Swipe Right IF You Like This Post - A Candid Comment About Dating Apps

 

Whether you are married, single, or in a relationship, you may be tempted or have logged on to a dating app somewhere along the line. Never mind the smirk and denial. Most of you have done it. And, yes, so have I. There are a lot of apps out there that cater to just about anyone interested in finding a partner. Some are geared to the LGBTQ2+ community. Others are segmented into groups like farmers or Christians, BBWs, and seniors. Some apps are meant to inspire a long-term commitment, others for the so-called hookup or friends-with-benefits culture.   You name it, it's out there. There are some plus and minuses here that need to be looked at, which is what this article is about. So read on, and if you like this article, virtually swipe right by sharing it.

There are some good things and some bad things to consider regarding the online dating world. So here are some pros/cons and tips to consider.

• Pro:  Most profiles have a photo on them, so you get a sneak peek at what the person looks like.
• Con: Many profile photos are outdated or of animals and nature and sometimes include other people or objects.
• Tip: Use an updated photo or photos of yourself. Make sure they are of you, not your pet or trees or you with a bunch of people. A potential date wants to see what you look like; they are interested in something other than a pic of Pookie the dog, or a tree. Also, posting a photo of you in a group violates privacy laws. If you post a group photo, cover the faces of the other people to protect their identity. And if you want to include Pookie, take a picture of you with your pet.

• Pro: Most profiles have an introduction and an about me section. This allows the person to share a brief summary of what they are looking for in a partner and what interests they may have.
• Con: The introduction section and about me are poorly written or contain too much, too little, or off-putting comments and rants in many profiles.
• Tip: Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Putting up an introduction that says something like spoil me rotten, or No scammers will turn people off. Also, writing a book or almost nothing will cause a swipe to the left to avoid that. Ranting about scammers and your medical conditions and coming across a laundry list of what you want will also get you an auto swipe left. Write one paragraph. Include your interests and hobbies, and for the introduction, write something that will spark a conversation. A good example is something like this. Sunny days are meant to be spent with sunny people. While it is okay to mention a disability or medical condition, the goal is to attract someone, so don't overdo it with a detailed medical report. And finally, keep the rant to yourself. If you are that angry, it is best to avoid online dating until you have cooled down. Yes, there are fake profiles, but coming across like a cop who can sniff out a scam will not be welcomed by anyone.

• Pro: There is a dating app to suit what you're looking for. You name it, you can find it.
• Con: Many people create profiles on multiple apps without understanding the intended audience.
• Tip: Read the app name, look at the description, and know what you are getting into. If an app title reads like The Dom House or  My Friend with Benefits. If you get my drift, it is a safe bet you are dealing with people who like whips and chains or a person who wants to be friends but also wants to put their shoes under your bed. So, read the title and read the description before creating a profile.

• Pro: There are a lot of really lovely and interesting people you can connect with.
• Conn: There are some really creepy people on dating apps.
• Tip: Trust your intuition. If the profile looks too good to be true, it is probably a swipe left. On the other hand, you may be delightfully surprised and find a fascinating person. Trust your instincts and also strike up a conversation with a potential date. People are looking for hookups; this is a very risky thing to do. Only do it with planning. Make sure you protect yourself. If you plan to get busy, it is safer to hook up with someone you know. Always let someone know where you are and set up a time for a check-in with them, or let them know often where you are and your next move. Also, if you did not ask and you start to receive unwanted communication or photos of naughty bits, ditch the person and report the profile. And yes, if need be, call the police for help. It does not matter if you are a guy or a gal. Creepy is not cool.

Jennifer Viveros and Dr. David Schramm wrote an interesting article about the pros and cons of dating. In the piece Pros and Cons of Online Dating in Later Life, they focused on older adults.  It covers the subject in more detail than I could have.  There are some other resources on the net that you can also review for yourself. You should take care and be informed of the positives and negatives, risks and benefits of online dating, and the associated apps.  Also, consider the traditional when it comes to dating.  Friends, family, and visiting places of interest can sometimes yield connections.  Even your workplace offers an opportunity to find a partner. But you really want to be careful while doing that on the job.  In short, explore the options, know the lay of the land, and plan accordingly.  Most of all, have fun.  Thanks for reading this post.  Please like and share it with others and send feedback below.  I will see you in the next edition.  Cheers.

Candid Comment - The Big Oooooh - Montreal Olympic Stadium

 

As it is known, the big O is Montreal's Stade Olympique, the 1.6 Billion dollar structure that draws awe and derision. Why is that? After all, the stadium still gets used today, though no significant tenant hosts events there. The Montreal Alouettes play at a different location, and the Expos became the Nationals and headed to Washington to become the Nationals. Some soccer events are held there; you can see a concert there. So what is the fuss? Why is this place considered beautiful and ugly at the same time? The answer lies in the fact that the stadium needed to be better built. Specifically, the roof. It has torn thousands of times and can not be trusted to hold 1.2 inches or about 3 Centimetres of water from rain or a significant show fall. In short, it was poorly built. Yet it is considered the 3rd most popular place for tourists visiting Quebec.

My take on this, it's a joke and a bad one at that. Besides the roof problems, there is the concrete issue; there have been several incidents where slabs have fallen. The tower, also a feature of the stadium, is the tallest inclined structure in the world; it has had a fire, and the cost ballooned to a point where it took 30  years to pay for the work. And what did Montrealers end up with? This, 

take a close look. What do you see? Take a real close look. It was designed by Roger Taillibert, a French architect. What is supposed to be a circular design looks more like a toilet bowl.

I believe the French architect who designed the stadium was trying to send a message to Quebec. Your not like us; you're not even close to being like us. Since the 60s, Quebec has attempted to assert itself as distinct, specifically along its cultural makeup. The 70s saw the rise of separatism, and in 76, the PQ came to power, and ever since then, Quebec has been drastically altered. During this time, Jean Drapeau, the mayor of Montreal, was busy coming up with big projects like the Montreal Metro and Expo 67. He also decided to throw Montreal into the hat for the Olympics in 76. Well, Montreal got them.

The point was to showcase Montreal and Quebec as modern, developed, and worldly.  It was anything but superb.  Canada did not win a Gold medal; 29 countries boycotted the games, and Quebec's provincial flag was spotted during the closing ceremony.  It's illegal to fly a flag more prominent than the Olympic flag and one not from a country; Quebec is not a country.  I can not compare this with the Hitler Olympics, but the idea was to show a modern French Quebec, an independent pseudo-country.  That did not turn out to be the case at all.  The creator of the stadium may have had a gut feeling Quebec was going for it. They wanted to show themselves off as a country.  So, he created this monstrosity to reflect his thoughts on the matter.  And what you see is this giant toilet in the middle of Montreal.

The term monstrosity is strong.  I have been in the stadium once.  It was for an Alouettes game back in the '70s.  From the ground, it looks impressive and really cool looking. It's not so remarkable when you see it from above, like in the above photo.  For this reason, there is both love and hate for this building.  The kicker is that this blunder will still be standing decades into the future, a reminder that Quebec is not France 2.0 and is still and probably will be for a long time to come a pseudo country, nothing more, nothing less. 

Thankfully, there are some positives.  The stadium has been paid for, and it is, as noted, still used and, in the past, has been put to good use.  The Sun reports that there has been some good usage of the facility, though it is still one of the most notable for what went wrong and the lingering effects. So enjoy if you want; just don't go near there during snow storms or rain, and be aware of the possibility of falling concrete.  

The Most Watched YouTube De doo doo doo Baby Shark Dance

Everyone on YouTube is vying for views, including me. So the question is, what will get people to view your content? A catchy title, great graphics, and an awesome subject. Yes, the elements of a good video for YouTube are graphics, content, and a title that grabs the viewer's attention. It also helps to have a robust promotional element, like a social media presence and ads. In the end, though, the content matters the most.

One YouTube video created by a Korean company has managed to merge content with the elements of the items mentioned above. Drum roll, please. A kids' video, yes, a video made for kids. Baby Shark Dance has, since its upload in 2016, the video has been viewed 13 billion times. You read right, 13 BILLION. This 2-minute short has also allowed PinkFong, the company behind the video, to get revenue from the views as the video has gone so viral it hit all the marks for YouTube monetization. In short, it is a mega cash cow for the company. It is so simple in its concept, and it really works. The content is catchy, a song about a baby shark and its family combined with simple graphics. But really, what makes this video and song so attractive?

It's that catchy do-do-do-do baby shark lyric. All through the tune, you hear the do-do-do do. Known as an earworm, this kind of song is designed to get into the brain and stick around for a bit. It has been proven in studies that at least once a week, humans will get sucked into an earworm. Think about that, at least once per week. You know this is true. Come on, face up to it. We all get an earworm or two stuck in the brain.

La vida Loca - Ricky Martin
Barby Girl - Aqua
De doo doo De da da - The police

And others are all songs that dive into our heads and stick around. That is the magic that has made Baby Shark Dance successful. It's the earworm effect, along with the graphics, title, social networking, and articles like this one. So, should we all dive in and do a video like this one? Nope, and here is why. Your channel and the content should be unique, your style and your content. Trying to mimic this video will only work for some, and one is quite enough; thank you very much.

So do do do your own thing, and who knows, you might be able to top the 13 billion one day. Remember, be unique, use good graphics and a title that will attract an audience and promote your work. That is the best way to be successful in anything you do on YouTube.

Candid Comment - Monopolies

For the record, a monopoly is not necessarily the cause of inflation; other factors are involved, but they do not help lower it either. In Canada, monopolies are fast becoming a problem. In telecom, banking, and retail, they are making a mess of the economy because they refuse to allow competitors to compete against them. Then again, can you blame them. Who would not want to have the lion's share of the cellular services or food market? We even see monopolies in areas like housing. Money often, but not always, trumps morality and fairness. There is another problem that monopolies create. They tend to ignore and, in some cases, outright disrespect the people who come to them to do business.

Recently food chains have instituted the practice of receipt checks. The claim is to prevent revenue loss due to theft. To be fair, there is a problem with shoplifting in stores, which can affect consumer costs. Having said that, being blatantly disrespectful of the people coming to the store to buy needed food is not the answer, especially when earnings have hit record highs. But, these giants don't give a dam about the customer; that is the sentiment being expressed these days. They know they have a monopoly and can do as they wish; no one, especially in government, is doing anything about it. To be fair, there is a case for the check on the receipt. While not legally required, it does help to ensure you as a customer did not get overcharged and that you have all the items you bought, and it does prevent or lower theft which can cause prices to go up down the road. The issue is how this all started, how it appears to the customer, and how it looks in the face of record profits and the strong, and I do mean a strong belief that consumers are being gouged. This belief is also felt concerning bank fees, phone and internet costs, and even gas pricing. The root of all of this is little to no competition in Canada. The argument, and it is a load of crap, is that our population is too small to support other players. It comes down to a federal government and their provincial counterparts turning a blind eye to the problem or just throwing a band-aid on it. Frankly, they are scared; they know they would lose donor dollars if they dared to break up monopolies.

But, you see, we must do this in Canada. It's time for a significant change in how competition works in Canada. It is time to put the foot down and make it clear that government elected by the people runs the show, not the corporations. Now let's be fair. Some corporations are fair-minded, run well, and positively contribute to the economy. In short, not all corporations are evil. Then again, what defines an evil corporation? The evil is not the entity, but what they are doing or not doing. The evil is also what is allowed by those entrusted to not allow it.  

By the way, not all monopolies are bad. Just as not all corporations are evil. Same for the government. There is no room for competition in certain parts of the economy; thus, a monopoly that sets or fixes a price can be healthy for the economy and consumers.  

The problem, which is a big one here in Canada, is that we have allowed them to grow too big. They have too much power, and the government does little to fix that. It will be up to the next PM to do something to open up the markets for things like food, housing, telecom, and banking in a regulated and fair manner. This also applies to the media. In short, too much monopoly and not enough diversity is making our lives difficult, and it's no longer fair, and NO, it does not suck to be us. We matter. The middle and lower class matter. So to the next person wanting to be PM, fix this, end this, and do it soon. We do not have to take it in the butt any longer, and we will not go away until you do.

Source material:

Article from The Conversation.

The Charted Professionals of Canada website has an excellent and sobering article about monopolies in Canada.  They have a second article about this topic that is just as solid as the first.

Got something to say?  You should actually have something to say, and you should convey your thoughts to the PM. Here is the contact form to send him your thoughts on monopolies.  You can also contact Pierre Poilievre and Jagmeet Singh.

Competition Bureau of Canada.  This body regulates completion. Some argue it could do it better. Tell them what you think.

Candid Comment - Coke In The White House Not the Drink

The Secret Service has closed an investigation into a bizarre incident involving cocaine that was snuck into the white house. Ok, you can not fly near the building without risking being blown out of the sky. If you jump the fence, you will get jumped by security lickedy split. Point a weapon at it, and a dude or dudette will put a round between your eyes in a second. But, apparently, you can sneak dope into the place and not get caught.  

Then again, and this is pure speculation on my part, the FBI and Secret Service may still be looking into the matter but pretending to close the case while still looking into it. Just a thought. I'm not planning to do it, but if I were going to sneak dope into the white house, I would choose Viagara. Joe may need help with, you know, that thing.

Humor aside, the fact that a drug that is highly addictive, not to mention illegal, got into one of the most secure buildings in the world puts into question how secure the facility is. That said, it is for sure that the procedures, policies, and day-to-day operations will have to be reviewed to ensure there is no repeat performance.  

For the person who did this, you got lucky.  If the investigation is indeed closed.  To anyone thinking I wanna try that, ummm, don't.  Like I said, humor aside, it may be funny, but it would not be so fun if you got caught. 

I will see you in the following Candid Comment or Conversation.  Thanks for reading.

Candid Comment - Titanic Claims 5 More Lives

Hours after the submersible Titan descended to explore the wreck of the Titanic, the ship lost contact with the surface, and a frantic search began. Yesterday the search effort came to a stretching halt at a debris site, and it became clear that the Titan had a structural failure that instantly killed its five passengers. First, condolences are to be extended to the families of the deceased crew. This is a tragic end to what should have been an event of a lifetime for the men who ventured to the site of the Titanic wreck. Instead, it will be remembered as a mission that ended with deadly speed in what appears to be a sudden failure of the hull.

Reports suggest that this was more than just a lets go down and look at the Titanic trip. The crew went down to the site to run experiments and explore the wreck, as has been done in the past. However, in this case, something went very wrong. The team never actually got to the wreck of the Titanic.

So what happens now? An investigation of the accident would be in order here. There have been suggestions of design flaws and other instances of lost communication with the surface. James Cameron, a filmmaker and deep sea diver himself, has commented on the tragedy. In his summation, he points out that since the 60s, there has not been an accident like this and that the design of the Titan may be to blame. Actor William Shatner flew to space. He knew the risks and also had an expectation of what it would be like in space. It was not what he expected.

When I looked in the opposite direction, into space, there was no mystery, no majestic awe to behold . . . all I saw was death.

I saw a cold, dark, black emptiness. It was unlike any blackness you can see or feel on Earth. It was deep, enveloping, all-encompassing. I turned back toward the light of home. I could see the curvature of Earth, the beige of the desert, the white of the clouds and the blue of the sky. It was life. Nurturing, sustaining, life. Mother Earth. Gaia. And I was leaving her.

Everything I had thought was wrong. Everything I had expected to see was wrong. - William Shatner.

Diving into the depths has the same effect. It's dark, cold, and dangerous. Just like rockets, the ships that go beneath the waters need to be durable, and the materials used to build them need to be tested for safety not just at one time but regularly to ensure that there are no hidden faults. Aircraft, for example, are routinely inspected for structural integrity, and maintenance is a regular occurrence. There is a gold certification standard in the submersible community, and when followed, the procedures are used to ensure safe and sound work. Accidents can happen even with tests and certifications, but, in this case, the testing may have been less than robust, and the Titan may not have been certified to dive as deep as it did.  

There is an old expression. Curiosity killed the cat. But resurrection brought it back. It means that being curious can be dangerous, and taking a risk unnecessarily is not good. A good result is enough satisfaction to take the risk or repeated risks. 

Exploring a graveyard, which is what the Titanic is, is risky. While there may be some value in the venture, going to the wreck of the Titanic should be rare, for scientific research only and done using state-of-the-art equipment. In general, the resting place of some 1500 people should be left alone untouched and visited, as noted above, very rarely and only by a select few and family of those who died aboard her. Nature
, in this case, water has sent a message. That message is, leave us alone. That is what we should do with the Titanic.

 

Candid Comment - Bill 96 Not The Way To Encourage French Usage

Most politicians are bright people. And generally, they are well intended. This said, there are a lot of really foolish men and women in office who do and say very dumb things while in office.

Francois Legault, the premier of Quebec, thinks it is a good idea to halt the decline of French in Quebec by using the levers of power to dictate what language people can communicate in with government agencies at all levels. Bill 96 is supposed to support and strengthen Bill 101. The laws are intended to ensure the French language remains strong and is used over all other languages in Quebec.  

The body that is tasked with this is the OQLF, sometimes referred to as the language police. They are generally not welcomed by businesses. In fact, the inspectors are widely seen as rude and unprofessional.  Though to be fair, it is probably not the case with all of them.  The agency gets thousands of complaints yearly from people, mostly about how they are served or not served in French.  The critical question is this.  Is French on the decline in Canada and Quebec? The answer is actually YES.  Recent reports in the media, like Global News, point to a recent report by Census Canada that showed a drop in the use of French to 19.2%, down from 20% in 2018.  Many factors are contributing to the decline, including immigration.  To see the full report, visit Census Canada. Ok, sow French is on the decline, and so is English in Canada.  It can be said that English should and most likely will not die in Canada, whereas French could.  That is why Quebec has adopted the charter of the French Language, which came into force in 1977 and is now being bolstered with Bill 96, An Act Respecting French as the Official and Common Language of Quebec.  The problem is what it allows public servants and municipal employees to do: flat-out deny service in English.  Except in health care and public safety, but even in these areas, it is possible to be refused service.  And it is already happening.  The Montreal Gazette reports even those allowed service have been denied service. 

There are Four Groups allowed to receive service in English in Quebec.

• People who only corresponded with the municipal administration in English prior to May 13, 2021.
• People who have been declared eligible for English language schooling.
• Indigenous communities and Inuit.
• Immigrants for the first six months after they arrive and people who live outside Quebec.

What a ridiculous thing to do.  Essentially allowing people paid by taxpayer dollars to deny service based on language.  It's offensive, racist, and unsafe.  In 2007 Robert Dziekański was tasered to death by members of the RCMP, part of the issue was that he did not know English, and no one thought or did such a lousy job trying to find someone who spoke Polish to avoid the incident.  There were other factors, but the core reason was communication or the lack of it.  This kind of thing could happen in Quebec.  Other errors could become pronounced in hospitals and nursing homes because of language barriers.  A person from another part of the world or Canada could get lost or taken advantage of due to not knowing the language.  English is a universal language. Even in countries like France, it is spoken.  This said, learning French or at least having an app like Google Translate or Reverso may help. The best way to learn is to learn the language through a course. The Government of Quebec has a site that you can use to find a good course.  It would also be a good idea for the servants of the people in Quebec to speak English.  

There is a right and wrong way to encourage the use of a language; Quebec's approach needs to be revised. Even the Parti Quebecois, an ardent proponent of Quebec sovereignty and advocate for protecting the French language, think it a bad bill. Pascal Bérubé, with the Parti Québécois, whose MNAs voted against Bill 96, was quoted saying, "The measures are not essential because they don't make any difference. It doesn't create the desire to live in or even learn French." "It doesn't promote French." "It gives the impression of doing something, but we are not in favor of this."

Promoting and protecting the French language is one thing. Denying citizens who pay taxes service in another language when you can is another.  And it needs to be said Quebec is a province, and Canada is a bilingual country.  That said, provinces like Ontario and Manitoba may want to consider doing what New Brunswick has done by making it official. They are the only true bilingual province in Canada.

Mr. Bérubé has it right; no one favors this except the CAQ.  And in a culture that is supposed to be guided by respect and solidarity, this nonsense only damages the reputation of Quebec's francophones.  I learned that the French pride themselves on being respectful. Allowing officials to be rude and deny service based on language is repugnant, no matter what language they speak or are supposed to officially speak.