wampus

No one is questioning my characterization of the one dimensional characters in the show. I've never said the show had to cater to white men exclusively, I merely pointed out that the show had a depiction of racial / gender roles that was very politically charged, and anti-cis/white people, and men in particular. Seriously, the only positive male figures in that show were FN men, and there were no examples of negative figures that were FN. The only minority woman that was presented in a slightly negative way, was the asian nurse -- who was still competent at her job, even if she was portrayed as greedy and self-centered. The non-FN men didn't even get to be competent, they got to be incompetent, stupid, and/or villains.

Like if you wanted to add some depth / nuance to those characters, without being so one sided? Have the resentment that you're expressing here, made manifest in the FN people in the show. There's a very brief exchange at one point early on in the series, where I think Harry shows up at the res unescorted, and the FN people there basically stonewall / ignore him. It's glossed over in like 10 seconds, and then they act like it's all good. Asta's abandoning of her daughter with a healthy and supportive home life is a story element that's really forced. Have Asta's backstory altered so that it's not some deadbeat white guy trailer trash that she hooked up with as a kid -- have it be that she had a regular teenage cis white guy as a partner, one who could've just moved out of town. You could've had him die in an accident off screen, and potentially made the doctor who came back to replace Harry (briefly, before getting sent to Area 51 to get ass raped by the govt or whatnot) be the guys older brother, but make him less of a condescending fop. Asta realising who he was later on, especially given how nonchalantly she and the town shrug off his disappearance, and what comes out about how his life went afterwards, would add depth -- like those two kids basically had that guy's life ruined as an afterthought, with pretty well zero remorse or curiosity from ppl in town -- and the audience is encouraged to empathize/forgive the evil chick in the govt that did it, because she had some daddy issues that she wanted to time travel to fix. You could justify Asta giving her daughter up because she felt strongly that her family on the res wouldn't accept a white guy / baby (you don't even need to make it an explicit rejection, just one she internalised / acted on based on the lowkey resentment towards white people). Keep a passive aggressive dialogue structure between the FN people and the white people that Asta brings on to the res -- cause generally, in reality, they're tolerated but not accepted, because of all that history/resentment (that we're seeing even in this generally neutral commentary on the show). Have that resentment be more explicit in any dialogue with older FN. Keep Asta's grandad as a more neutral positive progressive figure who's just a hard workin guy, who values his culture/traditions, who loves his daughter and accepts her no matter what, even if some in the community still harbour all this resentment. He could even have more complex relations with the band, if he'd been made aware of the reasons for Asta giving up her daughter after the fact -- a backstory component where he'd realised the constant simmering racism on the res had hurt his daughter and cost him a direct relationship with his grand-daughter, and while he recognised/accepted the anger felt he had to move past it by opening the diner outside the res and integrating more with the town. He could basically have a vested interest at that point, for being a role model for the youth on the res, putting him respectfully / politely at odds with the more racist older folks on the res. His relationship with Harry could've been far different too, if he'd first viewed him as a potential 'new' white-boy suitor that his daughter was interested in -- that'd even provide comic opportunities, as he'd be completely thrown by Harry acting in an alien fashion / unpredictable fashion compared to what he expects of a white guy, causing him to question his own preconceptions even further, at least until he finds out the truth. From what I recall, the way they handled this stuff in the show, it really didn't make sense why Asta would've given up her daughter - and it especially didn't make sense given how they portray all the people in the community / family around her as being ultra/unequivocally supportive. It isn't all light in reality, for an adult-theme oriented drama you need to have some shades of dark to make it more interesting / engaging and insightful.

For the super smart outspoken muslim girl, you've literally got stories in the news frequently about muslim women being killed by their families for having tiktok on their phones and/or being too western minded. The show's got her out running around in the middle of the night with a young boy with no supervision, while still pretending like she's a devout muslim girl. Dig into that more. Lots of muslim women present a devout/submissive image to their parents, but at school they are far more liberal / westernized -- I'm sure I'm not alone in having known girls in HS who would change out of their religious garb for class, not because they'd get bullied or anythin, but because they wanted to be free to express themselves. Women in Iran, before the religious dictatorship took over, happily dressed in western styles while still following the general tenants of the faith / thinking of themselves as muslim. There's lots of talk in the media about how school shouldn't narc on kids for things like pronouns, but the religious stuff is also part of that conversation -- given that the boy she's running around with, is also the son of a teacher (or was she the principle? I don't remember atm, sorta moot) at the school, you could've played with that theme a bunch. Even if the parents may be accepting if she were to discuss it with them directly, she could still have inner turmoil/conflicts about it all. Heck, you could've even pulled a story practically directly out of the news and worked it in for "why she came back" to town after goin off to a prestigious school -- her mother could've been mis-appropriating a FN identity to get scholarships/funding to go to that program, she could've been exposed, and the kids scholarships cancelled as a result. She could've ended up with more interesting internal conflicts/character, by being conflicted by both the unethical behaviour of her parent towards FN, but also at being denied the opportunity just because she wasn't the 'right' minority race. Presenting that kid the way they did in the show, is a disservice to the struggles of many muslim women -- and there's likely a lot more material there that could be presented in far more interesting ways, even in a weird pseudo-comedy such as this show (I still say the premise/direction and overall flow of the show was disjointed/weird).

I don't have a problem with shows catering to demographics I don't associate with directly. Like I said, I did watch 3 seasons of this thing, even though I recognised early on what it was,. But the writing was one dimensional and lazy, and it got worse and worse as the seasons went on. I'm all for stories that are FN centric, but those stories deserve better writing and presentation than what this show was offering up.

Haven't seen dark winds, so I can't really comment on that one.

All I was pointing out is that the gender/racial depictions on the show are fairly clearly politically charged in today's climate. A more even representation would've had some competent men on the show, may've had some more nuance to the representation of minorities too. Instead you have whole episodes dedicated to things like "the women of the town rising up for fair pay" in very heavy-handed virtue signalling style.

The writing got progressively more and more entrenched in that sort of stuff, as the series went on. I'm sorry if you feel bad that I'm pointing it out, and noting that the cancellation wasn't really all that surprising to me?

Interac has things like extended warranties and fraud protection, it's just not 'generally' as good. Like here's one from a mid sized CU in BC, community savings, talkin bout some of the perks. The extended warranty part reads as:

Extended Warranty doubles the repair period on a manufacturer’s authorized Canadian warranty up to two extra years for purchases made worldwide. It covers products with a manufacturer’s authorized Canadian warranty of five years or less.

That coverage is better than some CCs from what I can tell, as many CC's cap it at one extra year.

Eh, sorta.

We have digital payment cards in Interac. A bunch of the chip components come from other countries though, and are part of an integrated supply chain, if that matters. You're right though, that a chip card / payment card, is 'technically' functioning very similarly to a credit card these days.

Where they're different is in the settlements and insurance side of the transactions. Debit cards are nearly instant settlements in most cases, and require funds to be present in accounts. Credit cards allow for delayed settlement based on statement reviews -- so you can challenge bogus payments later, at your convenience, in theory. Both provide a degree of insurance, but generally the CC is better on that front -- this is also likely why they're much more broadly accepted in online payments.

Debit cards can theoretically be sync'd up with a personal loan, to function similar to a credit card in that you can "spend" money you don't "have" -- but doing so would require adjustments to Interacs terms, and likely trigger non compete clauses with Mastercard/Visa for anyone tryin to go that route. In terms of that 'credit' though, on a debit card it'd be entirely the liability of the bank/credit union issuing the card -- with a proper 'credit' card, that liability/risk is essentially offloaded to a larger company that can accommodate larger risk, albeit with higher % interest across the board.

Another fun one though, if you're thinking credit cards.... is that Canada should have its own Canada-focused Credit Bureau. Using US companies like Equifax, means all your credit information is already in the hands of the US Government, even if they have "canadian" wings, due to the US's Cloud act. Same goes for our government / institutions continuing to use things like Microsoft clouds -- all that data is just exposed, and Canada's doing/done nothin about it. There're fairly clear reasons the US considers Canada their removed, I mean, our own government/regulators literally cannot function without US tech companies supporting them / providing them with service.

*just an edit to add another fun situation to watch in the financial area -- all the Credit Union mergers goin on, and what's happening in that space. Canada's credit unions are generally outsourcing their online banking applications to either the USA, or India. Even more hilarious, is that mergers are being effectively 'forced' by CEO's chasing golden parachutes. I know of at least one medium sized CU in BC who's CEO is an absolute idiot when it comes to outsourcing, and is well known as such by many -- for a smaller CU, she started emulating the outsourcing habits of big financial institutions she was hoping to merge with for that golden retirement package like a decade ago. Literally doing onboarding to such products with those big future merger partners, because it was a done deal before it ever went off for a vote to the membership. She picked up ridiculous operating expenses, which the CU couldn't really control -- like paying hundreds of thousands of dollars per year for Salesforce, with its 6% YoY increase, is 'surprisingly' not a sustainable smaller business thing to do. But she turned around and used that OpEx to go to the membership later and say "We can't possibly continue to operate, look at our ballooning OpEx! We need to merge with bigger CUs!". It's sorta a 'starve the beast' type tactic, done to the disservice of the membership, and for the personal profit of the CEO. And our regulators are cool with it -- hell, our regulators are encouraging this sort of thing, just like they're encouraging selling every Canadians online banking login authentication process off to the USA/India, at least one of which is a country totally not known for any kind of fraud industry what-so-ever, no ethical concerns, and who's never been connected to assassinations on Canadian soil. I mean, when I bank with my local Canadian community credit union, I obviously expect the USA or India's government to get access to my data.... and that's LARGELY because the BIG credit unions like Vancity want it that way, and have forced it on every other CU. There's even at least one BC CU that's given an India-based AI company access to practically all their member information from the sounds of things.

Like the trade association (Central1) is controlled by those big CUs, and it handles most settlements. Rather than maintain their geo-distant data-centres on different sides of the country, they're just sticking it all into Microsoft's cloud. So even all the cheques and payments that get processed, are within reach of the US govt due to the Cloud act. Regulators are 100% cool with it, cause the regulators are literally in Microsoft's cloud too, exposing all the personal data they take from the industry to US interest already. The BC regulators literally demand all private information for every person that has an account at a Credit Union, for vague "risk" reasons -- they post that openly on their BC FSA website, in guidelines/requirements for industry; I've previously poked the OIPC about it, and the Privacy Commissioner apparently doesn't see anythin wrong with it. And this shits literally happening like this year, while the govt is busy pretending to be all "elbows up"; they're continuing on with rampant rubber stamping of the outsourcing of core / critical canadian functions to foreign interests.

Eh. Bullshit jobs exist, no doubt. But the points mentioned in the article seem a bit askew -- even just the consultanty-vibe saying consultants are usually bullshit seems a bit off, though amusing.

I doubt the federal govt will be able to realistically cut just bullshit jobs / structure job cuts in an efficient way. I've spoken to managers in the public service before, and they've whined that it takes like 2 years to fire someone who's not doing their job, with all the hoops that are required due to the union etc. I'm starting to wonder if Carney's govt will even last that long.

Yeah, the semantics are already on display in what they're saying here. "a deal that will be in the best interest of Canadians" can be spun really easily.

"Yes, we bent over and spread our cheeks by removing a ton of protections in various industries, selling out those interests to Trump's whims... but securing lower tariffs on all other trade was in the best interest of Canadians in general"

"Yes, we capitulated on every point you mention, but a trade deal with the US is still better than no trade deal with the US, for the interests of Canada"

"Sure, we brought in legislation that lets us suppress Canadian's rights, so that we can allow US companies to ignore things like environmental concerns while they extract Canada's resources and sell them for US profit... but doing that's in Canada's best interest, compared to getting invaded/annexed".

It's just like how they scream elbows up! Let's avoid American control in our gov procurement! Except for Microsoft, or other tech giants, even though they're heavily implicated in the authoritarian shift down south... cause that'd be hard to change, and all our stuff is in their cloud already...

Gen Z stopped havin house parties, cause fewer of them live on their own / with a small group of roomies -- a lot more stick around with the parents, and parents aren't as keen to have a bunch of youth doing drugs and lightly misbehaving all night ;p

I participate, have voted green / left wing for decades. It does nothing.

My riding is staunchly NDP. Jenny Kwan at present, Libby Davies before that. The riding gets practically no federal investment because we've had a junky minority party person for decades. Nothing changes at the federal level. Writing to Jenny about any issue is utterly pointless, based on experience writing her multiple times over the years. And it makes sense she ignores her constituents, because her re-election is practically assured since the riding always goes NDP.

Politics at this point is like what Religion is, in many ways. Religion teaches people to just follow the rules, and they'll eventually get into heaven -- no need to rise up against your evil masters / oppression, because they'll get punished by god in the end, so you just gotta endure it. Democracies have been engineered to serve the same purpose, while relentlessly prioritizing the interests of an elite few -- it doesn't matter who we vote for, ultimately. Same thing with recycling/climate change -- distract the poors with separating yogurt cups, making them 'feel' like there's action being taken, while letting rich people throw gas on the fire. As long as we have that placebo, we'll keep doing the little piddly shit and ignoring the big problems caused by a small minority of people, even as we literally watch the world burn around us. The illusion that our votes matter is just the evolution of the mechanism used by the wealthy to placate the masses.

The country elected a person to try and stand up to Trump, and we got a guy that bent over to kill the DST on a Sunday based on the Orange Fascists whims, and who's busy putting in the sort of rights-suppressing legislation that Trump and American interests want. I'm convinced that any "deal" he works out, will ultimately be selling out large swaths of the Canadian population -- he'll justify it by saying it's a net-positive, or better than the alternative, type of language, and the cbc/media will spin it as needed.

I'll keep "doing my part" by throwing my vote away every election for a green / left party. But I can't be fucked to try and do more in between. Part of democracy is needing to accept that the majority of people just don't give a shit.

I disagree with it. Nothing wrong with having friends of whatever shape or size. But to act like you need those sorts of friends in order to learn basic human traits is utterly false.

Also, in terms of role models and gender stuff, it's just weird to think how that'd come in to play for a younger person. You can look up to role models for any reason -- typically for excelling in a field or pursuit that you're also interested in pursuing. But it's a personal relation imagined in your head between you and them. When gender enters into that relation, in terms of who you're modelling your behaviour after, a straight guy modelling himself off a gay man doesn't make sense. If you have an interest in the gender of your role model, as a guy, it'd be mostly in seeing the reaction they get from women, and wanting to emulate their success by dressing / behaving similarly. Like kids who saw rock stars gettin bras thrown at them, pursuing becoming a rock star because they wanted the same gender-oriented treatment.

Hell, you could argue that's one reason the incel's are so keen to model themselves after psuedo "alphas", and shitheads like Trump -- Trump's a disgusting pile of yuck, but he's rich, has a hot younger wife, a large family all living pretty well, and has tons of extra-marital affairs without any seeming repercussions (he's likely to dodge even that Epstein stuff). It's hard to argue that he hasn't 'succeeded' at life. Same goes for all the tech bro fascists who're fathering, literally, hundreds of kids. Meanwhile, Mr Too Much Empathy is going to internalize all the negativity about men from feminist sources, won't be able to ask a woman out because of that internalized trauma, and will disappear from the gene pool.