ValueSubtracted

The truth could be somewhere in the middle - no real intent, but instead just reworking an idea from the Discarded Ideas Drawer into something new.

That info is out there for sure, but I've always found it pretty shaky. Here's what Memory Alpha has to say on the subject:

The Star Trek Chronology, 2nd ed., p. 290 noted: "Although Picard and company were successful in eradicating them, the parasites did send a mysterious radio signal, presumably to others of their kind. At the time the episode was written, this was apparently intended to lead to the introduction of the Borg in Star Trek: The Next Generation's second season. The Borg connection was dropped before "Q Who" (TNG) was written, and the truth about the parasites remains a mystery."

The "apparently" always trips me up, but maybe there's a more definitive statement or there that I haven't seen.

It certainly could be true.

Somewhat ironically, this was apparently the lowest-rated episode of SNL UK.

Look, all we want is a zany time travel adventure where all bets are off, but is also completely consistent with decades of previous stories, and feels new and fresh while also seeming exactly the same as it always has been.

It's no "get a life" moment, but I think it's pretty funny.

I think it's perfectly understandable to at least attempt to rein in an increasingly rogue province by making a mutually acceptable deal. I don't believe it will help, or at least not much, but I can understand the attempt.

The lesson is obvious to provinces: dont follow federal laws you dont agree with.

That said, I can't really disagree with this point.

Ultimately, the proposed pipeline still seems to be contingent on finding a private entity that thinks it's a good investment, and I'm not at all convinced that that will ever happen. We'll see.

The counterpoint (and it's a deeply shitty, cynical counterpoint) is that the original targets weren't realistic to begin with, and would have been missed, just like every other climate target ever.

Is this better? History suggests it probably isn't. Is it worse? Maybe, but the depressing truth is it might just be a lateral move.

And that's the strongest "defense" I'm able to muster, which is pretty depressing.

There's a lot of good context in here, even as I'm still deeply conflicted about this strategy.

"The final Canada-Alberta MOU implementation agreement will put Canada’s target of net zero by 2050 well out of reach," Rick Smith, president of the Canadian Climate Institute, said in a written statement.

The Pembina Institute said its modelling showed the carbon pricing schedule included in the implementation agreement would result in an additional 230 megatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions over the next 15 years.

The federal government had no modelling of its own to offer on Friday.

The policy left behind by Justin Trudeau's government was stronger on paper. But Carney might argue his policy is stronger in practice — not least because it was achieved via political consensus with a conservative Alberta premier.

...

In defiance of the federal benchmark, Smith's government had frozen the province's industrial price at $95 per tonne last year. (Meanwhile, Saskatchewan has stopped collecting an industrial carbon price altogether.) And because of inefficiencies in Alberta's pricing system, the effective price was much lower.

Cynically, I bet they make a lot more money licensing their content out to third parties.

It is in the UK. The international streaming is what's up in the air, and it's of particular importance because the Beeb's financial situation indicates that they're either unwilling or unable to fully fund the show without an international partner.

A private backer was a requirement in the original MoU, and I can't tell from the article whether that's still the case.

If so, the whole thing may well be a non-starter.

This announcement seems oddly incomplete - maybe the hope is still alive?