Do you really think Canada would have fewer domestic crises if Trump or Putin invaded? Or if Russia attacked NATO?

In a world with narcissistic psychopaths like those in charge of enormous armies, you either invest in defence or you get conquered.

For Canada to possess some F-35s would not do much.

Canada would also need to maintain them if conflict arises. Hard to do if the US is both the source of software updates and spare parts, and also the aggressor against which Canada needs to defend.

Re: Russia as the aggressor, F-35 is also a risk because POTUS and VP might side partly or wholly with Russia, e.g. refusing/limiting US arms to countries fighting Russia.

Gripen has none of those problems.

Indeed. Schrems III cannot come too soon, and maybe this time it will stick.

Hopes these white coats are gonna show up at the White House real soon.

IIUC, the point of the leaflets is to extend consent education, so that instead of just covering the first group below it also covers the second.

1. UK school pupils. They already receive it.
2. Asylum seekers. AFAIK they did not previously receive it, which was a twofold problem: a. for the victims of the very small number of asylum seekers who committed crimes against consent, perhaps not knowing how seriously that would be viewed in the UK; and b. for the many innocent asylum seekers tarred with the same brush.
3. Older adults in the UK. These may never have received consent education, but unfortunately are often reactionary enough to vote Reform if anyone tries to “nanny” them - so they will probably never receive it.

Labour needed to do something to stop the law-abiding majority of asylum seekers having their reputations tarnished by a tiny number of no-goodnik asylum seekers.

IMO, the booklets were a good move by Labour. They will make it easier for thicker members of the public to distinguish between the very few bad apples among asylum seekers (“This guy broke the rules, and can’t plead ignorance because he received the booklet in a language he reads fluently”) and the law-abiding majority.

Is the word “Donut” kryptonite to Flock?

Why wouldn’t you be concerned about VM or container escapes?

TIL giraffes need detecting before they get too close.

D’you think she found it hard?

A decade and a half of recent Tory rule is the main (not the only, but the main) reason for this.

Their austerity program and educational cuts threw working class, especially kids, into relative poverty and ignorance.

Their “hostile environment” policy entrenched xenophobia.

Their support for the far-right’s wet dreams of a Brexit referendum and a hard Brexit lent the chauvinists establishment support and a veneer of respectability.

Other reasons include constant boosting (and funding) of chauvinist social media accounts as part of Russia’s (and maybe China’s, etc) decade of hybrid warfare aimed at destabilising liberal democracies and eroding support for human rights.

In the UK at least, decisions and rationale about which vaccinations and treatments should be publicly-funded via the NHS are published quite transparently. For example: https://www.nihr.ac.uk/story/preventing-cancer-extending-vaccination-boys

Vaccinating everyone in the UK against everything for which vaccines are available (even against diseases with very low risk in the UK) would cost so much that the NHS would have to cut treatments with very high benefit-to-cost ratio.

Therefore, below a certain benefit-to-cost threshold, the UK has no reasonable choice except to withhold public funding. The HPV vaccine for boys was right on that threshold. IMO, the UK did the right thing by funding the clear benefit (HPV vaccine for girls, whose risk was significantly higher per existing evidence) and extending it to boys when additional evidence showed it was worth doing so.

Somewhat relevant: https://thebrainbin.org/m/linux@lemmy.ml/t/1858588

deleted by creator

Cost-benefit is the likely reason.

For comparison: the UK initially concluded the cost-benefit ratio was in favour of girls-only HPV vaccination, but IIUC updated this assessment and offered it to boys too after a public campaign by Jaime Winstone.

Yet another example of why US citizens would benefit from GDPR-equivalent privacy laws.

Thanks for this!

I’m unfamiliar with Aquaseal. If I tried Aquaseal first without success, and it failed, what would be involved in prepping the surface afterwards for Tear-Aid or similar?

In other words, is the Aquaseal likely to interfere with subsequent membrane adhesion - and if so, how does one remove the Aquaseal from a NeoAir without worsening the existing damage.

I’ve used Tyvek for other applications, but never for repairing inflatable items. Intriguing suggestion. I’ll look into it further.

Where will you post updates?

“The iOS 26.6.1 update fixes three flaws in the iPhone Kernel and nearly 20 in WebKit.”

Feel free to message me or add a reply here after you try posting there, and I can check to see if the post is visible for me. Thanks!

Sorry, I’m not sure how to bypass that. Maybe disable JavaScript or try Reading Mode?