skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Economic harm" is a really weak criterion all around for restricting protest rights and one ripe for abuse. I'm not sure if this is the only impact that a line should be drawn at all.

"Public safety" is a good one, you're free to protest but there has to be adequate access for emergency services to get to people in need.

"No significant destruction" is a good one, not just making a mess in the streets but when your movement starts actively destroying property, looting, etc.

If you keep doing economic harm, your movement will tend to get pretty unpopular pretty quickly and the social pressure instead of government force will likely get to you in the end.

Lots of people walking of the job will do significant amounts of economic harm, I don't want people in certain jobs to become effective slaves because their job is important to the economy. And also a general strike is a very powerful action which should be done from time to time, explicitly very economically powerful and definitely should be protected.
You seem to have never heard of a strike.
Do it enough, and ignore the authority of the government to require these things of you, and eventually violence will come of it (forcibly ensure your appearance or imprison you, and that force knows no upper limit if you keep resisting).
Here in the US it is every 4 years, I didn't know that it was more ambiguous in Canada
How are the protestors sleeping?
You almost certainly have the right to mail a paper check for most things. While I tend to have my bank do it for most things it’s absolutely an option in general. I certainly still use check for a lot of purposes in the US.
I'm usually all in favor of workers protesting; not this time however.
During war time food and resources are rationed; does people complain against the government? Nope. So why during a pandemic that in just two years killed 5 fucking millions people -and counting- should they protest against perfectly sound measures?
Am I missing something, or "get vaccinated" doesn't even sound close to "one loaf of bread per day per family"?
Why do they think they aren't being heard? We've heard them, they're wrong, and we're not going to do what they want. The vast majority of canadian oppose the convoy and support public health measures. This is just a childish tantrum.
This is deceptive. It's not supported by a majority of Canadians, but their message was still supported by almost half of Canadians at the outset, and is still supported by a third. When a third of your population speaks, you should listen if you're a representative democracy.
Got any links to reading on this? You piqued my interest.

> Personally, I find his thinking savagely brutally straight to the point and cuts through cultural rust we've built up in our thinking process.
I think it's now a realistic prospect that they should try to tow icebergs and use them fir agricultural purposes, saving water that can be kept in the acquifiers.
> Why? Crime is measured per capita, but you say it should be divided by 10,000 steps or something?

Why would petty theft and robbery be divided by population? My risk of getting my bike stolen is 0 or my phone taken at gunpoint if I stay inside my home. It is non-zero if I go out. And it increases the longer I stay out. So measuring crime per person-hour of going out makes intuitive sense. Restaurant reservations is merely an imperfect proxy for this.

> Straw man. Everyone knows that all crime creates anguish for the victim and is to be avoided. If a person compares the effects of the pandemic to the opportunity of types of crimes, it doesn't mean they love the idea of larceny. Come on. Better faith in arguing please

Except the causation for these crimes is lax prosecution caused by 1) DAs who are politically motivated and 2) Prop 47 / similar regulations in other states. Unemployment is at record lows and there's a record worker shortage driving up wages. You cannot possibly claim the "effects of the pandemic" are causing increased property crime when unemployment has been so low for so long.

> Better faith in arguing please

Ironic, coming from a 15 minute old account whose only comment is this response.
Assembling != Putting Heavy Machinery on the Roads.
"Using government power intended for things like war"

This isn't the war measures act. It is a response specifically targeted to situations like this.

"I hope the response is a protest escalation"

That's neat. I hope that every protester that misused a privilege of their CDL lose their truck license, lose insurance, have their bank accounts locked, and face enormous fines. I guess we have differing hopes.

Sign petitions. Make a new political party. Lobby. Do a campaign. But if you try to force your political will through force -- which parking large trucks throughout cities and on border crossings is -- you have crossed a line and need to be reigned in.

"Not my country"

Oh gosh, what a surprise...

And then, of course, a comparison with completely irrelevant other events that most of us also found reprehensible.

I hate when the protests appear on HN because it makes me realize how terrible "right wing" so many on here are (not conservative -- I'm conservative -- but rather a particularly...stupid and angry version that now parades as right wing in the US), and how absolutely reprehensible opinions are. A sort of "look someone previously in a different country and a completely different event tore stuff down so let them go wild in another country to own the libs". Just garbage takes that should be embarrassing to the speaker.
No they aren’t. You must go to the government via the legal system, since they are the only one authorized to use force.
You keep arguing that these workers shouldn't have to shut up. Which nobody here has said.

So we don't seem to be in the same conversation.
You're drawing a false equivalence between "contracts between private parties" and "private properties"

By and large, the government does not come take away your freedom for breach of private party contracts. There are some exceptions, where we wrote law (government mandate) elevating some types of private party contract.

But generally, no, me violating your NDA won't escalate to the government shooting me, no matter how uncooperative I am.
> You don’t believe there’s a distinction to be made for how the protesters were being treated and what prompted the remarks?

From https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/news-why-did-justin-trudea...

"Trudeau expressed concern about the Indian security forces' attitude toward these peasant protesters and said that his government has always been a supporter of peaceful protests."

"Sikh vote bank politics matters in Canada. Sikh voters matter to Trudeau's Liberal Party, Conservative Party, and Jagmeet Singh's New Democratic Party. The Sikh population here is close to five lakhs. Sikh separatism or Khalistan has been an essential issue in the relations between India and Canada."

From https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/...

"Sikh, numbering less than half a million, form the largest ethnic group among Indian-origin Canadians. All four of Trudeau’s Indian-origin ministers are Sikh, and Trudeau has publicly boasted how he has more Sikh ministers than Modi. Amarinder Singh, chief minister of the Sikh-dominated state of Punjab and himself a Sikh, has publicly accused Trudeau’s ministers of having sympathies with Canadian Sikh extremists who would like to see Indian Punjab separated from India into the state of Khalistan. Last year, Singh had refused to meet Trudeau’s defense minister, Harjit Singh Sajjan. All four Sikh ministers have recently visited India, and New Delhi would have liked it if Trudeau didn’t bring them along again. But for Trudeau, this trip is all about the Sikh vote in Canada."

"Canada’s position is that it cannot curtail the right to freedom of speech and expression of its Sikh citizens, but New Delhi wants Trudeau to publicly distance himself from Sikh separatists. "

> It was reported that they were being attacked and beaten in India.

The videos and news reports I saw show protestors being violent. They were using tractors to attempt to run over cops, beating cops with batons, walking around with swords etc. Some examples:

Cops jump off wall to escape protestors at Red Fort: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1qFKUtfvMc

Protestors using tractors against cops: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7so5TwIMyM

Protestor attacking cop with sword: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEzMEzzb-94&t=53s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9feGjEr95nM

If anyone has any videos of the protestors being attacked which would prompt leaders of other nations to condemn, please share. I am from South India, and police using batons/water canons/tear gas is a standard practice even for small protests.
This answer seems to be a mix of principles and practicals. I'm curious which matter more to you. Hypothetically, in an alternate reality where the vaccine is super effective at reducing transmission of Omicron, and where Omicron is super deadly, would you support a vaccine mandate? Or is it the principle that matters more, where regardless of the vaccine's effectiveness or the dangerousness of the virus, you believe you should be free to decide for yourself whether to get a vaccine, without it impacting your employability?
With some 400 million fake Facebook users deleted … monthly.
> There's not a "guarantee" but this is the well known behavior of the evolution of diseases. There is strong evolutionary pressure to become less deadly and more infectious.

Do you know of any evidence that would support this hypothesis? Especially when talking about evolution over short periods of time (years, not centuries or millennia)?

An article in the Guardian published several months ago argued the opposite[0]; and while the Guardian is certainly no authority on scientific matters, and could well have its own narratives to push, their article suggests that this is not a well-known behaviour of pathogens.

[0] – https://i.imgur.com/3bQGj04.png
I’m not sure we disagree? 46% having sympathy shows it’s not a vocal minority in the least.

And sympathy is a kind of support. I mean, you can have support without sympathy for the cause they are protesting?

22% said they should stay, so 1 out of 5 directly support it.
San Francisco police linked a woman to a crime using DNA from her rape exam
Both of the grocery stores downtown closed because of alteractions with protestors. Front-line workers have been affected the most because they can't avoid going out. The rest of us are mostly not going downtown because there's rampant harassment if you're a woman, queer, POC, etc.
No one says that the barrel isn't necessary. Just that it's there and we should be judicious about when we want to apply it.
Ah yes, the age-old liberal tradition of using the military to suppress peaceful protest.
It is probably about the principle.
From their own website:

"Survey Methodology: The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from Feb. 11-13, 2022 among a representative randomized sample of 1,622 Canadian adults *WHO ARE MEMBERS OF ANGUS REID FORUM.*"
(emphasis mine)
First 90% of Canadian truckers are vaccinated.

I'm not sure why people think getting vaccinated is evidence of support for mandatory vaccinations.

Taxes are mandatory too, I pay them not because I think they're at the right level and used for the right things, but because of the practical repercussions of what would happen if I didn't and I got found out.

(it shouldn't matter, but - I'm double vaccinated, mainly because the jurisdiction I live in requires it for air travel. I have no strong feelings about vaccines either way).
Contracts are entered into voluntarily. Mandates are forcefully imposed by a majority onto a minority.
To add to what the previous commenter has stated which is absolutely on point, it is (might be a personal thing) work that is absolutely devoid of any real meaning or purpose.
That makes sense to me. But which people get to choose when to re-elect a government? I read that the Governor General was the one to call this last election. Do only certain elected officials get the power to call this or can anyone?
It's not peaceful. https://twitter.com/travisdhanraj/status/1493281411364700161
Almost 5 years ago, the ex-CTO of Mozilla blogged this:
https://andreasgal.com/2017/05/25/chrome-won/

...and apparently, the conclusions still haven't landed. Firefox lost because it has no reach. They lost on mobile and they don't have billion user properties to push their browser in the way Google has.

Any and all discussions about Firefox UI choices, its engine, whatever...are completely irrelevant if you have near zero reach. This problem cannot be solved with engineering. Nor will it be solved with donations.

Firefox lost and lost a long time ago. It's over. It cannot compete with these market forces. The world in which Firefox was successful, before smartphones, massive online services and a stagnant IE, no longer exist.

With this in mind, what should happen to Firefox? Short term to mid term, keeping it alive and hoping Google keeps wiring Mozilla tons of money, because without it, Mozilla would soon cease to exist.

Long term? I don't know. I would hope that the technical product somehow can be preserved and kept functional, but maintaining a browser is a costly business. It's not the type of project to send to Github and say "best of luck".

The common narrative in the web community that having an extra independent browser engine around is great is mostly a "feel good" story. Having a slightly crappier engine does nothing for developers or users. Firefox also doesn't keep the web "honest" as it's so small now that it can be ignored entirely. There's a reason both Edge and Brave picked Chromium.

As for Mozilla, I have little confidence in their ability to reinvent themselves, with or without Firefox. One of their ex-employees expressed it well on Twitter: they got addicted to a fire-hose of free money which they largely pissed away on fruitless projects.

As counter point to that I would say that besides failed projects, Mozilla has made very meaningful contributions to foundational computing, think Rust and WebAssembly. It's extra painful that in particular the most useful part of Mozilla, the above, is scaled down.

Mozilla these days comes across as a woke blog. Preachy, deeply political, yet without actual impact. I follow the simple rule in life where if somebody is constantly telling you how virtuous they are, they are the opposite. Because good people don't need to tell the world that they're good. "Progressive" Mozilla is quite the fan of neoliberal economics, as they fire a huge amount of workers (even during COVID) whilst enriching themselves as reward for...running the company in the ground. They are THE privacy browser (nope) and build an advanced container to castrate Facebook, yet don't do the same for Google services (for well known reasons). It's all very hypocritical and hollow.

Preaching is not only tiresome, it also doesn't pay bills. So go an do something useful in establishing "revenue earning products". A bookmarking service and a rebranded VPN fail to impress.
To me, the Soviet aspect makes sense. There was a fear in the US in the 80s that Japan would surpass the US to become the dominant world economy, which was reflected in the original film. In 2049, the Japanese aspect hasn't been erased, but it also exists alongside imagery of Russia, which, if we consider the actions of the Russian government in the years leading up to this film, it fits from the same perspective of a fear of the US being dominated.

I'm not sure why the original film seemed to only focus on Japan, PKD's vision also included the USSR. In that sense, 2049 almost feels more faithful to the book.

As for the flying cars...they had flying cars in the original film, why would they get rid of that? Or do you mean that you expect they wouldn't look so much like our cars? (If the latter, I kinda agree.)
While I see your point, a lot of invention happened when someone ignored conventional wisdom and others’ failures.
I agree with your criticism of first past the post.

The the proposal of the convoy occupiers is that their organization picks a committee to run the country. That's a significantly less legitimate government with absolutely no claim at a mandate.
Truly?

Imagine you're in an audience. Somebody two rows behind you raises their hands and asks a question. Do you leap to your feet so you can turn around and stare at their face?

Most people certainly don't. Ditto if the person is otherwise hard to see. They just listen and it's fine.
Thank goodness I'm not trying to speak for everyone then, just for myself, because it doesn't seem like tyranny.
For a country the size of Canada, they'd be invoking emergency powers just to cope with the number of excess roadside fatalities
Love it or hate it, the pandemic has caused the loss of life and economic activity. You can't shoot or offload guilt on the virus, so you'll move to someone or something you can blame. I putty the politicians that have lived just as miserable lives putting up with armchair dictators without any real power but to complain about how others do their jobs

This virus will continue to cycle through our world and continue to kill millions of people. Checked or no, this will continue until the virus dies or the vast majority are dead/immune. Nobody wants this; it's literally bad for everyone.

The gov has pumped billions to prop up the economy. Did you get your bail-out? I certainly didn't get 1 cent. I did my job without a belly ache; I've taken the inflation hit like everyone else. The least that I want to hear is selfish blow-hards complaining about governments putting a cap on their selfishness. We all hurt, and only working together will we heal.
The inability or unwillingness of the Ottawa police force to enforce the court-ordered injunction, and the additional inability or unwillingness of other provinces - like Alberta - from re-opening the border is the reason for this.

If the protests were in-person, not causing major, disproportionate interference with the Canadian economy and all injunctions were being both obeyed and enforced, there would be no need for this act.

The rule of law is breaking down and this is required to ensure that the fabric of Canadian society does not deteriorate.
It didn't survive because HTML5 came along with very well defined and strict parsing rules.

You don't need closing tags for a specification to be strict. As long as you define the parsing rules rigorously as HTML5 does, there is little benefit in XML compliance and there is in a well defined non-XML standard as it is mostly backwards compatible.
I don't support the convoy, but this still makes me extremely uncomfortable. This is an actual extreme measure. When his father used it, he JAILED communists and "suspected terrorists" in Montreal for more than 24 hours without any evidence, effectively suppressing their rights.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Crisis

> police officials sometimes abused their powers without just cause, and some prominent artists and intellectuals associated with the sovereignty movement were detained.

And to all the comments saying Canadians are supporting this move, they also supported it back in 1970. It's when they saw the consequences and that they actually understood how wrong it was that popular support dropped.
I have seen you here for a while. I don't ever remember seeing you call out antifa or blm rioters when they set fire to buildings.
A bill passed under the guise of "preventing terrorism" being misused?

Crypto is obviously used by terrorists, but crowdfunding sites are fairly heavy handed with terrorist and terrorist-adjacent campaigns
Driving is something teenagers are expected to handle. Hell, we trust teenagers behind the wheel of a one ton killing machine before we let them purchase cigarettes or consume alcohol.

Something tells me finding replacements wouldn’t be hard to do.
Are you friends federal government employees? If not, then the vaccination policy is enacted by the corporation they work for, not the government.

I'm glad you have felt at home at the protests, I'm sure if you tried to ask critical questions about vaccine efficiency and the active participation of far right extremists like Pat King in the protests, you'd have received a much colder welcome.

Thousands of people in Ottawa have been affected by the occupation. At least 1000 workers of the Rideau Center are out of a job because the protestors kept trying to force their way into the shops without masks. Covid is a respiratory disease and the use of well fitting masks are shown to significantly reduce transmission. Why are the protestors ignoring the science behind the policies?

If the protestors are rational, why haven't the protestors called out the loud lunatics amongst them who are on bullhorns shouting how Trudeau is a devil worshipper and pedophile?

Why have white supremacists like Pat King been allowed key roles in the protests, and allowed to - literally - dance on the sound stage set up on parliament hill?

Why did the organisers refuse to answer - earlier today - the simple question from a reporter if there were any firearms present amongst the protestors?

What was the rationale behind the "MoU" that called for the democratically elected government to be deposed and replaced with a junta composed of the protest organizers? That wasn't even a fringe demand, it was front and center.

Nobody from the protests has had any rational answers for these questions. I'm sorry, but for the residents to be able to accept the inconvenience of being occupied, they have to sympathise with the elements of the protests.
BLM protests in Ottawa were extremely peaceful, and met with harsh police retaliation. Protestors blocked _one_ intersection for one day, and they were all rounded up and arrested by dozens of police officers in the middle of the night.
Really? Where I live, cops only shoot if necessary, and someone getting away is not a valid reason.

Maybe in some very extreme case they would, but it is better that someone escapes custody than someone (including the suspect dying).

Then again, just a cop drawing a weapon or firing a weapon usually makes the news.
On the surface, yes. But in reality this is the fringe far right using the vaccine as a reason to disrupt the country.

My biggest concern with this all is the timing. The vaccine rules have been around for months, but right at the same time as Russia is preparing an invasion of a Canadian ally, we have unknown foreign money pouring into the country supporting an ill-defined movement with the sole goal of disrupting the country.
None of your examples are "inject this medication to keep your job."

Very, very different, and unprecedented for the general public.
Vivillon just has 20 different forms, so it makes sense it would be more common.
If you’re hep on freedom, tool on up the road to Quebec and protest their legalized discrimination based on language, religion and probably gender. Laws that violate their own charter passed via the notwithstanding clause. This is an anti Trudeau protest by the 35% of the population that is right wing. With some “get the Governor General to disband the government” throw in. Some folks just hate being told what to do.
I think the design trade-off was to aid with multiple dispatch, one of the core paradigms in Julia. There, the implicit bind in `x.foo(y, z)` does not make `foo` useful for multiple dispatching, so their hand was forced. They may have gotten this from the Common Lisp Object System.
> medication that does not appear to stop the spread of Omicron COVID

The current evidence indicates that the vaccine reduces the spread of the virus by about 50% [1]. It's a preprint, so take it with a grain of salt, but it does seem to match our prior 50% estimate for delta. [2]

That is a significant reduction, especially when we are talking about truckers who are inherently high risk as they tend to visit a lot of small towns.

1. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.27.21268278v...

2. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2116597
https://archive.is/gXs8e