valunord

If this deal happens, it could redefine how the US-China tech standoff is negotiated... Musk’s involvement would be fascinating - not just for the data implications, but for the precedent it sets: Can a single entrepreneur navigate and mediate two global superpowers’ interests?

It also raises the question of whether TikTok, under any ownership, can ever truly escape concerns about data security and political influence. Hmmm. Perhaps the bigger story here is the global power shift reflected in how tech companies are wielded as strategic assets.

The ESA's article claims to "reveal" Mercury's shadowy north pole, yet the image provides no actual insight into the pole itself, which remains shrouded in permanent darkness... The term "revealed" feels more like marketing spin than substance, as the image merely captures the general area around the pole.

This framing is reminiscent of similar oversights in planetary science, such as the perplexing case of Mars' north pole. Studies suggest a cyclical process where subsurface vapor escapes through a thinned crust during colder seasons, freezing into massive ice deposits, like those seen in the Korolev Crater. These ice layers, some over 1.2 miles thick (see the ESA Korolev Crater Study), challenge the traditional narrative of Mars' geophysical activity. Observations from missions like Mars Express and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter reveal hints of dynamic interactions between the crust and atmosphere, yet much of this is glossed over in mainstream discussions.

Why is there a persistent pattern of incomplete or opaque presentations regarding planetary poles? The public deserves transparency and detailed interpretations, not handwaving claims. If the evidence of crustal thinning and volatile release is as compelling as the imagery suggests, why the reluctance to address it head-on???

A commitment to clarity would foster trust in scientific institutions, rather than leaving informed observers to speculate about what's being left unsaid. This is frustrating.

Look, I get that you don’t see it that way, but dismissing this as some far-right echo chamber narrative feels pretty shortsighted. When I hear this stuff from actual Canadians - family, friends, and people living the experience - it’s hard to chalk it up to 'outside forces' pushing an agenda.

I’m not saying Alberta’s voice is literally drowned out in the sense that it’s silent. It’s drowned out in the sense that for all the noise, policy-wise, Alberta’s concerns often get sidelined while other regions take priority. That frustration isn’t imaginary. You might be comfortable with how things are, but not everyone is.

Shrill? Persecution complex? Maybe. Or maybe people are just fed up and tired of feeling like they’re being patronized when they point out legitimate issues. You can call it overblown, but the cracks are there whether you acknowledge them or not.

Honestly, Greenland’s probably tired of feeling like a geopolitical football at this point. But as long as the Arctic’s up for grabs, expect it to stay on the radar.

LOL, right? Somewhere between ‘affordable defense budget project’ and ‘sell your national debt to make it happen.’ Either way, the geopolitical value is worth more than the sticker price, and that’s the part people underestimate.

Yep, and it’s not as far-fetched as people think. The US tried it under Truman too. This isn't just a Trump brainwave. It’s been on the table before, and it’ll probably come up again as Arctic competition ramps up. The question isn’t 'if' the US stays involved in Greenland but how. Whether through diplomacy, economic partnerships, or something more official, Greenland’s future is tied to who secures influence there first.

That $14 per American sounds like a deal, honestly. But the tricky part is less about the money and more about convincing the people of Greenland that closer ties to the US are better than sticking with Denmark.

Economic incentives only go so far—there’s a cultural and political dynamic at play. If Greenland leans towards more autonomy, stronger US ties as a protectorate might happen naturally without needing to 'buy' anything outright. If they drift away from Denmark, North America becomes the obvious landing zone.

I get why it feels like that, but Greenland’s strategic importance didn’t suddenly appear because Trump made headlines. The Arctic’s been heating up (literally and politically) for a while now. Russia’s been militarizing its Arctic coastline, and China’s trying to gain influence in the region through ‘research stations’ and resource deals. The US presence at Thule wasn’t just for fun... it’s part of a broader strategy that predates Trump by decades. Trump just made it louder (and weirder), but the underlying value of Greenland has been quietly escalating for years.

I get the sentiment, but let’s not pretend Canada’s running some utopian alternative to the US. Canada’s got deep, deep, DEEP structural cracks that are hard to ignore. I've got family that fled Canada and I've got some more that are miserable up there at the moment. They hate the government, they hate the cultural evolution, and they simply hate all the possible futures right now. Think about this:

- Trudeau’s leadership is on life support, with his own party circling the wagons to push him out. Even Liberal MPs are openly calling for his resignation. The country’s direction feels more dictated by party infighting than any grand vision.

- Economically, Canada’s in a rougher spot. GDP contracted last quarter, the Canadian dollar’s getting steamrolled by the USD, and political uncertainty is scaring off energy investments. Meanwhile, the US economy is actually growing. That’s not exactly a great look for the 'better system.'

- Housing? A total disaster. Young Canadians are stuck renting indefinitely, and wages haven’t kept pace with living costs. By comparison, even in US cities with high real estate prices, the economic mobility is still better. I know twenty-somethings who are buying homes, living life, and having large families. One friend is 25, already has three kids, and owns a home—stable as can be.

- And don't forget groceries... food prices in Canada have been soaring to the point where one in five families are skipping meals or turning to food banks just to get by. That’s not just bad policy, it’s a slow-rolling humanitarian crisis!

I’m not saying the US isn’t broken. Sure, it’s a mess in a lot of ways, but which country isn't right now?

But if we’re comparing corpses, at least one of them still twitches. Canada’s problems aren’t just political, they’re economic and cultural... and there’s no clear path out. Maybe that stomach-turning thought of joining the US will feel a bit different if things keep sliding downhill.

And about the US being 'broken since inception' - come on. Canada’s flaws run just as deep, if not deeper in certain areas:

- Political gridlock? Trudeau’s barely hanging on, and Parliament is a powder keg of internal rivalries. Party leadership fights dictate policy more than voters do.

- Representation imbalance? Alberta’s voice gets drowned out, while Quebec rides on political privilege. Sounds familiar, right?

- Judicial interference? Trudeau’s government meddling with court decisions drove his own Attorney General to resign. LOL

- Corruption? From the SNC-Lavalin scandal to WE Charity, Canada isn’t exactly shy about political favoritism and backroom deals.

- And don’t even get me started on voter disenfranchisement! Canada’s own electoral system ensures whole swaths of the population feel ignored. I mean, this is what I’m hearing from Canadians, so you’re not gonna convince me otherwise. I’ve even heard talk of civil war scenarios if the government doesn’t change, and that’s saying a LOT for Canadians. You know it’s bad when folks known for telling each other to go to hell with a smile stop smiling - and forget to apologize halfway through.

I get the appeal of CANZUK or joining Europe in theory, but let’s be real, Canada’s fate isn’t going to be saved by cozying up to the Commonwealth. If Canada collapses under its own weight, it won’t be US 'fascism' that’s the biggest threat. It’ll be watching foreign powers scoop up influence while we argue about which utopian club to join!

Haha, fair enough! Let’s just hope no one ends up eating their own words if Greenland - or even Canada - starts rethinking their options... Arctic politics can shift fast, and it’d be a shame to see China further sink its teeth into the region while closer ties with people who actually share similar cultures and values were on the table. But hey, I’ll happily shelve this take if Denmark and Canada keep things locked down! Good luck!

I get the hesitation. 'Manifest destiny' doesn’t exactly have the best branding. But this isn’t about expansionism or flag-planting; it’s more like making sure the neighborhood’s in order before someone else moves in and rearranges the furniture. Greenland’s interest (if it ever happens) wouldn’t come from the US kicking down the door, but from their own evolving relationship with Denmark. If anything, the US would probably just be the least disruptive option on the table.

Honestly though, what do you think about China’s own 'manifest destiny' moves in Africa, Brazil, the US, Canada, and basically everywhere else?

Read my reply to krapp above.

But yeah, Greenland's not just Denmark's icy backyard... it’s a strategic Arctic outpost sitting on rare earth minerals and shipping lanes that are about to become prime real estate as the ice melts. The US already camps out at Thule Air Base for a reason, and with Russia and China eyeing the region hard, folding Greenland into a North American framework isn’t about expansionism, but rather it’s about locking down resources and supply chains before someone else does. Greenland’s been flirting with more autonomy anyway, and when the time comes, stronger North American ties could offer stability without the economic freefall of full independence. Ignoring Greenland while the Arctic heats up (literally and politically) is leaving the back door wide open.

So while it's kinda hard to see at first blush perhaps, Greenland plays an actual critical role in North American security and economic interests - far more than it might seem at first glance. Yeah, Trump's interest aside (which definitely brought some unnecessary circus to the topic), Greenland’s value lies in a few key areas:

- Strategic Arctic positioning. It's central to Arctic geopolitics. While the Arctic ice melts, new shipping lanes are opening up, and countries are vying for control over these routes and untapped resources. The US already maintains a military presence at Thule Air Base, but integrating Greenland more formally would secure this position and reduce the risk of competing interests (think Russia and China making moves in the region - which they are very, very much doing).

- Resource potential. Greenland's rich in rare earth minerals and many others that are critical to modern tech and defense industries. These materials are currently dominated by Chinese markets. Greenland’s dev could diversify supply chains and reduce Western reliance on Chinese exports. This is SO insanely critical right now.

- You might not like this one, but: think geopolitical stability... Denmark’s grip on Greenland isn’t absolute. There’s been growing interest within Greenland towards greater autonomy, and while full independence is really complicated and economically (ultra) risky, stronger ties to North America would absolutely offer an appealing middle ground and protect the people of Greenland itself.

Ultimately if we ignore Greenland it feels like we're leaving a crucial puzzle piece out.

Let’s set aside the jokes for a second... there’s a case to be made for Canada, Greenland, and the US forming a closer political and economic union. Not as some imperialistic land grab, but as a pragmatic response to shifting global power dynamics and shared interests.

Just hang on - this isn't as crazy as it sounds!

Think about it:

- There would be a shared defense and infrastructure: NORAD already has the US and Canada tied at the hip for defense. Greenland, being strategically crucial to Arctic security, fits naturally into this alignment. Folding them into a single framework could simplify and strengthen North American defense.

- Economic integration's already there: the US and Canada are each other's largest trading partners. NAFTA (and now USMCA) means much of the heavy economic lifting is already done. Greenland’s resources are becoming increasingly important as Arctic access opens up.

- Population and resources balance out: Canada has land and resources but not enough people. The US has people and markets but strained resources. Greenland sits on untapped potential. There’s a complementary puzzle here that fits. Heck, I know a bunch of people that would move to Greenland in my circle of friends alone if it were a state of the Union.

Think about the plausibility, even if you don' think it's likely.

Sure, there's political gridlock in the US? Sure. But let’s not pretend Canadian politics are a beacon of stability. And Denmark’s hold on Greenland isn’t exactly ironclad. In unstable times, pragmatic unions can look attractive.

And yeah, there are a lot of cultural differentials, but flipping flap jacks, look at the cultural divide between California vs Indiana or TX vs Vermont. Mergers like this happen incrementally - closer military cooperation, shared Arctic development, economic harmonization.

Not saying this will/could happen tomorrow, but in a time of rethinking alliances, I think it’s less far-fetched than it sounds. If Europe can experiment with supranational governance, why can’t North America????

What are the realistic roadblocks here beyond just "politics?"

Would love to get Google and all the big companies' fingers out of my life, but spam is overwhelming today.

Would love to see a robust tutorial to show us how to really do spam protection right.

It feels as if Automattic doesn't do a complete paradigm shift and become truly open with their software everyone is going to give up on them entirely - at least everyone with significant talent and investment.

How well does this work for families of 6-10 or more people? Does it work for keto and similar diets? Does it handle one-off OMAD (one meal a day) needs?

What usecases are you finding for this kind of a tool?

Too true. This is all of modern society.

Very upsetting development. Not even a reasonable exit strategy and good deal for those needing to find a new home. 50% discount to exit to eM Client??? LOL, give me a break.

I don't trust 1PW anymore. After they killed their product with their forced cloud storage with 8, they died. Not trustworthy behavior from anyone in that space.

This is not capitalist. Google has itself said it's a communist org. Even commies and socialists like to make money.

I like what they're working towards with V in Vinix as well. Exciting times to see such things with ABI compat with Linux opening new paradigms.

Fuck that. Just have some willpower! Some of us have been doing OMAD without assistance, just grunting through the stress and pain for years. It's much healthier than drugging up.

Great tool I think this is heads and shoulders above other options, including Projectors from OBS since it allows me to control the ecosystem I'm sharing very tightly and cleanly. Thank you!

I once set out to learn Vi, but the absurd modal editing and convoluted key combinations for basic tasks made it a nightmare. Efficient and logical, my ass!

Oh boy. Here we go.

Pretty cool... but I hate writing long hand. :o)

A shorthand teaching and capturing tool would be pretty cool though.

It keeps coming back to metabolism being the entire key to all types of cancer.