fish fillet with tartar sauce
President-elect Trump weighs into debate among supporters to back H-1B visa programA North Vancouver man has been charged on multiple counts after a bizarre stabbing incident in California. Devin Wolfgang Vandorhoef, 25, is in police custody after he was arrested by detectives with the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office on Nov. 25. At around 10 p.m. that evening, police received multiple 911 calls that a person had been stabbed in a residential neighbourhood of Salinas, a small city 30-minutes by car from Monterey, Calif. Upon arriving at the scene, police said they found three people with stabbing injuries. All were sent to hospital with minor to critical injuries and are expected to survive. Monterey County Sheriff Detectives said they learned that Vandorhoef and a female victim had previously met and gotten to know each other via a gaming platform. “Vandorhoef developed a year’s long obsession with the victim which led to him flying to California from Canada where he resides,” reads a statement from the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office. Police added that Vandorhoef was accompanied by Darius Avery Whyte, 25, who is also Canadian. Whyte has also been arrested and charged in connection with the incident. “On the date of the stabbing, Vandorhoef arrived at a residence on Bollenbacher Drive and knocked on the door while holding a package. He identified himself as a delivery driver,” police said. “Our victim’s boyfriend opened the door and Vandorhoef forced his way in and began stabbing the boyfriend with a knife resulting in multiple critical injuries. “The female grabbed a sharp metal object and began defending her boyfriend. While fighting back, the female victim was strangled and stabbed by our suspect sustaining moderate injuries. During the struggle, the suspect sustained multiple critical stab wounds,” police said. Detectives said they discovered that the package Vandorhoef was carrying when he arrived contained handcuffs, duct tape and knives. “It is unknown how these items were intended on being used,” the sheriff’s office said. According to the Monterey County in-custody log, Vandorhoef has been charged with attempted murder, conspiracy to commit attempted murder, mayhem, stalking and burglary. His bail is set at US$2.3 million (C$3.2 million). Local broadcaster KBSW Action News 8 that Vandorhoef and Whyte pleaded not guilty in court on Monday. The co-accused are due to appear in court again Dec. 10.
The Australian government recently passed legislation that bans social media for anyone under 16 . Prime Minister Anthony Albanese hailed the legislation for putting “the onus on social media platforms — not young people or their parents” — for protecting youth from online harms. Australia is the first country in the world to pass a nationwide ban of social media for teens, set to take effect in a year . But other measures have been enacted or considered here in Canada and elsewhere. In the United States, it will be illegal for children under 14 in Florida to have social media accounts starting Jan. 1, 2025. Beginning in 2024, Québec began banning cellphones in classrooms . This fall, with the start of the 2024–2025 academic year, Ontario also began banning cell phones in schools . This follows a lawsuit filed by four school boards in Ontario against social media companies for disrupting youth learning. Québec is reportedly considering a social media ban — following Australia’s lead — that would limit social media use for teens under 16. Provincial governments recognize that social media and cellphones can be problematic for youth, and they’re not waiting on the federal government to take action. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently announced that the proposed Online Harms Act (Bill C-63) , originally introduced in February 2024 , will be separated into two bills . The idea is to pass the part of the bill focused on child protection to address problems like sextortion , image-based sexual abuse, revenge porn and other forms of online sexual violence. Since the Online Harms Act is still being debated, MPs in Canada may look to other countries, like Australia, for guidance on protecting youth from these online harms. Some people in Canada approve of Australia’s social media ban and see it as a potential solution , including some teens . This idea has received a lot of traction in public discourse too, including with the book The Anxious Generation that argues social media should be banned until age 16 . Many of us may recall the stories of Rehtaeh Parsons , Amanda Todd and more recently a boy in British Columbia who died by suicide after being cyberbullied and sextorted. Some studies have shown that social media use is related to anxiety and depression among adolescents . Bans or regulations raise important questions about how we, as a society, should respond to social media use among youth and deal with online harms. We are a team of researchers who study technology-facilitated sexual violence among youth aged 13–18 in Canada. We have conducted 26 focus groups with 149 youth from across the country, and launched a nationally representative survey of around 1,000 youth to learn about their experiences with online harms, what they know about the law and which resources work — and which ones don’t. Our initial findings show that youth experience a range of harms as they use digital platforms and social media. We also found that algorithms are fueling harms. Youth have emphasized they want tailored supports and resources to help them have safe, healthy and enjoyable experiences with technology. A full ban of social media is not realistic, in part because social media companies have no idea how to implement it . Some ideas are to use facial recognition technology or check someone’s age using credit cards . Another idea is to upload government IDs to third-party platforms for age verification. However a ban is implemented, it will almost certainly gather more user data, which raises questions about youth data privacy and security . These measures may also drive youth towards other platforms that are less regulated, such as on the dark web. This could actually make it harder to protect youth from online harms. Bans also don’t actually solve the problem . For example, abstinence-based interventions don’t work when it comes to sex education . It is unlikely that an abstinence-based approach would work with social media . Furthermore, technology is increasingly integrated into our daily lives, and youth need to be taught about healthy and responsible online interactions. Youth are learning how to become digital citizens . Kicking the problem down the road until they’re 16 or older will postpone the consequences, not solve them. This could cause more harm than a ban intends to solve . A ban also frees social media companies, governments and parents from any accountability. Rather than meaningfully addressing the harmful content and their impacts, a ban removes any and all responsibility from the people and institutions whose job it is to protect youth. Technology companies need to develop their products with kids in mind , rather than prioritizing their profits and putting child safety and health second. Kids need guidance and support , and a ban does nothing to remove harmful content or resolve its negative impacts. Rather than bans, we suggest implementing holistic interventions that emphasize digital citizenship and youth rights and responsibilities so people of all ages learn how to have safe and healthy interactions with technology. This requires a consolidated effort across various sectors of society, including schools , community organizations and, importantly, both tech companies and government agencies. While there are resources available for educators, parents and youth about how to have safe and healthy online interactions , we need to act now. Rather than resorting to blanket bans, we should prioritize comprehensive societal changes that address the root causes of these harms. By doing so, we can promote youth safety and help our communities confront online harms. Christopher Dietzel receives funding from Le Fonds de recherche du Québec – Société et culture (FRQSC). Kaitlynn Mendes receives funding from SSHRC and the Canada Research Chairs Program.
HOUSTON (AP) — An elaborate parody appears to be behind an effort to resurrect Enron, the Houston-based energy company that exemplified the worst in American corporate fraud and greed after it went bankrupt in 2001. If its return is comedic, some former employees who lost everything in Enron’s collapse aren’t laughing. “It’s a pretty sick joke and it disparages the people that did work there. And why would you want to even bring it back up again?” said former Enron employee Diana Peters, who represented workers in the company’s bankruptcy proceedings. Here’s what to know about the history of Enron and the purported effort to bring it back. Once the nation’s seventh-largest company, Enron filed for bankruptcy protection on Dec. 2, 2001, after years of accounting tricks could no longer hide billions of dollars in debt or make failing ventures appear profitable. The energy company's collapse put more than 5,000 people out of work and wiped out more than $2 billion in employee pensions. Its aftershocks were felt throughout the energy sector. Twenty-four Enron executives , including former CEO Jeffrey Skilling , were convicted for their roles in the fraud. Enron founder Ken Lay’s convictions were vacated after he died of heart disease following his 2006 trial. On Monday — the 23rd anniversary of the bankruptcy filing — a company representing itself as Enron announced in a news release it was relaunching as a “company dedicated to solving the global energy crisis.” It also posted a video on social media, advertised on at least one Houston billboard and a took out a full-page ad in the Houston Chronicle In the minute-long video full of generic corporate jargon, the company talks about “growth” and “rebirth.” It ends with the words, “We’re back. Can we talk?” In an email, company spokesperson Will Chabot said the new Enron was not doing any interviews yet, but "We’ll have more to share soon.” Signs point to the comeback being a joke. In the “terms of use and conditions of sale” on the company's website, it says “the information on the website about Enron is First Amendment protected parody, represents performance art, and is for entertainment purposes only.” Documents filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office show College Company, an Arkansas-based LLC, owns the Enron trademark. The co-founder of College Company is Connor Gaydos, who helped create a joke conspiracy theory claiming all birds are actually government surveillance drones. Peters said she and some other former employees are upset and think the relaunch was “in poor taste.” “If it’s a joke, it’s rude, extremely rude. And I hope that they realize it and apologize to all of the Enron employees,” Peters said. Peters, 74, said she is still working in information technology because “I lost everything in Enron, and so my Social Security doesn’t always take care of things I need done.” “Enron’s downfall taught us critical lessons about corporate ethics, accountability, and the consequences of unchecked ambition. Enron’s legacy was the employees in the trenches. Leave Enron buried,” she said. But Sherron Watkins, Enron’s former vice president of corporate development and the main whistleblower who helped uncover the scandal, said she didn’t have a problem with the joke because comedy “usually helps us focus on an uncomfortable historical event that we’d rather ignore.” “I think we use prior scandals to try to teach new generations what can go wrong with big companies,” said Watkins, who still speaks at colleges and conferences about the Enron scandal. This story was corrected to fix the spelling of Ken Lay’s first name, which had been misspelled “Key.” Follow Juan A. Lozano on X at https://x.com/juanlozano70
Last month, over 100 female professional footballers from across the globe came together to criticise FIFA’s partnership with Saudi oil giant Aramco, denouncing the deal on environmental and humanitarian grounds. Now, following the United Nations’ COP29 climate summit, the only African who signed the open letter, external has revealed why she took part in the protest. Former Nigeria international Ayisat Yusuf has described FIFA’s decision to work with Aramco as “not justifiable”, despite football’s governing body stating that sponsorship revenues are reinvested back into the women’s game “at all levels”. “FIFA don’t have to take money above humanity,” Yusuf told BBC Sport Africa. “It’s very important we let people know that partnership – giving sponsorship to Aramco – does not stand for what our values (as female footballers) are. “Our values should be put first regardless of the money. We’re just making our voice heard, for them to also reconsider and think about humanity, our health and our human rights.” Aramco, owned by the Saudi Arabian state, is the biggest oil producer in the world. Its three-year deal with FIFA gives it sponsorship rights to the men’s World Cup in 2026 and the Women’s World Cup the following year. As well as criticising its negative impact on the climate via greenhouse gas emissions, the players’ letter highlighted allegations of human rights violations by the Gulf kingdom, describing the partnership as a “punch in the stomach” and a significant setback for women’s football. At the Africa Cup of Nations earlier this year, William Troost-Ekong made history as the first footballer to wear boots made from recycled materials at an international tournament. The Nigeria men’s captain is an investor and ambassador for the company which manufactures the boots, which are made of corn waste. The Al-Kholood defender believes that the sporting world should work harder to support global efforts on climate change. “Sport is such a big influence around the world,” Troost-Ekong told BBC Sport Africa. “It’s not only about the players. We talk about the organisers of the big tournaments, the clubs, the owners of teams, and of course the fans – because those are the biggest numbers.”
US goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher is retiring from international soccer
(Bloomberg) -- Shares of JBS SA, the world’s biggest meat company, and other Brazilian beef producers slumped on the news that China is starting a probe into its imports of the meat, which have surged in recent years. The Asian country, the world’s largest beef buyer, will decide if a surge in shipments from overseas has hurt the domestic industry, the Ministry of Commerce said Friday. The investigation, launched at the request of China’s domestic industry associations, is likely to end within eight months, but may be extended under special circumstances, according to a statement on the ministry’s website. Any protectionist measures from China are likely to hurt major exporters, including Brazil, Argentina and Australia, as well as companies in the US. Concerns over a potential drop for sales sent JBS and others tumbling. The top meat packer was among the worst performers in Brazil’s benchmark Ibovespa index on Friday, falling as much as 3.3%. Minerva SA dropped 3.1%, and Marfrig Global Foods SA lost as much as 7.8%. China imports surged between 2019 and mid-2024, dealing a blow to the domestic industry, groups representing the animal husbandry sector from several top producing regions said in their petitions. China’s beef producers are struggling with huge losses after local prices plunged to multi-year year lows due to oversupply and sluggish consumption. Brazil accounts for almost half of China’s total beef imports, and the Asian country holds similar signifcance for Brazil, typically purchasing nearly half the nation’s exports of the meat. “It’s a nuisance, of course,” said Roberto Perosa, the president of the Brazilian Association of Beef Exporters. Still, he says Brazilian producers can be competitive even in a scenario of higher tariffs. The group also will also work to open new markets for Brazilian beef in hopes of diversifying exports in the long term. Ongoing efforts include negotiations with Japan, Vietnam, South Korea and Turkey, Perosa said. Brazil’s Agriculture Ministry, Trade Ministry and Foreign Relations Ministry said in a joint statement that the country will seek to demonstrate that its beef exports don’t cause any kind of damage to the Chinese industry, and simply complement local production. China’s move could also be a blow to North American companies. US beef exports to China and Hong Kong climbed 16% in October to the largest in more than a year, according to the US Meat Export Federation. Still, overall exports to China in the January-to-October period are down 8%. The USMEF said it’s aware of the investigation and will be monitoring its progress. In Argentina, the head of Argentine beef industry group Ciccra Miguel Schiariti said the nation is a much smaller exporter and therefore less likely to be targeted by any potential tariffs from China. Some earlier probes by China against other countries resulted in hefty taxes. It slapped anti-dumping duties in 2020 on Australian barley as diplomatic tensions escalated between the two trading partners. Even though Brazil has embraced closer ties with Beijing, it has also pushed back against a perceived deluge of cheap exports from China. Brazil imposed new tariffs on various products from China and other Asian nations in October, including a duty increase on fiber optics and cables, and iron and steel products. --With assistance from Megan Durisin, Josh Xiao, Isis Almeida and Jonathan Gilbert. More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com ©2024 Bloomberg L.P.
New disability ministers will ‘champion’ inclusion and accessibility – ministerMusk, Ramaswamy spar with Trump supporters over H-1B work visas
Craft, Suter score 18 as Miami (OH) knocks off Siena 70-58