• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

All things Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
Better get that resume tuned up...

A wave of layoffs is sweeping the US. Here are firms that have announced cuts so far, from Carvana to Netflix.​

  • In the first few months of 2022, a wave of layoffs swept across American business.
  • The cuts stem from slower business growth, paired with rising labor costs.
  • The layoffs cut across industries, from mortgage lending to digital-payment processing.

 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,952
Points
1,360
Better get that resume tuned up...

A wave of layoffs is sweeping the US. Here are firms that have announced cuts so far, from Carvana to Netflix.​

  • In the first few months of 2022, a wave of layoffs swept across American business.
  • The cuts stem from slower business growth, paired with rising labor costs.
  • The layoffs cut across industries, from mortgage lending to digital-payment processing.

A lot of Tech and a lot Service Industries. I always thought work from home would lead to job losses. If you can be outsourced, that means your job can be outsourced 😁

Plus companies have probably started amassing pretty good analytics now on remote vs office outputs.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,360
Points
1,360

Government data suggests the first two shots offer little protection against an Omicron infection — "There's almost no protection," Tam said earlier this month — and data from other countries similarly suggest the primary series offers negligible levels of protection against transmission.


I must have not been paying attention a year and a half ago when Dr. Tam first said “there’s almost no protection”….oh wait, she didn’t.

And Health Minister Duclos says:
Duclos said every Canadian adult should have had at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine in the last nine months. Canadians who got a shot last summer are no longer "up to date," he said, and they need to roll up their sleeves now for a booster.

To that end, Duclos said Canada will no longer call people who've had two doses "fully vaccinated." But he didn't say if the government's vaccine mandates will be adjusted to dictate people have three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine.

And people wonder why there is eroding trust in our Government??
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,155
Points
1,090
Until you have a large population with two shots, determining that a rapidly mutating virus may not be adequately prevented by only two shots is not surprising.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
956
Points
1,060
That came 24 hrs after he dropped the mandates at airports. No stops, if fully vaccinated. OBTW, fully vaxxed is now three shots.

I had the original first two shots, hardly ever wore a mask, didn't social distance among friends and never caught covid. With all the side effects rearing their heads, I highly doubt I'll take any more. I no longer pay attention what trudeau and his minions order us to do. While he may have won the vote. He wasn't given a mandate, by Canadians, to destroy our country or ignore our wishes. I can ignore him just as easy as he ignores us.
 

Blackadder1916

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,167
Points
1,160


I must have not been paying attention a year and a half ago when Dr. Tam first said “there’s almost no protection”….oh wait, she didn’t.

And Health Minister Duclos says:


And people wonder why there is eroding trust in our Government??

I'll agree that Dr Tam does lack the ability of precognition; she probably missed that class during med school and residency, shame on her. And shame on Covid for evolving into different variants including "Omicron" and its now emerging sub-variants that challenge previous vaccine regimes. If only she had known in December 2020 or January 2021 (a year and a half ago depending on how loose one interprets it) that "Omicron" would be first reported on 24 November 2021, she could have made the prediction that booster shots of vaccines (that had, in most cases, only received emergency use authorization in Dec 2020) would be necessary.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
The NDP are nothing if not predictable, and are experts at taking advantage of a gigantic crisis to build their base. I assume that similar trends might be seen nationally.

But the time to pay the Piper is coming ;)

Tracking B.C.’s industry employment dynamics through the pandemic – and the public sector’s oversize role in job creation​


With the provincial unemployment rate hovering near record lows and the total number of people employed in the province up nearly 100,000 since the start of the pandemic, in aggregate the labour market has mostly recovered.

But three of every four new jobs created in the province since the start of the pandemic have been in the public sector.

As the final figure below shows, private sector employment (consisting of paid employees plus those who are self-employed) is well below its pre-pandemic growth trend.

For a more complete and durable economic recovery, job creation in the private sector will need to accelerate. Relying on the public sector to drive and sustain employment growth is not a viable long-term strategy for the province.

 

Retired AF Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
225
Points
710
If Canada's air travel industry wasn't already in enough trouble, this news is sure not going to make it any better.

Mandatory random COVID-19 testing for fully vaccinated air travellers resuming next week

Darren Major · CBC News · Posted: Jul 14, 2022 9:17 AM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago


The federal government has announced that it will be resuming mandatory random COVID-19 testing for international travellers arriving at four major airports next week.

Ottawa had initially suspended random testing for fully vaccinated travellers last month after airport authorities urged the government to drop the program, saying it was causing long delays at airports, although testing remained in place for those not considered fully vaccinated.

But fully vaccinated travellers will once again be subject to mandatory testing, although the government is moving the testing out of airports to nearby off-site locations, such as pharmacies. Travellers can also book a virtual self-swab appointment.

Fully vaccinated travellers arriving in Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver and Montreal could be subject to random testing starting Tuesday

To qualify as a fully vaccinated traveller, a person must have received two doses of a recognized vaccine (like Pfizer, Moderna or Astra-Zeneca) or one shot of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

Detecting new strains

The government maintains that random testing for air travellers is necessary to help detect new COVID-19 variants.
"As demand for travel increases across the world, today's announcement marks an important step in our progress to streamline testing processes outside our airports while preventing the further spread of COVID-19," Transport Minister Omar Alghabra said in a press release.

Those selected for random testing must complete the test within one day of their arrival, the government says.
A spokesperson for Greater Toronto Airport Authority (GTAA), the organization that runs Toronto's Pearson International Airport, said they were "pleased" that testing was moving offsite.

The GTAA had been one of the most vocal critics of the government prior to the suspension of random testing. The spokesperson said stopping testing at the airport has reduced delays. "The temporary pause in mandatory random testing at airports was helpful as it resulted in a smoother experience for arriving passengers," the spokesperson said in a statement.

Link
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,195
Points
1,010
I've heard that what they're really doing is using the pretext of random testing to secretly and non-randomly microscopically tag people so their movements can be tracked.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
956
Points
1,060
“People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both”

― Benjamin Franklin
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,684
Points
1,060
People fearful of the government being able to track them and posting about it on social media via their cellphone are my favourites.

Most of them are probably beneath the effort but...


Canada’s national police force admits use of spyware to hack phones


The RCMP says it needs to use malware because encryption has made surveillance “exponentially more difficult.”
OTTAWA, Ont. — In a “remarkable” disclosure, Canada’s national police force has described for the first time how it uses spyware to infiltrate mobile devices and collect data, including by remotely turning on the camera and microphone of a suspect’s phone or laptop.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,388
Points
1,260
Yup, real funny guy Bruce. Just fucking hilarious. If it doesn't fit your wheelhouse, the other guy becomes your foil.
Actually, even if it fits in my wheelhouse the other guy becomes my foil.

We are living in the most prosperous, safest, time in human history here in Canada.......I won't apologize even a little for believing that we have it so good and yet there are those who believe we've never had it so friggin' bad.

Left, right, whomever
Oppression Obsession
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
5,188
Points
1,110
Most of them are probably beneath the effort but...


Canada’s national police force admits use of spyware to hack phones


The RCMP says it needs to use malware because encryption has made surveillance “exponentially more difficult.”
OTTAWA, Ont. — In a “remarkable” disclosure, Canada’s national police force has described for the first time how it uses spyware to infiltrate mobile devices and collect data, including by remotely turning on the camera and microphone of a suspect’s phone or laptop.
I can't speak to the techniques or technology, but I can definitely speak to the legalities of this, and maybe ease some concerns, if anyone is willing to tolerate any more 'law nerd' out of me.

As a rule of thumb, there's a lot of stuff police in Canada cannot do arbitrarily. They cannot simply choose to enter a residence and look for drugs. They cannot simply tell a bank to hand over bank records to look for evidence of money laundering. They cannot force a person to give a DNA sample. They cannot sneak into a business and search it and not tell the owners or tenants til months later.

Of of these things need to be done sometimes for investigations, and so police seek permission from the court to do them. A Search Warrant is permission from a Justice of the Peace (JP) or a judge to search a place. A production order is an order to someone holding third party documents, records or data to hand them over to police.

To get any of these, a police officer has to convince a JP or a judge that the legal requirements are met. At the very lowest end, I can believe an offense has been or will be committed, and that it would help the investigation (super low threshold) if TD Bank confirmed for me who holds a give bank account number.

Let's say I get that and I want the actual account statements to see transactions- I have to convince a JP that I have reasonable grounds to believe an offence has been or will be committed, and that those documents or data will afford evidence of the offence (higher threshold).

If I want to then go into the business and search for stolen property that I think is in the back, I need to convince a JP that I have reasonable grounds to believe there is a specific thing or things in a specific place that will provide evidence of a specific offence. Getting a bit tougher still. When I execute that search warrant, the people whose place it is get a copy of it and get told about it, it's not sneaky.

Some warrants can only come from a judge. If I want to search a place covertly with delayed notification of the residents/tenants, for instance, I need to convince a judge that the investigative technique I want to use will provide information concerning the offence, and that it's in the best interest of the administration of justice to do it, and that no other type of judicial authorization can let me do what I want to do. That same type of 'General Warrant' can authorize a lot of different stuff, but with the much higher oversight of coming only from a judge, and me being able to demonstrate why it's really necessary to do something probably quite intrusive.

All the way at the top of the mountain for 'hardest warrants to get' are warrants that authorize the Interception of Private Communication. These are also known as a 'wiretap' or a 'Part VI' (They're in Part VI of the Criminal Code). Any interception of private communication by police must have either a warrant, or be in exigent circumstances, generally where it's immediately necessary to preserve life.

I'll skip over intercepts where one party consents, because that's not what's being spoken of in this article. Malware installed on someone's mobile device for the purpose of intercepting their communications is, well, an interception of private communications. A Part VI authorization is needed. To get one of those, police have to convince a judge of several things:
  • An offence has been or will been committed that wiretaps are permitted for. You can't wiretap every offence out there.
  • It's in the best interest of justice to do the wiretap (this is a check on intrusion into privacy)
  • Except for certain terrorism or organized crime offences, that it's an investigative necessity because other steps have been tried and failed, or are unlikely to succeed (this 'investigative necessity' is unique to wiretaps and is a REALLY high bar to cross)
Police also have to specifically tell the judge:
  • What type of communications may be intercepted
  • Who may be intercepted (if known)
  • Generally, where the communications will be intercepted
  • The period of time that the authorization remains valid (no more than 60 days without a judge's renewal except for certain terrorism or organized crime offences- a check on overly lengthy intercepts)
  • If interceptions have been requested and granted or denied on this investigation previously (a check on judge shopping or slopping investigation)
Before a judge even looks at it, it has to be reviewed and signed by a crown lawyer specifically trained and authorized as an 'agent' to review and sign these, to make sure a lawyer well versed in prosecutions is part of making sure the request itself is lawful and sound.

Legally, police installing malware on a device to intercept communications is basically the same as wiretapping a phone. It's super hard to get, and it's very costly and resource intensive to run one of those. Only major investigations get wiretaps.

Just caveating what I've written here, I haven't done a non-consent intercept warrant yet. While I spend most of my work time writing judicial authorizations these days; I'm not yet trained to do these. It's a tough course to get and a tough course to pass, and investigations where they're employed are limited (though when you have a wire up on a file it can be really friggin' cool, and you're probably working something worthy).

I hope this sheds some light. Sorry; tough to make this concise.
 
Top