defaultname

AMD's position on machine learning has been fascinating to watch. While the company has gone through some cash strapped years, investing even some marginal effort into the ML space would have paid off handsomely in data center sales. Instead they let nvidia run away with it, pushing out a half-baked ROCm, which bizarrely supports such a tiny subset of cards it is farcical: With nvidia devs with a standard consumer GPU are building solutions and testing models, and when it's time to push big staying with nvidia is just the easy choice, while AMD apparently tries to upsell for even marginal support.

Apple has done more to see Apple Silicon supported in the ML space in almost no time than AMD did over the past decade. Apple obviously has more resources, but they don't have a 1000 person team working on this, I suspect, but instead it's a very commando, efficient operation. They got a small number of dedicated resources committed to bringing support and enabling the community, and it happened.

I don't think it's a trend or that people are trying to be cool or something. JWT is like a simpleton version of Kerberos/ActiveDirectory tickets. Having authentication and/or authorization independent of operational systems has significant advantages is architecture and deployments.

They are saying that a "modern lifestyle" may lead to obesity and type 2 diabetes. They are not saying that meal skipping leads to that, but rather it's a reaction to it.

"Edit: you've been posting about nothing else for literally weeks now."

This is beyond parody. It's as if your moderation is purpose driven to elevate and amplify disinformation, and that actually useful, meaningful discussion has disappeared from this site.

Congratulations, HN continues its descent to utter irrelevance. Now featuring literally daily QAnon nonsense, which you never moderate or threaten bans about (even after the few reasonable users try to flag and moderate). It's incredible that every one of my comments, in response to grossly ignorant nonsense, were highly upvoted by users. Then along comes dang, enabler of alt-right QAnon horseshit. Cheers.

Nobody called the EA when BLM was destroying businesses

You've mentioned BLM multiple times. BLM protests in Canada were a momentary point event and the total sum of damage was minuscule (not the "billions" you claimed in another post). Why would the EA or SoE be called for a momentary event? One that isn't making promises about not leaving. Of "holding the line". Sorry, your own rhetoric and bombast got used against you.

A single day of the Windsor bridge blockade eclipsed that total in damages by magnitudes. As did a single day of the Ottawa insurrection. They might not have been breaking windows, but the damage was enormous. The cost to businesses, in policing, and to commerce was enormous. Now add that the convoy and its supporters were openly advocating terroristic threats against service providers that cooperate with the police (e.g. towing companies), which it should be noted is itself an incredibly serious crime, but that just got normalized.

Or this tweet by the Ottawa Police?

Are you referring to the sadly pathetic lawyer basically police-car-chasing for clients to grift? Because you know the Ottawa Police tweet was spot on. Just as they gave plenty of warnings. And just to be clear, it is critically important that defense lawyers and civil liberty groups push the government and fight for every right, but citing this guy and his obvious grift, or his pander-to-the-crowd "but you can't do that!!!" routine, is not convincing.

As a protip, when you put dozens of links -- most of them completely unconvincing nonsense -- in your posts, it just looks crazy. It doesn't make your point.

Yet Trudeau invoked the same act which was renamed in 1980

You seem to be profoundly misinformed.

When BLM burnt down billions of dollars worth of businesses

BLM burnt down billions of dollars worth of businesses in Canada? Wow, I guess I must have missed that news cycle.

The "whatabout BLM" tactic is so tired.

I don't know why you care about skin color so much

Right.

No clue what Qanon has anything to do with vax mandates

You know, I asked myself the same question. I wondered "why does the stage in Ottawa keep talking about WEF, the Rothschilds, poisons in children's cereals, child sex rings, Donald Trump, 5G, the conspiracy that all of the media is lying to you and some guy grifting off your cause is telling you the truth, etc". Why did so many participants keep talking about so many things but vaccine mandates. Why is the entire ecosystem, and so many supporters and supplicants of this movement so caught up in QAnon nonsense among other conspiracies? Glad you share the confusion.

You are basically spouting corporate media nonsense

Here it is. I literally stated what I directly observed, and have heard (from people like you), and you wave it off as "corporate media". Did you perhaps spit at CBC reporters while you were busy honk honking?

Not a single charter right has been overridden. Every act undertaken under the EA is on the official record (available to the opposition parties). Parliament can revoke or partially revoke any component of the EA at any juncture. Then it has a followup discussion/analysis phase built in.

Let's be clear -- there is no silencing component to this act. If someone has unfairly seen their accounts frozen, do a tell-all sad tale to every media outlet you can find. Rant on twitter. Share those Facebook pages. There are plenty of outlets that would love it. There are political parties who would make this their battle cry, using it to seal their own ascension.

But there isn't a single case. Not one. No sad tales. Now accounts have been frozen -- we know that for sure -- but the people whose accounts have been frozen have been organizers and direct participants. People who knew what was coming and had literally weeks of warning to stop or face consequences. There isn't a lot of sympathy there. But the poor waitress in some small town who gave $20...boy, that story will give this country a new government.

Yet...where is it?

While the linked article and the twitter thread it links are both quite good, your core point is absolutely correct.

As stated elsewhere, this is a minority government. If there is a single actual case of someone donating some small amount and having their account frozen, with the corresponding life mayhem, may the Conservatives use it to bludgeon the Liberals.

But there hasn't been one. Not a single case. A couple of opposing politicians and twitter personalities have invented vague claims of cases, but these are clearly a fiction (or have been clarified as "but it could happen" scenarios).

You are taking a government's word for it

Canada is a parliamentary democracy, and the current governing party -- the ones who take all of the heat for every abuse -- are a minority government. They can fall at a moment's notice. Prime Minister in Canada isn't King, and instead is far less powerful than, for instance, the US president.

Yet *not a single case has been brought forward*. A couple of Conservative MPs have vaguely alluded to cases -- ones with almost no details, yet the few details that are brought up don't match any known donor lists (e.g. "Briane from Chilliwack") -- yet despite this being such an incredible hammer to take down this government, crickets.

So yes, I'll take the government's position on this.

"seal-clapping"

Ah, yes, "seal-clapping". That surely conveys the sincerity of your comment. Or we saw mass financing of public mayhem and realized that yes, this is a very real problem. It's a real problem that needs considerable solutions.

"purely because it's directed at a minority whom they have dehumanized for years"

A "minority"? This is perverse. By this measure, every deplorable subset is a protected minority that you will pearl clutch about. Won't someone think about the poor Nazis?

Financed mayhem will always come under the microscope.

I am just in awe at this. Astonishing.

After a three week long insurrection based on profound ignorance, and thousands of instances of criminality, you think the government -- just as it was about to have the resources available to put it down -- should have shook hands and said "you win" to these people? And just to be clear, even if we though the army of QAnon aficionados would go for it, I assure you they would have expected amnesty.

No, I don't think so. It was *way* too late to suddenly try to eek a win out of this.

"I literally said that I'm not assuming any level of support"

Your entire post was predicated on an assumption about the level of support.

"weirdly defensive"

It is neither defensive or weird. A lot of Americans in particular are grossly misinformed about {broadly gestures at almost everything related to this}, but they have very deep opinions. It's actually telling that you tried to portray the inverse (e.g. Canadians talking about America), when that simply isn't true: We are overwhelmed with American news and political happenings for time eternal, in media, news, social media, etc, where most Americans have a very superficial understanding of Canada for obvious, practical reasons. DHH's post panders to an alt-right crypto crowd, but to every Canadian it looks like ignorant clowning.

"You are also coming up with tons of ad-hoc explanations for everyone"

You're injecting a ridiculous number of strawmen. I argued against your statement that political positions on a vote = actual reasoned opinion. That has never, ever been the case in Canadian politics. No rational person expects it to be the case.

"agreeing wholesale with suspending the charter"

And with this statement, everything you've said on this entire topic has been completely discounted. The emergency act does not upset a single charter right. Not one. As with DHH ridiculous claims about martial law, it betrays that the speaker's hysterical take can be ignored as baseless rhetoric.

Further, the root post nowhere claimed "all Canadians support this". They noted that our base values are different and that many Americans aren't fully informed, and that is 100% true. As you've done with my posts, you're bizarrely spinning that out into something completely unsaid.

"you just missed my point"

No, I didn't. You pointed out the number of votes between two parties to demonstrate mandate. Only the actual numbers betray a completely different situation. You don't get to casually claim that one whole set don't matter because it makes your story work better.

"NDP since they basically condemned trudeau"

Again you're speaking like you don't know how politics work in Canada. How else do you think they will frame it? They know that if it is not passed, armies of trucks (parked just outside the city in a set of farmer fields) will return back to Ottawa, and yes they would be blamed for that, and there would be consequences. So they support it while (perhaps rightly) pointing out that it is only necessary because of bungling by Trudeau. That's what they do.

Do you think 100% of Liberals and NDP support this? I have no doubt you'll say no, that you actually think most of them are against it. Now here's a better question - do you think 100% of Conservatives and BQ are against this? The notion is simply absurd, and both parties have leaned heavily on extraordinary powers historically. There are countless examples of Conservatives in particular demanding extreme responses to, for instance, aboriginal blockades. Historically the Conservatives have been a very law and order party.

And the emergency action should never have been necessary. My province, Ontario, has a literal army of officers, heavy equipment, and penalties and measures to squash this occupation at the outset. There was a bit of negligence, territorial behaviour, and perhaps intentional blindness, that led to it becoming such a problem.

Although it is a bit rich that the #1 reason given for opposition to the motion is that the motion was successfully used to clear Ottawa. Basically that now that the problem is superficially resolved, now it isn't necessary. Not that it was never necessary.

The video was made February 15th, weeks into the blockade, and long after it was painfully clear that the public was turning dramatically against the convoy. At this point the Premier of Ontario and the federal government were openly discussing measures to squash the occupation.

A week earlier the organizers had quietly dropped their memorandum of understanding's insurrection demands.

"Completely ignore the reasonable take, pick up much crazier demands made by a different person"

What I described were the demands in effect by the organizers for weeks. In interviews with convoy participants, zero of them seemed to believe that removing a border vaccine requirement (completely and utterly irrelevant given that the US government has their own mandate that makes Canada's extraneous) would be enough for them to go home.

"but it's not representative of the electorate"

The two parties supporting this measure got 8,862,977 votes. Every other party together got 8,287,006. And the best part still is that the Conservatives and BQ get to vote against this measure specifically because they know it will pass. It's a free vote where they get to claim overreach while also not suffering by defeating the measure and the ensuing problems end up being placed in their laps. That's how adversarial parliaments function.

So your claim about the electorate was simply wrong, even if we ignore that it is fundamentally ignorant in the way Canadian government even functions.

It is sobering whenever this topic appears on HN (though thankfully this time it seemed to be flagged directly off the first three pages immediately, and perhaps DHH's low quality pablum has been properly binned) because it really resets my perception of the quality of comments here. Like reading a newspaper or magazine article on a field you happen to know in detail, making you realize that what you thought were considered, informed opinions are actually just people giving uninformed, careless takes. Strongly held, highly emotional opinions that are built on a tower of, in essence, shit.

It's someone telling you, with great passion and confidence, that the Linux kernel needs to be rewritten in Visual Basic because the current PHP code isn't maintainable. Throughout these comments, and in hot takes like DHH's, there are just profoundly ignorant errors that betray that the speaker doesn't have the slightest clue what they're talking about. It instantly reveals their rhetoric to be noisy garbage.

Canada is freezing the accounts of people who organized or directly participated in this illegal occupation. Any news you've read to the contrary has been, as some groups like to scream, "fake news". Literal fake news.

It would be such political hay if a single such case came forward. A minority government hangs in the balance, and can be ousted (insofar as a new election is called) immediately. Do you know why no verifiable case has come forward? Because the cases you heard of were lies.

YouTube videos are not citations. No one is going to watch them or try to read the tea leaves of some third party's interpretation. The literal demand of the organizers of the group (a separatist and a white supremacist) were that the government resign en masse. The trucks are emblazoned with "Fuck Trudeau" flags and signs. The rhetoric coming from the various participants has been aggressive and apocalyptic.

No, Trudeau should never have met with them. I'm no Trudeau fan, but there was zero value in ever meeting with this group. They should have been swept up the moment they broke the first law.

"like suspending some restrictions conditional to hospital utilization"

Like almost everyone who has takes on this here (including DHH), you seem to know perilously little about the actual situation, yet you've got a lot of takes. The vast majority of mandates are provincial, for instance, not federal, just as health systems are managed at the provincial level. Ontario (the province that Ottawa is in), actually has a conservative leader, but the so-called "truckers" didn't target him at all, and their minimal foray into Toronto was immediately squashed by a much more capable police force. Nor did they do much about any other premier. Because it had little to do with mandates. These people simply don't accept democracy. They don't like Trudeau, therefore he's got to go. I mean, they literally said it over and over again. That's cool, but we just had an election so they can take their mini insurrection and go home again.

Support of the majority? 93% of Canadians wanted to see the protests cleared. 2/3rds wanted participants jailed.

A majority of Canadians agree with a lifting of mandates, but this was true before this protest, and if anything the protest set it back. Support for the protest was extremely low.

Not only is it unconfirmed, it has been explicitly denied by banks, the government and the RCMP. Sanctions have only been levied on organizers and direct participants in the illegal occupation.

The MP either lied, or got played by someone who knew he was a gullible tool.

It's called a lie by a conservative MP who is pandering to a very gullible base. I am deeply concerned for the rational judgment of anyone who actually believed that bit of nonsense.

Every level of government has asked the MP to give details, because clearly it isn't true. He hasn't because the person does not exist.

Ultimately he should resign. Either he was trolled and played, or he simply has so little respect for the public that he invented a tale to play on (largely foreign) beliefs.

"Yes, outside enforcers were needed because local police were not doing it."

Ottawa is a relatively small city. They were grossly overwhelmed after letting an occupation setup base. Further, you clearly know absolutely nothing about Canada, or Ontario, or the police involved, or the politics, so your various takes are nonsensical.

"Trudeau is one of Schwab's young leaders and has embarrassed Canada."

A current QAnon conspiracy on HN, stated with a straight face. How absolutely embarrassing.

So everyone else is aware (although this ridiculous stupid essay from DHH thankfully got flagged off the front page, so this post is largely only being seen by "the faithful"), the WEF conspiracy came about because some people with incredibly poor critical skills have derived an inverted relationship between a group and its members. Basically a tail wagging a dog assumption. The world's powerful all are members of Davos / WEF basically as a networking and "say nice things", so the especially gullible conspiratorial swap that relationship and now the WEF is actually the master puppeteer pulling the strings. It's a conspiracy literally beyond parody, and I'm still caught up in Poe's Law, unsure if the above comment is sincere, or some sarcastic example of insanity.

"Why would you treat this group of protestors so much more harshly than ones that, say, block railways?"

Me? I found the railway blockades intolerable lawlessness. Trudeau took well-earned criticism for the soft-handed approach to them, and it cost him a majority government. It had far less of a negative impact on Canada (and touched on a very sensitive aboriginal issue), but those of us with actual value-based positions -- instead of just tribalistically flexing our positions to justify whatever we think "our" group are doing, as seen by DHH here -- are pretty consistent on this.

But can you point out any other protest in Canada that set up hot tubs on city streets, abused commercial vehicles and commercial privileges, terrorized residents, squatted on city parking lots as command and control systems, and operated a lawless zone? Pointing to some CHOP in the US (also GROSSLY unacceptable) isn't an example. Pointing at BLM isn't a counterpoint.

"expect them all to behave like their some sort of hive mind"

Among any group there will be bad actors. The constant citing of a Nazi flag appearance was just boring nonsense...at least until I repeatedly saw Canada First and Red Ensign flags (which are a subtler way of saying the same thing). QAnon nuttery would be just some fringe...if it wasn't the majority of content on their main stage and repeated by the main organizers constantly. The guy saying the flurry of incredibly ignorant misinformation would be just some nut, if it wasn't the same thing that came out of almost every participant's mouth.

"I also think your news sources are a little biased."

Sure. I mean, my news sources don't involved many QAnon blogs, but during the protest I had a video window playing most days featuring one of the sympathetic live streamers who constantly walked up and down the protest, interviewing participants. ZOD, the travel fun guy, some machine guy, etc. It is the words of the participant, and hearing their rhetoric at their stage, that gives me my opinion of this group.

The Canadian response is the first piece of hard evidence

For two decades the US has frozen and seized accounts in the hundreds of thousands -- billions of dollars in assets -- often with little oversight or checks. Civil forfeiture is rampant. Whole political groups have been declared "terrorist affiliated" and any correlation at all can lead to extremely unpleasant outcomes. No fly lists are flippant and casual.

And you think Canada using financial tools, primarily motivated by large external contributions to illegal activities, is the example?

It's maybe an example, sure. A weak one to me, but sure. It's certainly no precedent. To use this as the kick off point for some crypto advocacy seems...pernicious.

DHH's piece is clearly just a pro-"trucker" piece -- he has posted others previously -- and he decided to add a crypto narrative as some weak editorial justification. Add that he knows crypto enthusiasts are now going to distribute this nonsense widely. It's a pretty easy group to pander to.

But sure, he brings up classic arguments for crypto. There is nothing new in them. "Avoid government control - use crypto". Sounds great when it's for a cause you support, and DHH supports chaos and lawlessness in foreign cities he has no interests in, so why not. Kind of falls apart when that same mechanism is used for causes you're against.

You're 100% right. The moment someone blasted their horn -- much less their modified, multi-horn noise-terrorism device -- they should have been warned, fined, and then charged/arrested for mischief. The moment they blocked roadways illegally with regulated, commercial vehicles, they should have been warned, fined, and then charged/arrested, the vehicle towed. The moment the first person stopped near a bridge they should have been...etc.

So we agree, law breakers should have been charged. Police action should have been constant and aggressive.

But it was an occupation. Police barely operated in their lawless zone at all. That's the whole point, and was the intention of the group. It was a bully group, and their rhetoric and claims were often that they would die before they left. There are connotations to that.

"In just three weeks of honking, blocked streets and bridges, bouncy castles and flag waving, this peaceful protest"

Aside from a billion dollars+ in trade blocked when the protest -- having achieved nothing terrorizing the residents of Ottawa and blasting horns/setting off fireworks around the clock -- branched out to trying to block international borders, they harassed schools, healthcare workers, anyone wearing a mask, and attacked reporters from venues they don't like. The vast majority of businesses in the affected zone shut down entirely because the lawless, selfish crowd at this rally proved such a massive liability that simply closing was a better option.

But they set up a bouncy castle and brought children as shields (stated tactical plan of the group), so I guess that is okay.

They fawned over a Fox News reporter, and then spit on and slurred an MSNBC reporter. You might notice a correlation with another group South of the border, and that isn't accidental. Just as it shouldn't surprise that the main "stage" of this operation's daily speeches were chock full of QAnon gibberish (utterly indisputable -- the crowd cheers as conspiracies about the WEF, the Rothschilds, Bill Gates, 5G, and so on were given the daily reading). Appearances by "Canada First" flags, Red Ensign flags (an old Canadian flag repurposed by white supremacist), and more unfortunate correlations. This isn't accidental. Livestreams and discussions with many of the protestors betrayed just a cosmically misinformed, ignorant group, and it's a perilous demonstration of the future we all face as groups fracture off, conveniently declare anything but a few grifting sources "fake news", and then feed off of each other.

To call this an anti-mandate protest is to seriously miss the plot. If it was -- if it hadn't constructed noise-terrorism devices that saw people measuring 100db+ in their apartment -- and actually saved the "Fuck Trudeau" signs and QAnon conspiracies, or that whole seditious "we're not leaving until the government resigns and the Governor General declares us the new government" bit of nonsense, they could have inspired sympathy. Instead it was simply political terrorism, and is grotesquely anti-democratic. 93% of Canadians wanted this shut down weeks ago.

"Martial law"? After three weeks, weeks past being declared an illegal occupation, they were sent home in the gentlest way possible. After weeks of warnings, then days of warning of an action, the police did their job. The only thing above and beyond normal policing they did was that the Emergency Act allowed other regions to add to the police force without the whole normal process. Calling this Martial Law is *gross* and makes DHH look like a clown, though the entire piece manages that so it's consistent. It should offend anyone with any functioning reason.

"First the Ottawa police department got GoFundMe to confiscate donations with the intention of redirecting them to other causes"

GFM was made aware the cause was being used to fund literal crime breaking (indisputable), so they cancelled it. Good for them. And if someone crowdfunded to have crimes committed against DHH or his property, I hope they would be even quicker (but hey, at least his detractors will have crypto, right?). What GFM decided to do then was entirely on GFM's side.

Now the government wants crowdfunding with targets or sources in Canada to report large or suspicious transactions to FINTRAC, given that currently it is a gap in the financial system. There is nothing surprising or bizarre in that.

And before someone cites BLM or "ANTIFA" thinking that's some sort of "haha got you leftist" retort, a lot of us -- those of us who don't frame everything as "right" or "left", and have remotely consistent values -- are against unlawful blockades and occupations fullstop. "CHOP" areas -- terrible, shut them down. Railway blockades -- terrible, shut them down. Bridge blockade -- terrible, shut them down. City blockade and criminal harassment for three weeks -- terrible, shut it down. Trying to undermine or usurp a democracy through criminal action -- terrible, shut it down.

I am embarrassed for DHH. Another hot take bit of nonsense filled with clear lies, all so he could claim that crypto could be the answer? And this trash will see upvotes by crypto enthusiasts who don't realize it's yet another American giving their unwanted, unneeded, ignorant hot takes about a situation about which they are grossly misinformed (or they're just a liar and don't care, because again they know they're talking to an audience that will eat it up).

As one aside, he tries to shame someone who called for them to lose their commercial license, commercial insurance, etc. Imagine if you will that a pilot at JFK airport didn't like....who cares, something, anything...so they taxied their A360 out to an active runway and then shut it down and locked the doors. Until they were satisfied with whatever their cause was, they weren't moving. Now tell me what you think the chances are that this person would maintain their pilot license, employment, or would ever fly a plane again?

So, no source?

[Gestures broadly at everything]

You wrote a lot of text attacking a certain type of person

I "attacked" no one. If you feel an attack in it, you really need to reflect on why that makes you feel persecuted. Why a political demographic with zero historic interest in vaccines suddenly feels very opinionated about it is fascinating and disturbing.

I made a broad societal observation -- a plainly evident observation -- about tribalism overriding rational thought. And it's important to note that tribalism cuts all ways, and there are many cases of the "left" polarizing around something that is in no way a liberal or leftist value specifically because it's the tribal position.

Dismissing a considered response to a question as a "rant" is such lame trolling.

As to your demand for a "source" -- as if there's a scientific paper I can cite -- there are zero rational people who can read what I wrote and seriously question it, beyond weak HN trolls who have nothing.

It's uncomfortable for sure, though: Knowing that one's entire position about complex topics (vaccines, AGW, etc) is dictated by tribalism is pretty embarrassing when one really thinks about it. Particularly if one has blanketed it in lots of ridiculous rationalizations and explanations -- a legacy of nonsense -- carefully curating their YouTube channels of disinformation.

I'm curious what your answer is

Politicization and tribalism, obviously.

people don't trust these vaccines

There are traditional anti-vaxxers of the "my body is my temple" ilk: Organic food, often vegan or vegetarian, against all vaccines and with an often bizarre notion of what is a "chemical" or not. Usually super fit. No one is surprised when these people are against COVID vaccines as it's consistent with everything else they stand for.

But there is a whole new army of anti-vaxxers who don't care what they eat, vape, smoke, or whether they or their children are standing in a plume of diesel exhaust 24/7. Often very unhealthy. They've never had the slightest concern or attention for any vaccine or medication, including novel, experimental medications (including those which they'll eagerly accept when they get COVID). New vaccines like the HPV vaccine, or yearly flu vaccine changes that have whatever random assortment of other ingredients, have never been of any concern or earned even a moment of their concern.

But suddenly they have very specific thoughts about this vaccine? Come on. And if it's the scary "changes your DNA" (but actually doesn't) bit, there are alternative, less effective more traditional vaccines which they also refuse.

It's tribalism. Early on their group ("conservatives") took some positions about responding to COVID -- anti-masking, anti-lockdowns, etc -- and that cemented into positions that somehow morphed into being anti-vaccine (basically anti anything seen as controlling or responding to COVID), despite there being literally nothing from a values or political perspective that would explain it (indeed, there are loads of classic conservative tenets that would directly oppose this anti-vax position). Then loads of people realized they could grift off of exploiting this divide, politicians -- most of whom are vaccinated -- saw an opening to pander, etc.

It is baffling and needs to be studied in depth. Tens to hundreds of millions of people could self-destructively be turned against something simply because they saw it as outside their tribe and messaging.

So as long as it's politically expedient for the sitting PM you would advocate using the emergencies act? Yikes.

Can you point to the part of my post that said that? Anywhere?

Yikes.

Stronger response simply means demanding that police enforce existing laws and injunctions (where injunctions are often simply court orders saying "follow the law") instead of the conciliatory let-it-play-out messaging that Trudeau used at the time. Even in the case of the current protests the emergency act seems unnecessary, and is basically a failure condition for the Ottawa Police basically doing nothing and claiming that they're all out of ideas.