Uh it isn't? Green energy pays between 0.43-0.92kWh in most places due to FIT programs. It's around 0.04-0.08kWh for coal which is still 0.01-0.03kWh more expensive then nuclear and roughly double the cost of hydro-electric. Looking at Ontario, yes you notice very quickly when your price of electricity goes from 0.07kWh@peak to 0.17kWh@peak in under 8 years. If you want to see the train wreck in motion of this happening, you can look at Alberta.
Single case, and directly relating to that case. Also keep in mind that the TS case only applies to Ontario. If you want broad coverage it has to go higher, or the law has to change.
The courts may need to put further protection in place
Won't work like that. This will require one of two things, either a new law or a new provision under the privacy act(federal). Or a case relating to this and trolling of information to the SCC and the actions of the OPP in gaining the information/use of the information being considered overly broad and in turn meaning that it can't be used. Something similar happened a couple of years ago with exigent circumstances and it being struck from Canadian law by the SCC.
No, I mean Twitter doesn't want you specifically as a customer. I'm surprised you haven't already gotten the message. They're telling you, "It's not you, it's me. So GTFO."
Oh I'm not a customer, never have been. Neither have you. People that use it are a product being sold to advertisers, and when you operate on such a model you want nearly everyone to use it. Otherwise, it collapses around you in a pile of burning pain...kinda like how it is right now. I'm surprised you fail to get even this most basic premise of running a business like that.
Generally warrants are obtained against suspects not potential witnesses. It's the scope of the warrant that's disturbing. They even say that one of these people could be the killer, so they're basically treating everyone as a potential suspect merely for having their phone turned on in the vicinity of the crime.
In Canadian law this is completely legal FYI. Hell if you're walking down the street and there was a murder 2 blocks over, and the only information is "the suspect is a black male and accomplice was white male" and you fall into either of those categories, the police can detain you to ensure you're not one of the people who fit the profile of the individuals they're looking for. There's a lot to cover in this but that's the bare minimum that should make sense.
There have been multiple cases of warrants being used against witnesses in case law in Canada as well, especially against uncooperative witnesses in crimes, several cases that I can remember witnesses were also found to be accomplices. What a lot of people don't understand and this is usually due to watching a lot of American TV(which is just plain bad on law, and really terrible on US laws too) is that the rights afforded to you under the Charter are weighted against S.1 which allows the suspending of rights if enacted via the courts or laws. Your average Canadian has less rights then their American neighbors do and it all comes back to S.1.
Keep in mind that in Canada up until a few years ago, Exigent Circumstances were legal on the books and so on. The whole idea behind it was to allow warrentless entry/searches/tapping of communications/etc before a warrant was authorized, or allow entry into a building, and so on. And allowed police to do actions without a warrant, then go back and get a warrant to cover their actions. The various laws that used it, had been on the books since before there was a Canada, and the courts ruled that exigent circumstances were overly broad in a modern society and struck the entire thing out of law.
Article is garbage and completely misses S.1 of the Charter, something you're also missing. S.1 states "guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." To boil it down, government or courts can make laws that override these rights, or put in place case law judgements if there is a "greater good" for the rest of society. It's one of the big things that makes a lot of charter lawyers here in Canada believe that the Charter probably won't make it to 2030.
So with that, you can not refuse to talk at a RIDE checkpoint because S.1 supersedes other rights guaranteed under the charter and the SCC has already ruled that the "RIDE Program" that although being an unlawful search, there is a reasonable exception under S.1 "for the safety of all Canadians, to reduce the number of drivers under the influence" as long as it's premise holds true. That means you have no reasonable right to refuse to answer, even though it's technically an illegal search. On top of that since it is a search, and you are driving a motor vehicle you must also show license and vehicle registration if demanded. What you can do however is answer to the bare minimum that's requested of you, nothing more. There's a whole pile more to this but I'm too damned tired to write it out.
Also, the wikipedia article on R. v. Hebert misses several key things, I recommend reading the actual case law on http://canlii.org/
Right. And where are you going to put them? Let's take a look back again to Ontario where land is at a premium not because of a lack of space, but because it's some of the best farmland in the world. How much of an area are you going to need for all those batteries to cover say 4.8 million households? Well let's cut it down to 4m, and just run from Windsor to Ottawa, not counting the businesses. Keep in mind that off peak is somewhere around 16k MW and on peak hits between 22k MW and 29k MW. 50MWh wouldn't even scratch the surface of a standard swing in non-peak to peak usage and would lead to a massive brownout or parts of the grid being dropped off. So now we're getting into multiple sites, multiple storage, multiple redundency. BESS for example provides 15min(23MWh) of power to a city of ~30k, and requires storage in what's basically a giant warehouse. So now we're looking at underground storage as a possibility right? Well luckily a lot of southern ontario is sitting on limestone.
so build some solar and wind much more south? Alabama AND Arizona for example. electricity is the cheapest form of energy to transport
Mighta missed it, but between Ontario and say Arizona there's at least 1800 miles. And between Ontario and Alabama it's around 1k miles. While the NA grid is somewhat interconnected, there are still separate network grids in case of catastrophic failure. On top of that, there isn't a big nationwide high voltage DC grid for the delivery of power from plants. And HVDC is the only way you're going to be transporting power that far while reducing the loss. AC it actually becomes very cost prohibitive very quickly over very long distances and more electricity is lost due to resistance and heat.
Ontario's best solution for electricity has always been nuclear, followed by hydro-electric to round it out. Followed by coal and natural gas for peak demands. The current government(Liberal) decided that "coal is nasty, evil and dirty" and shut them down, instead of say retrofitting them. And there were even a few leaked documents that they wanted to do the same with natural gas power plants and wanted to ban natural gas for home use, forcing everyone onto electric. The price started climbing quickly once these cheap sources were removed from the grid.
If you want to see this insanity in action, go look at the current NDP government in Alberta. Where they're pushing the same policy. The problem in Alberta is, whole lotta area and people are very spread out. Coal is plentiful, and in turn small out of the nowhere places where it's cost prohibitive to build NG, impossible to build nuclear, and where solar or wind is also prohibitive. They're now scrambling to build thousands of KM of power lines. Small towns and cities like Grande Prairie and Grande Cache rely on small scale coal plants to keep people from freezing to death in the winter when there are grid failures for example. The winter I spent in Grande Cache, the nighttime lows hit -48C with a windchill of -55C. The daytime highs were between -25C and -38C not counting windchills. We had 3 days with no power due to high winds, the mall, fire dept, and all government buildings had power though. So people who didn't have wood as a backup, could safely stay somewhere.
If windmills are there to cover peak, it would never happen in Ontario. The hottest days of the year here are also the times when there is the most peak demand, and the wind is almost never blowing. Usually around then it's somewhere between 29-35C with a humidex of 35-40C. On top of that, if you're talking about in-general daytime peak, Ontario generates more electricity then it uses(and is also home to the 2nd largest nuclear power station in the world). The excess is sold to the US at between 0.02-0.05kWh, something which the people of Ontario never see anymore.
That was federal, not provincial and had to do with replacing a 1st gen medical reactor, which is still in use. Just a FYI. I think you're talking about the hundred million on a "natural gas" generating station, that was cancelled because the NIMBY's in Mississauga threw a hissyfit. That's the same NG plant, that the current government is under 2 investigations for relating to the destruction of documents.
What you mean like here in Ontario? Where the windmills don't turn because the government pays them not to produce electricity? Where it accounts for under 2% of the total generation but responsible for 80% of the price increase in the last decade? From at peak of 0.07kWh to 0.18kWh. Where you can have 45+ days in a row without direct sunlight for solar. Yeah, they're doing a world of good for us. 70k people have had their electricity cut in the last 2 years, 700k customers are 4 months or more in arrears right now. The largest hydro company(Ontario Hydro) has 1.3m customers for example. FYI: Electricity is called hydro here, because our primary generation source used to be hydro-electric.
That comic deliberately mis-interprets and contradicts itself to make a point.
This coming from the person who deliberately misinterprets and contradicts their own points and the points of others to try and make themselves seem morally superior? Right. Let me know when you figure out the whole "yes people should be treated equally, and not attacked for having a differing opinion" that you're so up in arms against. After all, you're quite happy to see people attacked for "freedom of consequences" as long as they're on the opposite side of the ideological isle. While I'm quite happy to see nobody attacked for such. You however, believe my view to be fascism.
Again your interpretation is contradicted by the first sentence of your source!
Read that again. Arranged the donation in 2014, this was started in 2013. I know, it's so out there...especially in context. Also re-read the first source, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt where you missed the important part.
Cherry picked and quote mined parts of vast document dumps are not reliable.
So, someone saying that directly in the context of the email is quote mining and not reliable. Bet you didn't even check the emails in context did you? Nope. I bet you didn't, good on you!
Considering the stuff that's come out from leaked emails including stuff like Hillary knowingly ordering the destruction of data even after demands for the data under law? You can take the link as you want, it does have backlinks to all of the previous leaked emails, previous statements and so on. That means she/they was lying, ignored official requirements, or simply believe they're so big they can avoid prosecution. So that leaves us with: Either the FBI is incompetent, turned a blind eye, or someone was holding a sword over their head in recommending prosecution.
Oh hey, I thought I was your favorite anti-democratic pro-fascist poster. I guess I'm only your second favorite now:(
Tell you what, I don't really have much time, so can you just make your usual claims about what I said then provide me with a long list of links, none of which actually contain anything relevant?
Well since I've never called you that, I'm sure you can cough up the links where I've labeled you that.
Sure, you want me to start with your anti-gamergate stuff, or the parts where you refuse to look at actual evidence of anti-gamergate people engaging in everything that you claim GG did. I mean you've got great company with this guy right here. Or do you want me to start with the stuff regarding twitter again that you refused to look at and ran away over?
Because a lot of people only like to hear what they want to hear. Twitter is a private company not a public service, there is no obligation to offer everyone a voice. Just like sports, religion, music, fashion or any other private venture, you create an ecosystem that you think customers want. You and I might think it's shit, but millions of others out there might think this sanitised version of Internet communication is great.
Correct partially. People enjoy listening to what they like to hear, however Twitter is a publicly traded company not private and is responsible to it's shareholders. Go listen to their last investors meeting, investors in general are livid with what the CEO has done to the company and brand.
Investors already know that the current CEO has significantly damaged the brand, possibly beyond repair. Some people though are in so deep that the only way to recover their buy in is for Twitter to sell to another company, but the CEO keeps fucking it up and the board doesn't seem to care. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if in 6mo that there's a shareholder revolt. So that goes all back to the original point, when you ban people because "reasons" it doesn't draw people in. Their number of active users continues to fluctuate between 288-315m but the number of new subscribers continues to fall through the floor. Which also reminds me of the shareholder lawsuit against them for purposefully misleading investors on future growth of users.
There's a gigantic stick up your ass, and you're so deep into it, that you don't even notice anymore.
Pretty modern hallmark of a regressive right there. Can't dispute anything, get's into a huff and stomps their feet instead of countering any point at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh it isn't? Green energy pays between 0.43-0.92kWh in most places due to FIT programs. It's around 0.04-0.08kWh for coal which is still 0.01-0.03kWh more expensive then nuclear and roughly double the cost of hydro-electric. Looking at Ontario, yes you notice very quickly when your price of electricity goes from 0.07kWh@peak to 0.17kWh@peak in under 8 years. If you want to see the train wreck in motion of this happening, you can look at Alberta.
Single case, and directly relating to that case. Also keep in mind that the TS case only applies to Ontario. If you want broad coverage it has to go higher, or the law has to change.
The courts may need to put further protection in place
Won't work like that. This will require one of two things, either a new law or a new provision under the privacy act(federal). Or a case relating to this and trolling of information to the SCC and the actions of the OPP in gaining the information/use of the information being considered overly broad and in turn meaning that it can't be used. Something similar happened a couple of years ago with exigent circumstances and it being struck from Canadian law by the SCC.
No, I mean Twitter doesn't want you specifically as a customer. I'm surprised you haven't already gotten the message. They're telling you, "It's not you, it's me. So GTFO."
Oh I'm not a customer, never have been. Neither have you. People that use it are a product being sold to advertisers, and when you operate on such a model you want nearly everyone to use it. Otherwise, it collapses around you in a pile of burning pain...kinda like how it is right now. I'm surprised you fail to get even this most basic premise of running a business like that.
Think you mean Twitter doesn't want you as a customer unless you're willing to drink the kool-aid and engage in ideological groupthink.
Generally warrants are obtained against suspects not potential witnesses. It's the scope of the warrant that's disturbing. They even say that one of these people could be the killer, so they're basically treating everyone as a potential suspect merely for having their phone turned on in the vicinity of the crime.
In Canadian law this is completely legal FYI. Hell if you're walking down the street and there was a murder 2 blocks over, and the only information is "the suspect is a black male and accomplice was white male" and you fall into either of those categories, the police can detain you to ensure you're not one of the people who fit the profile of the individuals they're looking for. There's a lot to cover in this but that's the bare minimum that should make sense.
There have been multiple cases of warrants being used against witnesses in case law in Canada as well, especially against uncooperative witnesses in crimes, several cases that I can remember witnesses were also found to be accomplices. What a lot of people don't understand and this is usually due to watching a lot of American TV(which is just plain bad on law, and really terrible on US laws too) is that the rights afforded to you under the Charter are weighted against S.1 which allows the suspending of rights if enacted via the courts or laws. Your average Canadian has less rights then their American neighbors do and it all comes back to S.1.
Keep in mind that in Canada up until a few years ago, Exigent Circumstances were legal on the books and so on. The whole idea behind it was to allow warrentless entry/searches/tapping of communications/etc before a warrant was authorized, or allow entry into a building, and so on. And allowed police to do actions without a warrant, then go back and get a warrant to cover their actions. The various laws that used it, had been on the books since before there was a Canada, and the courts ruled that exigent circumstances were overly broad in a modern society and struck the entire thing out of law.
Article is garbage and completely misses S.1 of the Charter, something you're also missing. S.1 states "guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." To boil it down, government or courts can make laws that override these rights, or put in place case law judgements if there is a "greater good" for the rest of society. It's one of the big things that makes a lot of charter lawyers here in Canada believe that the Charter probably won't make it to 2030.
So with that, you can not refuse to talk at a RIDE checkpoint because S.1 supersedes other rights guaranteed under the charter and the SCC has already ruled that the "RIDE Program" that although being an unlawful search, there is a reasonable exception under S.1 "for the safety of all Canadians, to reduce the number of drivers under the influence" as long as it's premise holds true. That means you have no reasonable right to refuse to answer, even though it's technically an illegal search. On top of that since it is a search, and you are driving a motor vehicle you must also show license and vehicle registration if demanded. What you can do however is answer to the bare minimum that's requested of you, nothing more. There's a whole pile more to this but I'm too damned tired to write it out.
Also, the wikipedia article on R. v. Hebert misses several key things, I recommend reading the actual case law on http://canlii.org/
Right. And where are you going to put them? Let's take a look back again to Ontario where land is at a premium not because of a lack of space, but because it's some of the best farmland in the world. How much of an area are you going to need for all those batteries to cover say 4.8 million households? Well let's cut it down to 4m, and just run from Windsor to Ottawa, not counting the businesses. Keep in mind that off peak is somewhere around 16k MW and on peak hits between 22k MW and 29k MW. 50MWh wouldn't even scratch the surface of a standard swing in non-peak to peak usage and would lead to a massive brownout or parts of the grid being dropped off. So now we're getting into multiple sites, multiple storage, multiple redundency. BESS for example provides 15min(23MWh) of power to a city of ~30k, and requires storage in what's basically a giant warehouse. So now we're looking at underground storage as a possibility right? Well luckily a lot of southern ontario is sitting on limestone.
so build some solar and wind much more south? Alabama AND Arizona for example. electricity is the cheapest form of energy to transport
Mighta missed it, but between Ontario and say Arizona there's at least 1800 miles. And between Ontario and Alabama it's around 1k miles. While the NA grid is somewhat interconnected, there are still separate network grids in case of catastrophic failure. On top of that, there isn't a big nationwide high voltage DC grid for the delivery of power from plants. And HVDC is the only way you're going to be transporting power that far while reducing the loss. AC it actually becomes very cost prohibitive very quickly over very long distances and more electricity is lost due to resistance and heat.
Ontario's best solution for electricity has always been nuclear, followed by hydro-electric to round it out. Followed by coal and natural gas for peak demands. The current government(Liberal) decided that "coal is nasty, evil and dirty" and shut them down, instead of say retrofitting them. And there were even a few leaked documents that they wanted to do the same with natural gas power plants and wanted to ban natural gas for home use, forcing everyone onto electric. The price started climbing quickly once these cheap sources were removed from the grid.
If you want to see this insanity in action, go look at the current NDP government in Alberta. Where they're pushing the same policy. The problem in Alberta is, whole lotta area and people are very spread out. Coal is plentiful, and in turn small out of the nowhere places where it's cost prohibitive to build NG, impossible to build nuclear, and where solar or wind is also prohibitive. They're now scrambling to build thousands of KM of power lines. Small towns and cities like Grande Prairie and Grande Cache rely on small scale coal plants to keep people from freezing to death in the winter when there are grid failures for example. The winter I spent in Grande Cache, the nighttime lows hit -48C with a windchill of -55C. The daytime highs were between -25C and -38C not counting windchills. We had 3 days with no power due to high winds, the mall, fire dept, and all government buildings had power though. So people who didn't have wood as a backup, could safely stay somewhere.
If windmills are there to cover peak, it would never happen in Ontario. The hottest days of the year here are also the times when there is the most peak demand, and the wind is almost never blowing. Usually around then it's somewhere between 29-35C with a humidex of 35-40C. On top of that, if you're talking about in-general daytime peak, Ontario generates more electricity then it uses(and is also home to the 2nd largest nuclear power station in the world). The excess is sold to the US at between 0.02-0.05kWh, something which the people of Ontario never see anymore.
That was federal, not provincial and had to do with replacing a 1st gen medical reactor, which is still in use. Just a FYI. I think you're talking about the hundred million on a "natural gas" generating station, that was cancelled because the NIMBY's in Mississauga threw a hissyfit. That's the same NG plant, that the current government is under 2 investigations for relating to the destruction of documents.
Around 40% of freight is night-only runs as it is. It's increasing as more places allow double-tandem 80ft trailers.
What you mean like here in Ontario? Where the windmills don't turn because the government pays them not to produce electricity? Where it accounts for under 2% of the total generation but responsible for 80% of the price increase in the last decade? From at peak of 0.07kWh to 0.18kWh. Where you can have 45+ days in a row without direct sunlight for solar. Yeah, they're doing a world of good for us. 70k people have had their electricity cut in the last 2 years, 700k customers are 4 months or more in arrears right now. The largest hydro company(Ontario Hydro) has 1.3m customers for example. FYI: Electricity is called hydro here, because our primary generation source used to be hydro-electric.
That comic deliberately mis-interprets and contradicts itself to make a point.
This coming from the person who deliberately misinterprets and contradicts their own points and the points of others to try and make themselves seem morally superior? Right. Let me know when you figure out the whole "yes people should be treated equally, and not attacked for having a differing opinion" that you're so up in arms against. After all, you're quite happy to see people attacked for "freedom of consequences" as long as they're on the opposite side of the ideological isle. While I'm quite happy to see nobody attacked for such. You however, believe my view to be fascism.
Obligatory XKCD reference
Here, let me fix that for you.
Again your interpretation is contradicted by the first sentence of your source!
Read that again. Arranged the donation in 2014, this was started in 2013. I know, it's so out there...especially in context. Also re-read the first source, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt where you missed the important part.
Cherry picked and quote mined parts of vast document dumps are not reliable.
So, someone saying that directly in the context of the email is quote mining and not reliable. Bet you didn't even check the emails in context did you? Nope. I bet you didn't, good on you!
There's people sitting in leavenworth for doing less then what she did.
ZeroHedge and DailyCaller are not reliable sources for anything.
So actual documents, actual statements, and actual sources aren't reliable? Nice media bubble you're living in. I bet mediamatters is good though.
Considering the stuff that's come out from leaked emails including stuff like Hillary knowingly ordering the destruction of data even after demands for the data under law? You can take the link as you want, it does have backlinks to all of the previous leaked emails, previous statements and so on. That means she/they was lying, ignored official requirements, or simply believe they're so big they can avoid prosecution. So that leaves us with: Either the FBI is incompetent, turned a blind eye, or someone was holding a sword over their head in recommending prosecution.
This isn't even touching the pay-for-play stuff including the 12m payment to the clinton foundation while she was still sec. of state for her to come speak to the king of morocco. Or the enlistment of journalists/columnists to attack political candidates using her talking points.
There ya go.
Oh hey, I thought I was your favorite anti-democratic pro-fascist poster. I guess I'm only your second favorite now :(
Tell you what, I don't really have much time, so can you just make your usual claims about what I said then provide me with a long list of links, none of which actually contain anything relevant?
Well since I've never called you that, I'm sure you can cough up the links where I've labeled you that.
Sure, you want me to start with your anti-gamergate stuff, or the parts where you refuse to look at actual evidence of anti-gamergate people engaging in everything that you claim GG did. I mean you've got great company with this guy right here. Or do you want me to start with the stuff regarding twitter again that you refused to look at and ran away over?
Oh boy! Everyone's favorite anti-democratic pro-fascist poster is back! I wonder if I can now count you as my own personal stalker.
Yes, expecting that people have different opinions and *not* attacking them is fascism for you. Good to see you're still so cowardly that in that same thread you haven't responded to anything else, while still claiming "I'm attacking people" when I show you the face of the modern left engaging in witch hunts. Perhaps you'd like another? Like this person who's also on the far-left, self-identifies as a SJW and openly advocating people and fire bombing business for having a different opinion.
Because a lot of people only like to hear what they want to hear. Twitter is a private company not a public service, there is no obligation to offer everyone a voice. Just like sports, religion, music, fashion or any other private venture, you create an ecosystem that you think customers want. You and I might think it's shit, but millions of others out there might think this sanitised version of Internet communication is great.
Correct partially. People enjoy listening to what they like to hear, however Twitter is a publicly traded company not private and is responsible to it's shareholders. Go listen to their last investors meeting, investors in general are livid with what the CEO has done to the company and brand.
Investors already know that the current CEO has significantly damaged the brand, possibly beyond repair. Some people though are in so deep that the only way to recover their buy in is for Twitter to sell to another company, but the CEO keeps fucking it up and the board doesn't seem to care. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if in 6mo that there's a shareholder revolt. So that goes all back to the original point, when you ban people because "reasons" it doesn't draw people in. Their number of active users continues to fluctuate between 288-315m but the number of new subscribers continues to fall through the floor. Which also reminds me of the shareholder lawsuit against them for purposefully misleading investors on future growth of users.
Ah OK, I see the problem now.
There's a gigantic stick up your ass, and you're so deep into it, that you don't even notice anymore.
Pretty modern hallmark of a regressive right there. Can't dispute anything, get's into a huff and stomps their feet instead of countering any point at all.