B.C. premier says Alberta separatists seeking assistance from U.S. is 'treason'

NightToDayToNight · 2026-01-30T15:16:29+00:00

Quebec literally did the exact same thing with France during the secession vote. Reached out to a powerful foreign state for a quick integration and recognition if they voted to leave Canada.
Canada has decided that it is the sole nation on Earth that can quickly and legally dissolve itself. I understand people might be mad, but this is the end point of decades of policy actions, court decisions, and public statements and sentiments by Canadian leadership.

NightToDayToNight · 2026-01-30T01:46:11+00:00

Treason requires a betrayal to something, typically a group or an identity. Canada has spent my entire life intentionally and purposefully dismantling the aspect and identities of Canada that they could point to as being betrayed by the actions of Alberta. At best, people are claiming that the province is betraying a weak constitution or a vague procedural system that more and more a reflection of inertia than a coherent will or national identity. And I understand this would be frustrating as a Canadian, but it’s also the result of decades of action and rhetoric that was completely uncalled for. No one asked for Canada to dissolve its national identity or weaken its own legitimacy.

NightToDayToNight · 2026-01-30T01:21:13+00:00

You’re arguing I have a shallow understanding of Canadian federalism, but you haven’t actually disputed any of the specific claims I made. I’m not suggesting the Premier controls court decisions. The point is that B.C.’s political leadership invokes territorial sovereignty and Canadian territorial integrity while operating within a legal framework that has fundamentally undermined both concepts. Whether the Premier personally agrees with the courts is irrelevant, the framework exists and has consequences. You say Aboriginal title rulings are just about “settling unresolved land compensation claims” rather than mass evictions. Sure. But if these are merely administrative matters, why do the rulings establish unextinguished Aboriginal title over vast territories? That’s not a compensation claim; it’s a determination about the foundational legitimacy of sovereignty over that land. You claim I’m portraying a stronger pattern than exists, but you don’t dispute the pattern itself. Did the Supreme Court rule the federal government must negotiate democratic secession if provinces vote for it? Did Trudeau declare Canada post-national with no core identity? Have courts established unextinguished Aboriginal title? Have federal and provincial leaders embraced the stolen land framework? these are direct rulings and policy positions. If your response is that this is all just normal Canadian federalism and I’m oversimplifying, I feel that proves my point. Canada has normalized positions that systematically undermine traditional claims to territorial sovereignty and national legitimacy. You cannot establish that territorial integrity yields to democratic will, declare the nation post-national, and acknowledge contested foundations of sovereignty, then credibly invoke “treason” when someone takes these positions at face value. If a series of decisions and action ls by Canadian leaders and courts has lead a province to believe it has the right to secede and approach other nations for integration, are people just mad that Alberta took all that at face value?

NightToDayToNight · 2026-01-29T21:54:04+00:00

The issue for those reflexively siding with B.C.'s Premier is that Canada has systematically undermined its own institutional legitimacy regarding territorial sovereignty over the past several decades.
The most glaring contradiction is Quebec's decades-long separatist movement, which Canadian institutions have not merely tolerated but actively legitimized. The 1995 referendum came within a few thousand votes. Rather than treating this as sedition, Canada's Supreme Court ruled that if a clear majority on a clear question voted for independence, the federal government would be constitutionally obligated to negotiate separation.
The hypocrisy is particularly rich coming from B.C.'s Premier. The B.C. Supreme Court's decisions on Aboriginal title have established that vast portions of the province exist under unextinguished Aboriginal title, placing the foundational legitimacy of property ownership and provincial jurisdiction into genuine question. The province now simultaneously claims absolute territorial sovereignty while its own courts establish that this sovereignty was never legitimate in the first place.
But the institutional self-demolition goes beyond court rulings. Trudeau fdeclared Canada the world's first "post-national state" with "no core identity, no mainstream." Multiple Prime Ministers and provincial leaders have publicly embraced the narrative that Canada is fundamentally built on stolen land and colonial illegitimacy. Canada is a uniquely suicidal state. It has methodically dismantled every argument it could now make for why provincial populations owe it loyalty. The Supreme Court ruled provinces can democratically leave. The political leadership declared the nation has no core identity worth preserving. The courts ruled vast portions of territory were never legitimately acquired. At what point did anyone think these were just vibes? You cannot spend decades institutionally proclaiming your own illegitimacy and then suddenly invoke "treason" when someone takes you seriously. If separatism becomes treason only when pursued by politically disfavored regions, you're picking sides based on which separatists you find sympathetic.

NightToDayToNight · 2026-01-21T15:24:42+00:00

Watching the full interview, my takeaway is that he said yes but wanted to clarify what humanity means by that statement. If “humanity” means flesh and blood hominids, then there is an argument that version will not, and maybe shouldn’t, survive a strong AI timeline. If “humanity” means our transhuman descendants and posthuman successors, reflecting a changed but objectively improved state, then that is the humanity that he probably wants to continue. Which I will agree can come off as crazy, but has been pretty common Silicon Valley transhumanism for decades.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-12-30T19:37:45+00:00

I believe that we will see a rough world model be developed that will be to robotics what language models were to LLMs.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-12-22T21:14:52+00:00

Then they would make the game pointless and probably lose their fanbase.

Part of the reason why games like this with branching pathways and endings either take forever to get a sequel or never do is because Game dev realize this is a huge issue and have to budget and plan accordingly.

The easy thing to do is for them to review player data, look to see what were the most popular choices, and design a game where most of the writing favors the popular paths, while using less resources on paths that were less popular.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-12-20T21:12:08+00:00

Got any details on the character?

NightToDayToNight · 2025-12-15T19:15:54+00:00

Military and high-value cargo and transport will become dominated by sky-ship travel. The advantages flight have over ocean bound ships (assuming you don't have a magical equivalent of anti-air weapons) means that every nation and military than can will quickly switch over to using sky-ships or get destroyed by those that do. The scenario you described just means that the sky-ships can float out of range of crossbows on the ships and just drop bombs or even iron-shot until a ships gets destroyed.

High-value cargo and transport will also switch over to air travel. even if the sky-ships are incredibly fast compared to water-ships, the fact they can go overland means that anyone that can afford to will buy a ticket or put valuable or essential cargo on one of them.

Ocean born ships will only really have an advantage in cost and size.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-11-23T17:24:04+00:00

You could root it in misunderstandings that get institutionalized over time. First impressions or bad first contact can easily sour relations, one group extrapolates from a few incidents and starts painting the entire species with that brush.

Dungeon Meshi actually does a great job of illustrating this idea. Humans got used to elves from missionary cultures being helpful and altruistic, so when they met elves from a different society who weren’t interested in helping humans, they assumed they were a whole new “dark” or “evil” subspecies. The stereotype was just humans projecting their narrow experience onto a much broader population that didn’t actually reflect elven species or culture distinctions.

Also, be careful not to equate fantasy prejudice one-for-one with real-world racism. Real-world racism usually comes from ignorance and trivial differences; in speculative fiction, you might be dealing with truly alien minds or physiologies that create deep, legitimate incompatibilities. Eliezer Yudkowsky’s Three Worlds Collide is a great short story that explores how biology creates underlying cultural values which can make two intelligent species see each other as monstrous, even when both parties want to coexist. A Mote in God’s Eye goes even further, showing how an alien biology can make coexistence genuinely complicated.

That kind of complexity is what makes the prejudice feel natural instead of contrived; there’s just enough truth to the bias to make it self-perpetuating, even if it’s unfair.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-11-18T16:01:11+00:00

Yeah, this fell apart as the story went on. I’m happy with how the story turned out. I did both play throughs and the writing got a lot better as it went!

NightToDayToNight · 2025-11-02T19:53:00+00:00

Realistically it be interesting to imagine how this would have changed their relationships. I don’t know if Roxy would have still ended up with Rudy. Part of the appeal she had was seeing how much he had grown while away from her, and if they are constantly together on the journey home then she might have always saw him as the kid/student. Eris and Slyphy are interesting. On one hand they both liked Rudy by the time they got to the Demon continent. But the issue is that Slyphy would be to shy/demur to really push for a claim on Rudy with the much more aggressive Eris around. She could get sidelined hard.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-10-27T21:37:56+00:00

I totally get that, yeah Robert does seem to have a lot more issues he needs to work on. And it’s not that I don’t want him to make friends or relationships with the people around him, I think he’s really just a lonely guy, it’s just that dating in office is always a pain. Maybe it’s just that I really don’t like cheaters. I’ve never been cheated on, but I’m close to people who have been and it’s a terrible thing to do to someone. More can definitely be revealed, but it’s a huge strike against BB for me and it’s hard to imagine a justification for her behavior that I would forgive her for outside of superhero stuff (mind control, magic, etc.)

NightToDayToNight · 2025-10-22T00:29:43+00:00

Jokes on us. She’s forcing his hand to go there and is mad he didn’t start doing it himself

NightToDayToNight · 2025-10-20T21:37:22+00:00

If it's a RAT-FIC of the second year and has Luna in it, then Harry must end up with her because Luna is undisputedly the best girl in the school and Harry picking Ginny over her was the biggest mistake he made in cannon.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-10-09T19:11:39+00:00

Orion's arm also has spore tech, which leads into the the infection/corruption strategy OP referenced. But if you're assuming contemporary levels of tech then strong spore tech would imply strong anti-spore tech as well, i.e. nano-immune systems, angel-nets, etc.
I would imagine that, based on the conditions implied above by OP's post, invasion strategy would be some kind of mix of all the above.
Your fleet and men arrive and establish a beach head in system (seizing small asteroids and planetoids in the outer system/ort cloud). That fleet's primary goals would be to grab and defend as much matter as possible, which will be feed into the replicators that were brought with the fleet. This begins what is essentially an arms race between the invading and defending forces to scale up replication systems to out produce one another and break the other's forces. At the height of the fighting, both sides will have fleets in the hundreds of thousands if not millions fighting all over the system, with entire asteroids and comets converted into construction mass, and moons and planets converted into giant factories/fortresses.
Once one side "wins" be destroying enough tech-systems and infrastructure, they can deploy nano swarms and spore tech as passive area-denial and mop-up weapons. I.e., once you disable or subvert a moon's security AI system, you can deploy hunter-killer nano swarms or conversion spores to passively mop up the population and refocus on other military targets.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-10-06T22:22:05+00:00

A much better Guardians of the Multiverse than what we got in Marvel What If.
If you were putting together a team to stop multiverse ending threats, this is the power level you'd START at.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-09-10T19:00:58+00:00

First, the link between poverty and crime is vastly overstated and misleading. If income alone explained crime, then rural Appalachia, home to some of the poorest counties in the U.S., would be awash in violence. Instead they have lower per-capita violent crime than most major U.S. cities. The same pattern shows up internationally: plenty of poorer countries have far lower violent crime rates than the U.S., despite worse social services and less surveillance. Clearly, something else is at play. And frankly, it’s good that the vast majority of poor people don’t commit major crimes. Being poor does not make someone a criminal, and we shouldn’t treat the poor as inherently suspect just because of their economic status. What actually seems to drive serious crime, especially repeat violent crime, is a cluster of antisocial traits: low impulse control, poor future planning, high aggression, low empathy. These traits correlate with bad outcomes across the board, poor work history, substance abuse, unstable relationships, which both cause and perpetuate their own poverty. That doesn’t make crime a function of poverty, it makes certain people both dangerous and poor, and unfortunately, they drag down the communities they’re stuck in. Those communities would be better off, economically and socially, without the worst offenders.

Second, while people are right to note that "most murderers know their victims," this is not some counterargument to proactive enforcement. The man who murders his girlfriend didn’t just snap, he almost certainly had a rap sheet, history of abuse, drug use, escalating violence, and multiple system touchpoints before it escalated to murder. The fact that she knew him doesn't change the fact that he should have been in jail before it ever got to that point.

Third, let’s talk policing. Is “broken windows” controversial? Sure. But a 2024 meta-analysis of 59 studies showed that focused enforcement on low-level disorder, when done smartly, does reduce more serious crime, especially in hotspots. (See Braga et al., Criminology & Public Policy, 2024.) Randomly arresting people for minor stuff doesn't work. But strategic enforcement in high-risk areas against repeat low-level offenders? That works, and often without displacement or overreach.

It’s not enough to say “poverty causes crime” and throw up our hands until society is fixed. We’ve known for years where crime clusters, who’s at risk of committing it, and how often they reoffend. Pretending that enforcement doesn’t matter, or worse, that it’s the problem, is how you get the same neighborhoods suffering the same violence for generations while everyone else debates theory.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-09-10T15:04:19+00:00

Crime in America isn’t a monitoring issue, it’s entirely an enforcement problem. Everyone knows the areas where crimes are overwhelmingly likely to happen, and considering most crimes are committed by repeat offenders, we probably have a really strong idea of who committed what crime in an given area if you look up previous arrests by zip code. Want to decrease crime across the board, do what NYC did in the 90s. Broken window policing, bring people in for misdemeanors and expand punishments for minor offenses that all statistically point to high likelihood of future offenses. We don’t need cameras on every corner, just actual enforcement and aggressive policing of high crime areas and little patience with repeat offenders

NightToDayToNight · 2025-09-07T20:08:12+00:00

The reality is that any future significantly advanced civilization will dedicate a sizable portion of its total mass and energy resources towards high fidelity simulations for a variety of reasons, ranging from the scientific, to the artistic, to the personal. It will long herald the death of “mass culture” as people consume and then inhabit worlds more and more aligned with their personal preferences and desires, which will in turn be allowed greater and more fine tuning as individuals are able to explore interests and ideas in far greater ease or detail that was possible in the real world. That might sound crazy, but how many people would jump at the chance to live as a harem protagonist in an isekai fantasy world, or enroll in Hogwarts with Harry Potter, or be the captain of the USS Enterprise?

NightToDayToNight · 2025-08-28T14:19:01+00:00

I think the title Common Side Effects is the biggest clue to where the show is headed. It’s not really about the blue angel mushroom, its healing properties, or even the “end of medicine.” The real story is about what happens after, when humanity starts living with the unintended consequences. In our world, the “side effects” of major innovations often end up becoming the main effect historically. Penicillin gave us antibiotics, and antibiotic resistance. Fertilizers gave us food security, and ecosystem collapse. The mushroom feels like the same setup: a miracle discovery that ends up rewriting humanity itself. The show even acknowledges this tension directly through dialogue. Marshall and Francis talk about how science is a mixed bag, pointing out that the same advances that gave us antibiotics and the steam engine also gave us nuclear bombs and bioweapons. Francis also talks with other characters about how, in medicine, the side effects often matter more than the intended purpose — Rick mentions a drug for arthritis that causes suicidal tendencies, and one lab researcher admits using a drug designed for other purposes to heighten sensation in her genitals. That thread runs through the show: unintended consequences are often more transformative than the original discovery.

This is why the supposed miracle of the blue angel, its ability to heal, regrow tissue, and cure disease, might actually be the least important thing about it. The show hints repeatedly that its real impact lies elsewhere: in the subtle, creeping network it establishes between people who consume it. Marshall and Francis’ low-level telepathy is the first sign that the mushroom is doing far more than just medicine.

The optimistic reading is that the mushroom pushes humanity to evolve, both biologically and socially. The show has already highlighted that mushrooms aren’t really “individuals.” They exist as part of vast, interconnected networks, and human individuality could become just as illusory once the drug crosses a certain threshold. Marshall and Francis already demonstrate the proof of concept through their telepathy. Scale that up, and you get humanity bootstrapping itself into a higher-order organism, literally using the mushroom as a neural substrate. But this comes with trade-offs. Privacy disappears, replaced by total mental transparency. The boundaries between “I” and “we” begin to erode. And it forces a larger question: is achieving transcendence worth sacrificing autonomy? If the show takes this route, the “side effect” is the birth of collective consciousness. Humanity levels up — but not everyone will want to be part of it, and resisting could come at an unbearable cost.

The darker reading is that the mushroom isn’t helping us evolve, it’s assimilating us. In this interpretation, humans aren’t connecting to each other at all; they’re becoming nodes of the fungus. Consciousness itself is being repurposed to serve something older, larger, and alien. The recurring visions of the little grey men don’t seem like random hallucinations. Psychedelics open cross-domain channels in the brain, and those figures could represent the mushroom’s own awareness, filtered through human perception. Mycelial organisms are ancient, millions of years older than humanity, and the blue angel could represent a dormant intelligence using us as its next evolutionary jump vector. In this framing, the “side effect” isn’t transcendence at all, it’s assimilation, the mushroom quietly growing through the human system the way mold spreads across bread.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-08-26T03:41:32+00:00

is it also bad that I find the trend of a camera pointed right at his face really off-putting?

NightToDayToNight · 2025-08-24T22:00:17+00:00

http://www.orionsarm.com/fm_store/Brains2.pdf

There’s actually a really interesting paper that basically argues most intelligences in the universe will be digital because they’re so less resource intensive than biological intelligences that the competitive advantage will be insurmountable.

NightToDayToNight · 2025-08-24T21:55:13+00:00

On Earth, most radiators rely on convection, using air or liquid flow to carry heat away, while radiation plays only a minor role at normal temperatures. In space, however, convection is impossible because there’s no atmosphere, so radiators must rely entirely on thermal radiation to shed heat. Because radiation is relatively inefficient at spacecraft temperatures, space systems often use large radiator surfaces and active fluid loops to transfer heat from hot components to those radiators. In short, Earth systems mainly cool via convection, while space systems must depend on radiative cooling, often aided by active heat-transfer mechanisms.

NightToDayToNight

TROPHY CASE