. It also has to do with likely complaints by our aforementioned barrel buddies the Canadian telecommunication Industry having a monopoly of sorts and a cozy relationship with regulators. and the fact they all of them are launching their own competing streaming services, which they however must charge tax, probably because they want to sell it to you as part of a package like normal TV, and with bundles of internet, phone, etc... Anyway it is pretty much a non-issue, that likely has more to do with courts than anything else. Despite Conservative warnings, I don't think any of the other parties actually planned this, nor is it really on their radar. As I said this is more about industry pressuring regulators to do something which will eventually end up in court anyway, so little political impact excepting in what the CRTC might decide prior to a court decision.
3) The last issue really talked about came up late in the campaign, and was not talked about in much detail, which was the TTP. The TTP does have some provisions such as copyright and some tech trade related type things to worry about. Unfortunately because of all the secrecy most of what was said either way was pretty ambiguous. Most of the real talking points seemed more concerned with things like the milk industry of all things and car manufactures and the like...
The son of one of the biggest Canadian socialist ever and a notorious coke whore who seemed to hang out at studio 54 every weekend. That being said this guy was a part time drama teacher. So politically all he has is a famous name and no credentials of running a major country. I agree with his governmental transparency iniatives. I agree with the legalization of cannabis. Beyond that I do not agree with anything this guy is for.
Paul E. Bahre
Actually I'd wish we were absorbed by the USA..."
That is the saddest, most appalling, most disgusting, most disturbing thing I have ever read...
A man should lead according to his conscience. If the circumstances are right, he will be the ideal leader, if they're not, someone else will be. But he shouldn't run around asking the people he's leading what they think in order to hold on to his position. What's the point of having a leader in the first place if that's all they're going to do?
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
People like TFA who are telling you otherwise are part of the problem. The TPP is very much about digital rights, and the election was a de facto referendum on the TPP.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
They promised to replace the GST with a harmonized tax, and the HST is still an option for any province that wants it.
What is this minimum wage you speak of?
Please post the math. I'd love to see it.
...as in any regime change, making it barely distinguishable from the previous government's, and on similar sources of "support".
If contradictions to the campaign that got them into office become all too flagrant (e.g. recently enacted or even forthcoming anti-citizen, anti-consumer provisions, in particular via international conventions), they may conveniently be excused by "having to keep bearing the burden of their predecessors' unfortunate legacy".
If votes could change a nation, there'd be a law against them.