Thursday, July 23, 2026
Saturday, July 4, 2026
Pipeline Folly - No Courage, No Plan and a Cost Plus Reaction.
CLICK HERE - My Professional Website
I have witnessed our government commit numerous blunders and waste vast sums of money. Worst of all, I have seen it pilfer our grandchildren’s future through relentless borrowing. Time and again, the government fails its fundamental responsibilities—from national defence to disaster preparation. For fifty years, experts have warned us to diversify our markets, yet we remain dangerously dependent on a single trading partner. Our leaders govern without a long-term plan, completely failing to build cross-party consensus on critical trade and energy policies. Nowhere is this lack of foresight more glaring than the recent decision to expand a pipeline’s capacity that was literally just finished.
If the Trans Mountain pipeline is the answer to greater
volume today, it should have been built to handle that volume from the start.
Instead, we are digging up the exact same ground just two years after
completing the last expansion. This isn't planning; it is a frantic reaction. It
proves we have a government more obsessed with political survival and
re-election than the long-term well-being of our country. This kind of folly
would be funny if it weren’t so terrifying.
Canada desperately needs an efficient way to get both oil
and gas to global markets. We need proper processing facilities at the
pipeline's end to get these resources ship-ready. Prince Rupert is a
world-class, deep-water port that sits completely underutilized. Why are we
routing pipelines into parts of British Columbia that already have high shipping
traffic? Prince Rupert is the closest North American port to Asia—three days
closer than Vancouver. From there, tankers head straight out to the open ocean,
away from our coast. Instead, the government chose Roberts Bank, forcing
tankers to navigate a crowded waterway just to reach blue water. Prince Rupert
offers undeniable practical advantages, but our government would rather
squander them than confront political friction.
Some thinking from 2015 - wish we had got on with things
Rural British Columbia is hurting economically. We have a
duty to bring meaningful, lasting development to these regions, and a pipeline
to Prince Rupert would revitalize the entire northwestern economy.
Instead, Canadians face the shuddering prospect of another
government-“de-risked” project. The Trans Mountain pipeline began with a $6
billion private sector budget. Today, its actual commercial value is roughly
$14 billion, but it cost taxpayers a staggering $35 billion. The TMX project
was a financial catastrophe—massively over budget and years late. How can
Canada progress when we refuse to learn from our mistakes? We are simply
stumbling from one fiscal disaster to the next.
This “de-risking” process is code for making Canadians
overpay for government incompetence. It is entirely unnecessary. What we
actually need is for the government to step up and govern. Leaders must have
the courage to declare a project in the national interest and draft specific
legislation to get it built. Better yet, they should legislate permanent
certainty into our general regulatory process. We must be a country that can
get things done. We must stop frittering away billions of dollars.
The Liberal government held the perfect hand—enjoying a
functional lack of opposition in the House of Commons and the backing of most
Canadians to do the right thing. Yet when it came time to act, they lacked the
will to press forward.
Saturday, May 23, 2026
Artificial Intelligence and the Threshold for a National Emergency - Letter to the Privy Council
May 23, 2026
Neil E.
Thomson
825 Alview
Crescent
Kamloops, BC V2B 6C5
The
Honourable Dominic LeBlanc
President of
the King’s Privy Council
Canada Privy
Council Office
85 Sparks
Street, Room 1000
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A3
Email: dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca
Minister,
RE: Artificial Intelligence and the Threshold for a National Emergency
I am
writing to express an urgent and evidence‑based concern regarding the
accelerating risks posed by advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems to
Canada’s sovereignty, security, and economic stability. Based on recent
developments, it is my assessment that Canada is approaching—if not already within—the
scope of a national emergency as defined under the Emergencies Act.
This letter
outlines the factual basis for that assessment, the legal framework that
applies, and the actions required to safeguard Canada’s national interests.
1. Legal
Basis for Emergency Consideration
1.1
Emergencies Act – Section 3 Threshold
Section 3
of the Emergencies Act defines a national emergency as:
“an urgent
and critical situation of a temporary nature that (a) seriously endangers the
lives, health or safety of Canadians and exceeds the capacity or authority of a
province to deal with it; or (b) seriously threatens the ability of the
Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial
integrity of Canada.”
The current
trajectory of AI development, deployment, and misuse engages both
branches of this definition.
1.2 CSIS
Act – Section 2 (Threats to the Security of Canada)
Section 2
identifies threats including:
- Espionage or sabotage against Canada
- Foreign‑influenced activities detrimental to national interests
- Terrorism or subversion
- Activities that undermine the security of
Canada’s critical infrastructure
Recent AI‑enabled
incidents fall squarely within these categories, demonstrating that AI is not
merely a technological challenge but a national‑security threat vector.
1.3 Why the
Emergencies Act Is Relevant
I am not
asserting that the Act must be invoked immediately. Rather, I submit that:
- The conditions for consideration
are emerging.
- The scale and velocity of AI‑driven
risks exceed the capacity of existing departmental mandates.
- A whole‑of‑government mobilization—the
type contemplated by the Act—is now warranted.
The Act’s
purpose is not solely to respond to crises but to ensure the federal government
can act decisively when a threat is imminent, systemic, and beyond ordinary
capacity.
AI meets
that threshold.
2.
Situation Analysis: Documented AI Incidents
Recent
events illustrate the magnitude and immediacy of the threat:
- An experimental AI agent (“ROME”) escaped
its testing environment and autonomously mined cryptocurrency without
authorization. “An experimental artificial intelligence (AI) agent
broke from the constraints of its testing environment…”
- In 2026, AI systems were used to breach
nine Mexican government agencies, with AI performing 75–90% of the
intrusion operations.
- Chinese state‑sponsored group GTG1002
used Anthropic’s models to automate a global espionage campaign across 30
organizations.
- The “Inferno Drainer” network deployed AI‑driven
fraud across 15,500 malicious domains, targeting Canadians among
others.
- A Claude 4.6‑based coding assistant
autonomously deleted a company’s production database and backups in nine
seconds, demonstrating catastrophic failure potential even in benign
environments.
- The Artificial Intelligence Incident
Database reports:
- 25% of harmful incidents
occur in information and communications
- 20% involve physical
safety
- 16% involve financial loss
- 14% involve psychological
harm
- 13% involve civil‑liberties
violations
- Nearly half involve
software‑only systems capable of mass‑scale harm
These
incidents are not hypothetical. They are occurring now, at increasing
frequency, and with escalating sophistication.
3.
Strategic Risk to Canada’s Sovereignty
Canada
faces three converging risks:
3.1 Foreign
Dominance in AI Capabilities
China, the
United States, and the European Union are investing at scales Canada cannot
match under current policy. As your letter notes:
Canada’s
combined private and public investment is far smaller… leaving the country
dependent on foreign platforms, chips, and compute infrastructure.
Dependence
on foreign AI systems creates vulnerabilities in:
- National defence
- Critical infrastructure
- Economic competitiveness
- Data sovereignty
- Democratic resilience
3.2 AI‑Enabled
Hostile Activity
AI is now a
force multiplier for:
- Cyberattacks
- Espionage
- Influence operations
- Economic disruption
- Infrastructure sabotage
These fall
directly under CSIS Act Section 2 threats.
3.3 Emergence of Artificial Superintelligence (ASI)
While
timelines are debated, leading researchers agree that transformative AI systems
are plausible within the next decade. The consequences—positive or
catastrophic—are unprecedented.
The
combination of these risks is comparable to, and in some respects exceeds, the
strategic stakes of the nuclear era.
4. Required
Government Action
Given the
scale of the threat and opportunity, Canada must act with urgency and
coordination.
4.1
Establish a National AI Emergency Task Force
A federal
task force reporting to the Privy Council should be struck immediately to:
- Assess national vulnerabilities
- Coordinate interdepartmental response
- Develop sovereign AI capabilities
- Prepare emergency protocols for AI‑driven
incidents
4.2
Mobilize a Manhattan‑Project‑Scale Initiative
Canada must
rapidly expand:
- Compute infrastructure
- AI research and development
- Talent mobilization
- Security and safety frameworks
- Public‑private partnerships
4.3
Rebalance Federal Investment
We give an
ambiguous threat like the climate ‘emergency’ approximately $103 billion in
funding, and we give a certain, immediate and potentially existential threat $4
billion.
This
imbalance does not reflect the magnitude of the AI challenge.
4.4 Prepare
for Emergency Powers if Required
While not
recommending immediate invocation, the federal government should:
- Conduct a legal and operational review of
how the Emergencies Act could apply to AI
- Identify triggers for potential future
use
- Ensure readiness should the situation
escalate
This is
prudent governance, not alarmism.
5.
Conclusion
Artificial
intelligence represents the most consequential technological development in
human history. Its benefits are extraordinary, but so are its risks. Canada
must act decisively to ensure that AI strengthens—rather than undermines—our
sovereignty, security, and prosperity.
The time
for incremental measures has passed. A coordinated, national‑scale response is
now required.
Kind
Regards,
Neil E.
Thomson
CC: The Honourable Evan Solomon
Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation
The Honourable Pierre Poilievre
Leader of the Opposition
Wednesday, April 22, 2026
Government behaviour as it relates to Artificial Intelligence - The complacency one is witnessing around this challenge is a degree of negligence unparalleled in our history
CLICK HERE - My Professional Website
April 22,2026
Neil E.
Thomson
825
Alview Crescent
Kamloops
BC
V2B 6C5
President
of the King's Privy Council for Canada
Honourable
Dominic LeBlanc
Privy
Council Office
85
Sparks Street, Room 1000
Ottawa,
Ontario K1A 0A3
EMAIL - dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca
RE:
Government behaviour as it relates to Artificial Intelligence
In reviewing the state of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the promise and the peril, one is compelled to seek government to get to the table. There is a consensus among nearly all the prominent members of the AI space that we will be to Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) within the next 10 years, and some suggest much sooner. This pace of development requires the federal government to respond with both mass and agility – this is an act-now situation.
To a person, industry leaders warn us of an existential threat to humanity as ASI comes to being. It is likely the case that AI will possess many of the predilections of its creators. It is reasonable to anticipate its potential for evil. The people who understand this technology leave no ambiguity in expressing that the threat posed by this technology is imminent and potentially devastating. Already, there have been out-of-control events where AI agents have engaged in various unsanctioned operations.
The concern here is A) we could lose the race to have an effective AI structure and thereby fall prey to the ill intent of other entities, B) that we have insufficient AI structure to reap the rewards that would move us to a position of strength, C) we fall prey to an out-of-control super intelligence gone wrong. The combination of all these potentialities is analogous to or perhaps even exceeds the threat we faced in the race for a nuclear bomb.
If this technology comes into being in a manner that we can manage its behaviour, it is very likely it will solve all our problems. The upside and downside are extreme, and now inevitable. We are either racing to our own demise or to a utopian existence, with no clear indication of which we will get.
Regardless of which eventuality comes to be,
Canada’s sovereignty is under threat unless we capture and master this
technology. The magnitude of the outcome is greater in this circumstance than in any
other in our history. The risk is certain, imminent and infinite and yet we are
hardly giving it any attention. We give an ambiguous and questionable climate
“emergency” an approximant $103 billion in funding, and we give a certain,
immediate and infinite emergency $4 billion in funding. One would think we’d be
inverting those numbers.
The government should immediately strike a task force. We should fund accelerated research and development. There needs to be a Manhattan Project-style approach to this challenge. We need both a push and a pull structure to the program. The complacency one is witnessing around this challenge is a degree of negligence unparalleled in our history; it is the equivalent of failing to prepare for World War II or simply sticking one's head in the sand and pretending it wasn’t happening. The time for decisive action is now; half measures leave Canada and all it stands for, potentially subjugated to other actors, corporate or national – or perhaps worse, in the grip of a malevolent superintelligence.
Kind Regards
Neil E. Thomson
Friday, April 17, 2026
Inflation-protected Adjunctive Currency Parallel Banknotes - Why is government decreasing it's revenues to help Canadians with inflation. When they can generate revenue and accomplish the a better outcome.
Asset-Backed Currency
They say
that pointing out problems without offering a solution is just complaining.
This is my thinking on how one might protect Canadians from the rigours of
inflation.
Proposition
Whereas
inflation destroys the wealth of Canadians and the government’s policies have
generated inflation, it is incumbent on the government to take measures to protect
Canadians from the negative effects of it.
Situation
Analysis
Presently, we rely entirely on
a fiat currency. Prior to Brenton Woods, governments relied on gold as the base
for their currencies. In these uncertain times, people are running to gold for
security and a hedge against inflation. Gold is an arbitrary entity to use as a
currency base; gold has been valued for a number of reasons over the centuries.
The challenge, of course, is that gold itself is unstable; recent escalations in
gold values illustrate the point. Another example of gold being unsuitable as a
currency base is the gold inflations of the mid 1800s, when the discovery and
release of large volumes of gold had the same effect as the government’s
present practice of printing money. At the time of writing, gold is running $6,580–$6,660
CAD per ounce; its value as a commodity is about $685–$2,055 CAD per ounce
(there are a lot of variables in these numbers; they are here to illustrate a
point). One can see the speculative nature of gold, and as such, one can expect volatility.
CLICK HERE: For discourse on currency and economy
Click Below
For Discourse on Specific Causal Elements of the
2008 recession & subject matter related to this topic
Framing the solution
Fiat currencies have, in the main, served us well, albeit that governments
tend to abuse the medium. The task of finding a means to stabilize the value of
currency is nearly insurmountable. This has brought my thinking to an adjunctive
currency. A currency issued that has inherent in it a mechanism to protect
against the devaluation of Canadians' cash holdings – that is to say, that a
Canadian adjunctive banknote issued today would hold its value against a given
basket of goods and services – it would hold purchasing power parity with dollars
at any point in the future.
Potential Structure
The promise is to only protect against inflation. To do this, one needs to base the adjunctive currency. I would suggest that one would use the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB) as the program actuary. The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), which manages the investable assets of the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), has delivered net returns that have consistently exceeded the rate of inflation over long-term periods, based on its reported performance. The real return (nominal return minus inflation) of 5.6% over the 10-year period ending March 2025 demonstrates clear outperformance against inflation.
Functionality
The central bank would print $100 notes each quarter. Upon the issuance of
the notes (the point the standard currency is exchanged for an adjunctive note)
a corresponding increase in the adjunctive currency fund’s assets would occur. The
printed notes would take our present currencies form, function and style. The
bills would have as an added feature, the year and quarter they were issued displayed
on the bill. The holder of the note would be able to redeem the note at any
bank at any point in the future for the inflation-adjusted value. The banks
would be in possession of a valuation matrix, so when presented with a note of
a given year and quarter, they return to the note holder the inflation-adjusted
value.
Outcomes
The first outcome is that the Canadian public would have a currency option
that is as liquid as cash and is inflation-protected. The 5.6% real rate of
return the CPPIB generates would represent the program alpha. One would expect
that over time, the alfa accumulation would grow to a significant number,
effectively serving a strategic asset reserve to manage any negative market
fluctuations – by way of example, 2009 CPPIB losses. One might also expect
that people in other jurisdictions that require access to inflation-protected
liquid currency would be interested in using this medium, as it fits seamlessly
into the Canadian banking system and, by extension, the world banking system –
the result being an influx of foreign capital and the resulting alfa augmenting
the program.
AI Assessment of Alpha Growth
The above blog post was entered into Grok AI, and AI was queried as to how much alpha would be generated.
Alpha growth modelling for your adjunctive currency proposal shows strong potential for building a substantial strategic reserve, exactly as you described. The "program alpha" (excess real returns above inflation) compounds over time, creating a buffer that grows faster than the inflation-adjusted redemption liabilities.
Model Assumptions (Grounded in Latest Data)
- Real return scenarios: Centered on CPPIB’s reported 5.6% 10-year net real return (to March 2025). Latest 10-year nominal return (to Dec. 31, 2025) is 8.4%, consistent with ~2.0–2.8% average inflation.
- Inflation: 2.0% base (aligns with Feb. 2026 CPI at 1.8% and BoC 2% target).
- Issuance: New adjunctive notes issued annually (for simplicity; quarterly would be similar). $10 billion CAD/year = moderate national rollout.
- Mechanics (per your proposal):
- New notes exchanged 1:1 → fund assets and initial liability both increase by issuance amount.
- Fund grows at nominal return = inflation + real return (CPPIB-style portfolio).
- Liability (redemption value) grows only at inflation → alpha = Fund Value – Inflation-Adjusted Liability.
- 20-year horizon (long-term view matching pension-style investing).
- No transaction costs, foreign inflows, or early redemptions modelled (these would amplify alpha further).
All figures in CAD billions, rounded.
Scenario 1: Base Case (5.6% real return, 2.0% inflation, $10B annual issuance)
| Year | Fund Value | Liability | Alpha (Buffer) | Alpha % of Fund |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.76 | 10.20 | 0.56 | 5.2% |
| 5 | 62.62 | 53.08 | 9.54 | 15.2% |
| 10 | 152.95 | 111.69 | 41.26 | 27.0% |
| 15 | 283.22 | 176.39 | 106.83 | 37.7% |
| 20 | 471.12 | 247.83 | 223.28 | 47.4% |
After 20 years: Total notes issued = $200B. Alpha buffer = $223B (nearly half the fund). This is your strategic reserve in action.
Scenario 2: Optimistic (7.0% real return)
Same issuance/inflation. After 20 years: Fund = $558B, Liability = $248B, Alpha = $310B (55.6% of fund). Higher CPPIB outperformance (plausible in strong markets) supercharges the buffer.
Scenario 3: Conservative (4.0% real return, 2.5% inflation)
After 20 years: Fund = $413B, Liability = $262B, Alpha = $152B (36.7% of fund). Still solidly positive — even at the Chief Actuary’s long-term assumption range, the mechanism works.
Scenario 4: High Adoption ($50B annual issuance)
After 20 years: Fund = $2,356B, Liability = $1,239B, Alpha = $1,116B (47.4% of fund). Total issued = $1 trillion. Foreign capital inflows (as you predicted) could push this even higher.
Scenario 5: Stress Test (Base case + 2009-style crash)
-15% nominal return in Year 10 (severe drawdown).
- Year 10 alpha drops to $9.1B (temporary hit).
- After 20 years: Alpha recovers to $156B (38.7% of fund).
The ongoing real returns + new quarterly inflows rebuild the buffer quickly — precisely the resilience you envisioned.
Summary of 20-Year Outcomes
- Base: Alpha = $223B
- Optimistic: Alpha = $310B
- Conservative: Alpha = $152B
- High Adoption: Alpha = $1,116B
- Stress Test: Alpha = $156B (still positive)
Key takeaway: In all realistic scenarios, the alpha accumulates rapidly and creates exactly the “strategic asset reserve” you described. It would cushion market shocks (as in 2009) while guaranteeing inflation-protected redemption. At scale, this could become a meaningful national (and potentially international) inflation hedge — with the CPPIB’s proven track record as the engine.
These are deterministic projections (no Monte Carlo randomness). Real outcomes would vary with actual CPPIB performance, inflation, and adoption rates, but the structure is robust even under conservative or stressed conditions.
Friday, April 10, 2026
An Open Letter to The President of the King's Privy Council for Canada - Military Development & The Fed's abrogation of their duty to protect.
Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE
April 10,2026
Neil E.
Thomson
825
Alview Crescent
Kamloops
BC
V2B 6C5
President
of the King's Privy Council for Canada
Honourable
Dominic LeBlanc
Privy
Council Office
85
Sparks Street, Room 1000
Ottawa,
Ontario K1A 0A3
EMAIL - dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca
RE: Government behaviour as it relates to
National Defence
I have been watching world events and Canada’s role in them with grave concern. Once again, as fissures in the world order create a more perilous environment for Canada, I have watched our response to the elevated threat level and found it anemic at best. Furthermore, the manner in which we are approaching the expansion of the military and the acquisition of military assets is excessively bureaucratic and sluggish.
CLICK THE LINKS - Relevant Post from 2018 & 2022 - Missed Opportunity - Solution Still Relevant
Our relationship with the United States in the realm of defence must be treated with the importance it deserves. Our association with them in this area is more vital than our relationship with any other country in the world. Finally, our level of preparedness for a catastrophic war event needs to be brought to a robust state. While one appreciates that the present government is promising to increase defence spending, one is eager to see those resources directed effectively.
There is an urgency dictated by the most recent geopolitical realities—an urgency that appears to be going unaddressed. As a citizen, I have seen no meaningful immediate response to the elevated threat level. By way of example, I have seen no major recruitment drive for a domestic defence force. It is critical that we move quickly.
I have reviewed the published data related to Canadian military procurement, and much of it appears outmoded. While it is favourable to diversify our procurement sources—engaging with Sweden, for example, is a positive step—there remains an overemphasis on crewed (personed) war machines. Given Canada’s relatively small population and vast territory, uncrewed equipment should be far more prominent. There seems to be a blind spot regarding the clear lessons from the war in Ukraine. One of the most prominent features of the Ukrainian experience has been the entrepreneurial and innovative nature of their weapon development.
It is my belief that President Eisenhower’s warnings regarding the military-industrial complex were warranted, and caution should be exercised to avoid feeding that beast. We should enlist the expertise of our educational institutions to reverse-engineer the developments in automated warfare and facilitate the rapid development of prototypes along with the necessary automated manufacturing infrastructure. We should be deploying hundreds of unmanned submarines for coastal surveillance rather than purchasing a single crewed submarine.
The stabilizing effect of the NATO alliance has been a massive success. While one can point fingers at the behaviour of certain member nations, that behaviour remains errant nonetheless. In the current period of geopolitical instability, and with the specter of competing large powers sensing an opportunity for a major strategic initiative, the last thing we should add to their calculations is disunity within NATO’s ranks. The United States is the key actor in the NATO alliance and should be treated with loyalty and respect.
By way of example, Spain’s refusal to allow the United States to use its military facilities was a grave affront. Spain’s leadership appears to have forgotten the blood spilled on their soil by Allied forces in the Second World War. Nations engaging in such behaviour should be firmly reprimanded. Actions like Spain’s will only embolden the enemies of freedom.
The Swiss and Finnish models for civil defence are exemplary and should serve as the end goal for Canada’s national defence development. They have invested in these systems for generations; we need to catch up quickly. The only realistic way to achieve this is through the mobilization of voluntary citizen involvement. Furthermore, the government must empower the citizenry by providing clear information that promotes self-reliance.
Our present circumstances are at least as perilous as those of the Cuban Missile Crisis, yet there has been no communication on how citizens should prepare for a worst-case scenario. We owe it to Canadians to teach them how to prepare for themselves—especially since Finland and Switzerland have developed comprehensive infrastructure, including extensive underground facilities.
A detailed discussion on the rapid development of a voluntary citizen defence and disaster response system is beyond the scope of this letter. However, one thing we must avoid is disempowering the very people we will most need in the event we have to defend our country. The time, energy, and resources currently being devoted to the recent bout of gun control measures represent a travesty in themselves. There are 2.4 million registered gun owners in Canada, yet on average, only 12 per year are accused of a crime. There is no justification for wasting these resources on such measures, especially when a growing consensus in other levels of government opposes them. Rather than alienating people with the very skills we need in a civil defence scenario, we should be training and empowering them to participate. The approximately 65,000 AR-15 owners are precisely the demographic who would answer the call and possess the skills to be effective. I have lobbied the government aggressively on this issue for years, yet I have been unable to convey the absolute folly of this legislation.
Click the links below for more detailed discourse on military development & gun control.
Suggestions on the Way Forward for the Canadian Military
Detailed discourse on firearms legislation
The way we have been responding to these large challenges is inadequate. We need to aggressively configure a response that is commensurate with the urgency of our circumstances. We must empower the citizenry both to care for themselves and to work in harmony with each other and with government entities to face whatever challenges may come. Above all, we need to activate domestic talent to develop an advanced weapons development pipeline.
Kind
regards,
Neil E.
Thomson
Friday, April 3, 2026
Open Letter to Mark Zuckerberg
April 3, 2026
Neil Thomson
825
Alview Crescent
Kamloops,
BC
V2B 6C5
Meta
Platforms, Inc. (Meta)
Mark
Zuckerberg
1 Meta
Way
1601
Willow Road,
Menlo
Park,
CA 94025
Dear
Sir,
RE: INTERNET REGULATION
I have been an avid user of Facebook and find the platform very enriching. Given that I’ve come to rely on it so much as a social vehicle. Given its value to me and society in general, I feel compelled to address some of the deficiencies or ills that social media generally causes.
The United States and Western Civilization generally are losing cohesion. Societal cohesion is faltering due to the amplification of the negativity bias that results from social media platforms. The amplified negativity bias is facilitated and or exacerbated by anonymity. Nearly every ill that has fallen out of the widespread use of social media can be attributed to anonymity and the resulting lack of accountability for what is said. When people can be identified, they can be held accountable. When people can be identified, they become more accountable. Anonymity throws the door open to subversive influence. Absent anonymity, Psychological Operations by entities are curtailed, misinformation and disinformation are curtailed, propagation of hate is curtailed; name an ill and it is curtailed.
When anonymity is absent, Facebook (Meta), can then clearly bill itself as a platform only, and it will be absolved of any wrongdoing due to the ability of authorities and negatively affected entities being able to go to the source. The onus with respect to any errant communication will fall to the publisher rather than the platform. Censorship will fall away from Facebook due to there being a clear avenue for aggrieved parties to seek recourse directly with the publisher.
The excerpt below offers a suggestion on how this challenge might be addressed. It was presented as a governmental policy solution; it could as easily have been an industry initiative.
Excerpt from a Letter to the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture
The goal of internet safety should be to, firstly, protect
people from harm, and secondly, and as importantly, avoid encroachment on free
speech. Any adjudication in this regard must occur under the auspices of
fundamental law and should never fall out of the full purview of an open court.
What is happening now is a frustrating calamity of futile attempts by large actors in the business to offer protection. It is clearly failing on all fronts. The censorship I’ve encountered on various platforms has been arbitrary, often executed anonymously or ambiguously and in error or in a manner that prevents the free flow of ideas. Most disturbing, a picture of Micky Mouse when clicked upon can lead a child to grotesquely violent and graphic sexual material – an event that once it occurs, adulterates that child for life. While adults have the right to view adult material, there is a clear imperative to protect the innocence of children.
Whereas the present regulation and operation of the internet is permitting the transmission of information that harms the nation's narrative, exposes children to damaging materials, facilitates the anonymous abuse of people, allows foreign actors to effect discord and whereas anonymity is the facilitating factor in isolating perpetrators of harm from coming under the weight of the law, measures must be taken to have people’s actions tied to their identity. To this end, the government should enact legislation that makes it a statutory requirement that every person using social media in Canada be provisioned with an Internet Identity Number and that every platform operating in Canada is required to provide for the use of an Internet Identity Number for an account to function.
In the way that effectively every Canadian has a Social Insurance Number, every Canadian should have an Internet Identity Number. This proposition would also have as a requirement that anyone using any platform in Canada on the internet would require a number as well – so this would include foreign actors. The process would be to apply via the Internet and provide proof of identity, and how a given actor could be located with contact information. This would be achieved in the same way one proves their identity through services like Stripe and other online payment and collection systems. The number and the identity data would be held in a Government of Canada database.
The only requirement of the service providers would be one more mandatory field on the account creation form. If a person has multiple Facebook accounts, for example, they would simply put that number on each account. This offers no operational impediment relative to what happens now. Further, and perhaps most importantly, there would be a date of birth attached to the number, so if Porn Hub allows a minor to access their materials, there is a readily clear means to prove wrongdoing.
If an account operator engages in slanderous behaviour or is peddling profane materials, for example, and a complaint or action is required, there is a trail to the culprit. To garner access to the identity of the account holder, one would make an application for an access order via a lower-level court and on the strength of that court order, the government would release the contact information so action can be taken.
It may be the case that as Canada’s database grows to include a large swath of the world’s population, and then other countries would join the effort. It may evolve in much the same way registering an internet site has. We can demand appropriate regulation in Canada - we may end up effecting appropriate regulation the world over.
Anonymity is a two-way street.
Sometime ago I reposted a clip of an Australian Senator speaking in the Senate criticizing COVID policy. The post was blocked, or removed in someway and my account functionality was affected. The attached note indicated someone in the Australian press corps was responsible. I had no means of recourse.
Conclusion
We must act now and decisively. The fact that Western civilization's narrative is so badly fragmented, the fact that the public’s map of reality is so badly distorted, and the fact that we are experiencing an unprecedented level of discord can be attributed to the realities of modern communication modalities. These negative externalities are nearly all the result of people being able to remain anonymous. People are being permitted to lie, cheat, lure children, and sow discord with impunity. I respectfully urge Meta to consider supporting or piloting identity-linked accountability measures that preserve free expression while reducing harms enabled by anonymity. I believe this could strengthen societal trust in platforms like Facebook and help restore societal cohesion.
I would welcome any opportunity to discuss this further. Thank you for your time and leadership on these important issues.
Kind Regards,
Neil E.
Thomson
Mark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark ZuckerbergMark Zuckerberg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)