Everybody calm down. USA and Canada have an agreement allowing them to enter each other’s air space. They said that if Canada doesn’t buy enough F-35s USA will have to send more jests into Canada’s airspace to fill in the gaps. That’s it. It’s not “buy our jets or we will invade you”. It’s “if Canada doesn’t buy F-35 we will have to do more work in our agreement”.
Cute, but its obvious everybody checks replies first and you do so specifically to avoid giving clicks to bad actors so they can draw people in to sell ads
Bad headlines will get worse if you RTFA after falling for the clickbait. The incentives are fucked.
Honestly, I’m a little surprised that this post wasn’t locked or had a comment pin stating that the title of this post is misinformation and that the actual body isn’t what the title indicates
Is that what the pundits said about the president and his appointee threatening canada again? Yeah he threatened them but what he meant was best friends forever! Kind of a hard sell at this point I’m afraid. The US is the enemy, they are deeply hostile make no mistake, in league with Russia to blow up Nato, and in a confrontation with the west over territory could trip the kill switches they have in high end military gear they sell, bricking those jets.
Sir, this is Lemmy. We thrive on clickbait headlines here :(
Seriously though. For all of Twitter’s awfulness, I think Lemmy could use a similar “reader added context” bubble right below the headline text. A corrective comment doesn’t really fix the engagement the headline gets.
“Such a nice airspace you have here, it would be a shame if something would happen to it”
Also doesn’t say they would invade… still it’s a clear threat.
Putting a correlation on “more fighters jets in your airspace” on them buying more planes that cannot really be used to protect from the US (for software limitations) sounds a lot like a threat.
Everybody calm down. USA and Canada have an agreement allowing them to enter each other’s air space. They said that if Canada doesn’t buy enough F-35s USA will have to send more jests into Canada’s airspace to fill in the gaps. That’s it. It’s not “buy our jets or we will invade you”. It’s “if Canada doesn’t buy F-35 we will have to do more work in our agreement”.
This community really needs a clickbait title flagging process.
Our media needs to fucking quit the click baity titles.
The process is RTFA :)
return to fucking acronym. english is hard
Cute, but its obvious everybody checks replies first and you do so specifically to avoid giving clicks to bad actors so they can draw people in to sell ads
Bad headlines will get worse if you RTFA after falling for the clickbait. The incentives are fucked.
That’s why some of us have to do the hard work of reading before replying.
Which is why a flagging process creates a better incentive loop and reduces stupid incentives.
Honestly, I’m a little surprised that this post wasn’t locked or had a comment pin stating that the title of this post is misinformation and that the actual body isn’t what the title indicates
You are right. The title is so misleading and I can’t believe someone with the title journalist on their resume wrote it.
They’ve used everything they’ve learned to twist the words into bait
Is that what the pundits said about the president and his appointee threatening canada again? Yeah he threatened them but what he meant was best friends forever! Kind of a hard sell at this point I’m afraid. The US is the enemy, they are deeply hostile make no mistake, in league with Russia to blow up Nato, and in a confrontation with the west over territory could trip the kill switches they have in high end military gear they sell, bricking those jets.
Sir, this is Lemmy. We thrive on clickbait headlines here :(
Seriously though. For all of Twitter’s awfulness, I think Lemmy could use a similar “reader added context” bubble right below the headline text. A corrective comment doesn’t really fix the engagement the headline gets.
“Such a nice airspace you have here, it would be a shame if something would happen to it” Also doesn’t say they would invade… still it’s a clear threat.
Putting a correlation on “more fighters jets in your airspace” on them buying more planes that cannot really be used to protect from the US (for software limitations) sounds a lot like a threat.
But, sure, you are technically correct