Yeah. I don’t really get how single cottage rentals are economical vs a proper many unit business.

But, I’m biased, I would prefer to stay in a cabin resort than some strangers cottage that has no real reputational risk.

Sure. Statscounter has a history of questionable data. They don’t have a representative sample of websites, and there are technical challenges.

Finland is a small population so would suffer from sample size issues.

What catalyst is there to drive an almost 4x market share growth? And the collapse of Mac?

Flip through a few countries, you can tell they are having issues with OS classification.

This is partly because there is no good supply chain or real wholesale market for mid priced consumer packaged goods. It’s essentially completely owned by the ogilopolies.

There is for produce and meats which share the supply chain with restaurants.

Yeah this is very likely bad data. This whole post should be deleted.

Why do people need a reddit alternative? It’s not really important.

Because it gives the platform engagement? Provides them with traffic/ad impressions to monetize? Out of all the boycotting, the tech boycott is most important

Honestly you wouldn’t want to drive there as a visitor. Like, you wouldn’t be driving from spot to spot, that would be a nightmare.

Hopefully they have decent medium term parking garage on the outskirts, then you could park and then transit/walk/uber/taxi. That would be ideal.

Edit: or I guess just park at your hotel for the entire stay. That would be even easier…

Fair enough, I am thinking of decriminalization that’s being moved away from, which is further along the spectrum.

I kind of see your analogy, but driving a car has utility, and is much safer (although I would like to prevent some car driving as well). Fentanyl addiction is not a natural course.

Anyway I don’t think we will agree, so I’ll take a separate tack. Yes, prevention and treatment is a separate issue. It also has wider support, so my wish would be that government can get some consensus here and take action.

I don’t disagree that having professionals nearby can prevent overdose / accidental death.

My concerns are: Safe consumption sites are controversial, and their support causes broader backlash. Usage rates are low and not a good use of resources.

Proponents are misusing data:

users of SCS would tend towards wanting help anyway and don’t speak to broader efficacy.

‘Lives saved’ don’t take into account any increase in use from a system perspective. That is to say, reduced stigma I believe increases drug use and death. Studies I’ve seen look at a micro level but not macro level. Example, “we prevented 10 deaths”, but they dont take into account any increase in drug use from its normalization.

It’s OK to feel shame for being addicted to drugs. But I also get we don’t want people hiding away and dying. Stopping use should be the goal.

The people on the front lines have an important perspective, but they aren’t seeing the whole story.

Aren’t cities moving away from SCS because it’s not working?

I don’t think Dofo is taking the right approach, but sanctioned consumption sites I don’t think are the way to go.

We shouldn’t be normalizing drug use, and they are very controversial.

My preference is to lean into voluntary treatment centers. Make space available so the moment someone decides they need help, space is available for them.

Agressively advertise treatment options in areas trafficked by addicts.

We need to work to shut down the use and availability of fentanyl and related opiates.

Prices are coming down, it may take a bit of time to shake out.

Students, affordable housing, starter homes, some retirees will see a downsize opportunity, reducing overcrowding in some homes.

Lots of utility at the right price.

At least some of that is because Alberta has the highest percentage of working age population - a share of the population is transient.

Seniors are less likely to retire in AB, and AB imports educated Canadians from other provinces.

Which also speaks to why equalization payments make sense (Atlantic provinces have to bare the cost of more retirees for example).

No thanks. I would prefer more grocery options not less

Yeah, I never understood this. Targeting legal firearms just annoys people.

I have a theory, that canada has been pressuring the US on gun control (the actual problem), and the whole ‘fentanyl crossing the border’ thing is projection

I read a lot of the report, but not all. I think technology is a factor in decline. Small amount of access is beneficial, but deteriorates as usage goes up. I’ve seen similar data in Canada’s testing/surveys

deleted by creator

I’ve never seen an LLM response be cavalier with credentials.

Threats to other countries isn’t noise… It doesn’t seem appropriate to hand wave away threats to other people.

That is not several times Canada’s GDP. Maybe you meant many many times Canada’s annual military expenditure.

Regardless 1.7 trillion Is a lot of money

Yes, but items are targeted to inflict the least amount of pain. We don’t neeed orange juice or bourbon for example.