All of this user’s content is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

  • 7 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: October 20th, 2023
  • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksOPtoCanada@lemmy.ca•Hypothetically, if Quebec were to separate from Canada, do you think that Canada should remain bilingual?English
    83·
    5 days ago

    You know that New Brunswick and Ontario have a bunch of francophone right ?

    Yes: 30.3% of New Brunswickers are French-speaking [1.1.1] (34.0% bilingual [1.1.3]), which is 0.6% of the Canadian population [3], and 3.8% of Ontarians are French-speaking [1.1.2] (10.8% bilingual [1.1.4]), which is 1.3% of the total Canadian population [4].

    References
    1. Type: Website. Title: “Statistics on official languages in Canada”. Publisher: “Government of Canada”. Published (Edited): 20240814. Accessed: 2025-12-03T02:10Z. URI: https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/official-languages-bilingualism/publications/statistics.html.
      1. Type: Table. Location: Table 1.
        1. 30.3% (231 850 Canadians) of New Brunswickers are French-speaking.
        2. 3.8% (533 560 Canadians) of Ontarians are French-speaking.
        3. 34.0% (250 120 Canadians) of New Brunswickers are bilingual.
        4. 10.8% (1 519 365 Canadians) of Ontarians are bilingual.
    2. Type: Article. Title: “Canada’s population clock (real-time model)”. Publisher: “Statistics Canada”. Accessed: 2025-12-03T02:16Z. URI: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2018005-eng.htm.
      • The population of Canada is 41 744 210.
    3. Type: Meta.
      • 231 850 New Brunswickers are French-speaking [1.1.1]. The population of Canada is 41 744 210 [2]. Therefore, French-speaking New Brunswickers account for approximately 0.6% ((231 850/41 744 210)×100 ~= 0.6%) of Canadians.
    4. Type: Meta.
      • 533 560 Ontarians are French-speaking [1.1.2]. The population of Canada is 41 744 210 [2]. Therefore, French-speaking Ontarians account for approximately 1.3% ((533 560/41 744 210)×100 ~= 1.3%) of Canadians.
  • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.workstoFediverse@lemmy.world•Happy #GlobalSwitchDayEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Signal isn’t federated [1][2][3.1]; it’s decentralized [1][2][3.2]. Though, for all practical purposes, I would generally argue that it’s centralized.

    References
    1. Signal-Server. signalapp. Github. Published: 2025-01-31T15:34:14.000Z. Accessed: 2025-02-01T09:24Z. https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server.
      • This is the source code for the server that Signal uses.
    2. “Signal (software)”. Wikipedia. Published: 2025-01-06T09:34Z. Accessed: 2025-02-1T09:30Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software).
      • ¶“Architecture”. ¶“Servers”.

        Signal relies on centralized servers that are maintained by Signal Messenger. In addition to routing Signal’s messages, the servers also facilitate the discovery of contacts who are also registered Signal users and the automatic exchange of users’ public keys. […]

    3. “Reflections: The ecosystem is moving”. moxie0. Signal Blog. Published: 2016-05-10. Accessed: 2025-02-01T09:40Z. https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/.
      1. ¶5. to ¶“Stuck in time”. ¶3-6

        One of the controversial things we did with Signal early on was to build it as an unfederated service. Nothing about any of the protocols we’ve developed requires centralization; it’s entirely possible to build a federated Signal Protocol-based messenger, but I no longer believe that it is possible to build a competitive federated messenger at all. […] [interoperable protocols] [have] taken us pretty far, but it’s undeniable that once you federate your protocol, it becomes very difficult to make changes. And right now, at the application level, things that stand still don’t fare very well in a world where the ecosystem is moving. […] Early on, I thought we’d federate Signal once its velocity had subsided. Now I realize that things will probably never slow down, and if anything the velocity of the entire landscape seems to be steadily increasing.

      2. ¶“Stuck in time”. “Federation and control”. ¶6.

        An open source infrastructure for a centralized network now provides almost the same level of control as federated protocols, without giving up the ability to adapt. If a centralized provider with an open source infrastructure ever makes horrible changes, those that disagree have the software they need to run their own alternative instead. It may not be as beautiful as federation, but at this point it seems that it will have to do.