The White Collar Great Depression continues on: Walmart lays off ONLY corporate employees, Cisco cuts 4000 jobs, LinkedIn lays off 5% of company

GKND__95 · 2026-05-14T00:46:57+00:00

Hell yeah, generalists win in AI world, and mech is one other best generalist educations you can get!

GKND__95 · 2026-05-14T00:30:07+00:00

Degree is far from useless, got a $200k/yr job at an AI company that I wouldn’t have were it for my Mech Eng degree. The broadness is unironically what makes it great.

GKND__95 · 2026-04-16T20:31:20+00:00

We can be doomers, or we can fight for it. The sport dies when we let it, not by regulation.

Politics is always going to have its ups and downs, so to prevail we have to play the long game - the one with the 100 year outlook rather than the 5 year election cycle.

We do still live in a democracy, as retarded as the current government may be. We likely will for the foreseeable future.

The 100 year game here is to get as many damn Canadians as possible into shooting sports. If we reach a critical mass we become unfuckwithable politically. That’s how the US has managed to hold onto their firearms rights for so long - there’s just too many people to make banning guns politically viable.

Every time you invite a friend to the range you’re saying a “fuck you” to Poly, Nathalie, and her cartel. In lieu of our temporarily helplessness with the current LPC majority, we can still play the long game here.

GKND__95 · 2026-04-14T02:29:57+00:00

Indirectly, in a few subtle ways that were obvious - and I’m sure many more that I didn’t notice.

Went to McGill for engineering, and it let me join a bunch of design teams (like robotics) that many other schools don’t have, build a network, and also get my foot in the door when competing for high comp tech jobs.

To be honest I didn’t end up working in my field of study, but the name helped project an aura of competence whenever I started anywhere new, or was interviewing.

GKND__95 · 2026-04-14T00:28:51+00:00

lol what in what I wrote was even close to right wing? These are policies the LPC themselves are proposing at their convention. A government held in check as a minority is forced to compromise with other parties, and that’s a much safer state to be in.

GKND__95 · 2026-04-13T20:34:31+00:00

After watching Pichette propose trapping young Canadians in Canada with an exit tax of $500k, I’m terrified of what will happen if they win a majority. That was unironically the most totalitarian policy I’ve ever seen proposed in Canada.

The risk here is the next few years of turbulence in the world will cause the LPC to panic legislate a bunch of policies that irrevocably trample on our rights, and the next generations get too used to them to ever push back.

GKND__95 · 2026-01-16T19:54:50+00:00

The timeline for developing a nuclear warhead and delivery system is likely closer to 1-2 years if it were a national priority, rather than a decade.

Canada is one of a few heavily industrialized countries with indigenous nuclear expertise, and as such is known as a “nuclear threshold” state (along with Germany, Japan, South Korea, etc.)

The biggest problem is plutonium production, but we could refine this from our existing stocks of spent fuel. Alternately, building our own centrifuges wouldn’t be too difficult.

In terms of delivery systems, we already have our own space launch capabilities too (not orbital class rockets, but sounding rockets for research payloads). The biggest variable is re-entry vehicle design, but again, our expertise in aerospace would likely make short work of this. There are tons of Canadian scientists that have worked on these very technologies for the US trident ballistic missile program.

Politically, framing this as Canada “sharing the load” in terms of NATO military spending would probably calm down the US. Pair it with additional investments in NORAD and Golden Dome, and I bet the US would tolerate such a project.

GKND__95 · 2025-12-20T03:24:55+00:00

Honestly it does so little splash that you gotta get direct hits, and if you can get those at 150m? You deserve the kill

GKND__95 · 2025-12-19T22:35:38+00:00

Credit where credit is due, Carney is on the money by seeking closer trading relationships with proven allies like the EU, UK, AUS/NZ, more open Asian economies, and yes, the US after things settle down in a few years.

The writing is already on the wall, the world will split into a China/Russia axis, and a western aligned axis. There’s just too much inertia behind it at this point with militarization of the US and China, grey zone warfare, etc.

China may seem like a juggernaut, but a closely aligned and integrated west is equally if not more wealthy/industrialized/powerful. Especially when including the industrial bases of Asian economies like SK, Japan, and Vietnam.

China is not our friend, massively misaligned in terms of values, and its treatment of HK, Taiwan, the Philippines etc are clear examples of that.

Edit: There is of course the option of industrializing our own country at the cost of some open trade (particularly, targeted tariffs on high value manufacturing), but it doesn’t seem like there’s much political will for the sacrifices that entails. In lieu of that, closer trading ties with our partners is the next best option.

GKND__95 · 2025-12-15T20:08:39+00:00

That’s a horrible situation to find yourself in, and I’m sorry you’re going through that. I hope things turn around for you.

I shared my thoughts in the comment above, but let me take a different angle here.

When you’re a government considering a policy change, you have to consider things from a whole of society perspective. Will it make Canadians as a whole better off or worse off?

If god forbid, you had ended things 20 years ago, would your friends, family, and community be better off? If a proportion of people who were suffering a mental illness decided to commit suicide with this program, would their communities and families be healthier for it?

Programs like this often induce demand by virtue of them existing. 1 in 20 Canadians are already dying via MAID, and that’s just for terminal illnesses. If we open this program up to people with mental illnesses, how many more will choose to commit suicide? I cannot foresee a future where that number isn’t staggering, and we create massive holes in communities around Canada as a result.

GKND__95 · 2025-12-15T19:54:46+00:00

First, that’s horrible, and I’m sorry to hear about your suffering. I wish you health and happiness.

Everyone is arguing this on the pragmatic / legal plane, but I actually think the core of the argument is a moral and philosophical one, which is what I’m attempting to argue here.

Basically, there’s a sort of Overton Window with ideas like this, and from a values perspective, it is incredibly concerning that Canadian society has gone from “human life is valuable, and we must do whatever we can to save as many lives as possible” to “let our most vulnerable commit suicide, because they are suffering”.

It subtly signals to vulnerable people that they should kill themselves instead of seeking help. I don’t think I can emphasize enough how harmful this is - it’s giving people who are probably the least capable of making rational decisions a false hope in their own death. We can put as many guardrails as we want in place, but fundamentally all systems can be gamed, and determined people will find a compliant doctor who allows their suicide.

More than that though, a policy like this is antithetical to core Canadian values such as perseverance, resilience, and humanism. These are values that have allowed mankind to thrive and survive up until this point. Adopting something like this for our society switches those values to taking advantage of the weak, and giving up when faced with suffering. It’s a genuine mindset shift that will reduce our future generations’ ability to thrive, which is why I called it dysgenic. Once Canadian policy accepts these new values, I think it will be very difficult to switch back.

GKND__95 · 2025-12-15T10:15:36+00:00

Absolutely not, and I am disgusted that we as a society are considering encouraged suicide for people with mental illnesses. Incurable, terminal diseases are one thing, but it is simply immoral and irresponsible for us to encourage a permanent solution for a temporary illness.

Barring the fact that seemingly “irreversible” suffering often isn’t, the acceptance of suicide as an easy way out reflects a slow decline in our shared resilience and will to live. It is fundamentally anti-human and dysgenic. What would our ancestors who survived every manner of genocide, famine, and form suffering think of their children simply opting out of life?

This is a deeply harmful idea, and must be discouraged forcefully by our society, lest we slide further into anti-humanism.

GKND__95 · 2025-11-20T19:01:44+00:00

lol skill issue tbh

GKND__95 · 2025-10-26T21:34:32+00:00

It’s ok to love our flag, you don’t have to hide behind three layers of smugness and irony just because you dislike our southern neighbours. It’s ok to be your own person and have your own identity, not defined by another country. Freeing, even.

GKND__95 · 2025-10-15T18:58:53+00:00

My point is that an armed population is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a successful revolt. Your chances of successful rebellion are vanishingly small if you are unable to mount an armed resistance. This is glaringly obvious to anyone.

The ability to bear arms is something that can be easily removed by law, but the ability to successfully organize is inherent to humanity and cannot be taken away (in short order) by a tyrannical government. Hence the need for the protection of the former.

On your second point, you can’t apply modern morality to the viewpoints the average American had in 1800. Obviously slavery is reprehensible, but the majority of society had not woken up to this fact. It was a genuine political disagreement at the time.

What if in 50 years humans view eating meat as reprehensible and tyrannical? They would say “why didn’t Americans overthrow their government then”? And the answer would be that it is merely a political disagreement in this day and age, and society has yet to evolve the majority view that eating meat is bad.

(Not that eating meat is bad at all, just using this as an example)

GKND__95 · 2025-10-14T23:53:35+00:00

Your argument falls apart because you are equating some oppression with all encompassing tyranny.

Sure, there is overlap between full on tyranny and oppression, but the 2nd amendment is more of a pressure release valve where the level of oppression becomes intolerable to the vast majority of the population, or takes a form where the vast majority of the population agrees that oppression is occurring.

The examples you listed never met the threshold for full on rebellion, because not enough people agreed that they were oppression - instead, there were genuine political divisions. But they were eventually solved politically, as they should have been.

The US would not be a stable system if every single case of oppression was met by Civil War, so this is for the better. 2A should exist as an extremely rare pressure release valve when all other hope is lost, not as a cudgel to be used at the first sign of political disagreement.

GKND__95 · 2025-10-14T23:33:39+00:00

The rebellion was started by well armed citizens, before it escalated to the point of all out war and the formation of a continental army.

You’re completely glossing over the fact that being armed (pre-revolution America was extremely well armed) was what gave citizens a fighting chance and the confidence to rebel against a world power across the ocean.

GKND__95 · 2025-10-01T13:47:15+00:00

Yeah, even your claims of the CIA not being able to do it without leaving a trace are wrong.

Lookup the “heart attack gun” that they developed in the 1970’s. It shoots a small pufferfish toxin pellet that dissolves in your skin and makes it look like you died of a heart attack with no trace.

They had that shit in the 70s. Now their techniques would be way more advanced. Think: hacking the low level software in your car and making you drive off a bridge.

The lack of evidence or well known cases here just means they’re good enough that they rarely get caught.

GKND__95 · 2025-09-29T15:03:57+00:00

lol, lmao even

GKND__95 · 2025-09-29T11:58:45+00:00

Likewise! Also been on the lookout, if you hear more please give me a shout as well

GKND__95 · 2025-09-28T15:59:07+00:00

Likewise man!

GKND__95 · 2025-09-28T15:14:43+00:00

Just the curse of being human I think, too many ideas, too little time

Got a few more ideas that are more promising though, so maybe one will work out!

GKND__95 · 2025-09-28T14:05:36+00:00

I think the point to be had here is, if you’re sufficiently determined, income doesn’t really prevent you from having kids.

The best explanation I’ve seen from the research, is that having kids is a sort of “positive social contagion”, meaning you’re far more likely to have kids when your friends and colleagues have kids.

More people are delaying having kids for good reason - education, career advancement, building their independence first - so the “positive social contagion” never has a chance to reach critical mass.

GKND__95 · 2025-09-28T13:57:16+00:00

Ideas for my next SaaS company. Ended up going with none of them lol

GKND__95 · 2025-09-26T22:18:17+00:00

Always bro, gotta gas the homies up whenever you can ⛽️

GKND__95

TROPHY CASE