Canada bans Netflix after employees caught binge-watching at work
The decision follows reports that government workers streamed terabytes of video content during office hours across 45 departments.
Documents obtained by a state broadcaster revealed that employees at Public Services and Procurement Canada alone generated nearly 3 terabytes of monthly streaming traffic — equivalent to 3,000 hours of standard-definition video. Other departments, including the Privy Council Office, Global Affairs Canada, and the Canada Revenue Agency, also logged significant streaming activity.
Shared Services Canada (SSC), the federal agency managing IT services, implemented the block in December 2024. Initially citing a lack of 'business value,' internal memos now indicate the real motivation was concern over productivity, not bandwidth limitations.
Even the federal government's guest Wi-Fi saw nearly 10 terabytes of streaming in a single month. Departments such as the Treasury Board Secretariat, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and Crown-Indigenous Relations were among the top users.
Despite the enormous volume of content streamed, internal assessments showed that the government's network was not overwhelmed. Officials viewed the issue as a 'people management' problem — with employees spending excessive work time watching shows and movies.
The streaming ban, which includes services like Disney+, Apple TV+, and Hulu, has not sparked major public criticism but raises broader concerns about digital habits in the workplace. The move reflects a growing focus on accountability and productivity in federal institutions, especially in an era where remote and hybrid work models continue to evolve.
Further audits and policy reviews may follow as the government evaluates how to enforce digital discipline on the job.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
6 hours ago
- Business Recorder
TSX boosted by mining stocks, Fed rate cut optimism
Canada's main stock index rose on Tuesday, rebounding after Friday's selloff, with investors optimistic about the U.S. Federal Reserve cutting interest rates in September. The Toronto Stock Exchange's S&P/TSX composite index rose 1.8% by 10:05 ET (0205 GMT) to 27,495.10 points, after three straight sessions of declines. Global stocks were lifted after traders ramped up bets of a U.S. rate cut in September to almost 94%, according to CME Fedwatch, following last week's soft U.S. nonfarm payrolls data. 'People see (unemployment numbers) as being the rationale for a reduction in interest rates at the Fed, and that's essentially positive for stock markets,' said Thomas Caldwell, Chairman at Caldwell Securities. 'Earnings are coming across fairly well and so the world is moving on, but there's this undercurrent of what will be the longer term damage of tariffs and this upending of world trade.' On the day, material stocks were among top gainers, with gold mining stocks adding 6%. Kinross Gold Corp gained 9% to the top of the index while Novagold, IAMGOLD and Seabridge Gold were up more than 5% each. First Quantum Minerals' shares rose 4.4% after the miner signed a $1 billion deal with Royal Gold. Tech stocks rose 2.8%, boosted by e-commerce platform Shopify's 5.43% climb after brokerage Benchmark raised its target price ahead of earnings on Wednesday. Electronics firm Celestica rose 3% and cybersecurity firm Blackberry climbed 3.4%. All sectors were in the green after TSX posted its biggest decline since April in Friday's selloff. Data showed Canada's merchandise trade deficit widened in June to C$5.9 billion ($4.24 billion) with imports outpacing exports. Canadian ministers are set to start discussing trade with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum on Tuesday. U.S. President Donald Trump put a 35% tariff on goods imported from Canada last week.
Express Tribune
a day ago
- Express Tribune
India's deceit of nuclear programme
Deceitful history of Indian nuclear programme is well-known to the world. On 18 May 1974, India tested its Peaceful Nuclear Explosions (PNEs) at Pokhran under codename 'Smiling Buddha' and underscored this reality that the country had diverted its peaceful side of nuclear programme towards weapon-based nuclear programme. Indian nuclear programme is prestige-driven. Indian PM IK Gujral, during his meeting with US President Clinton in September 1997, asserted, "I told President Clinton that when my third eye looks at the door of the Security Council Chamber it sees a little sign that says only those with economic power or nuclear weapons are allowed. I said to him it's very difficult to achieve economic wealth." The debate surrounding development of India's nuclear programme revolves around the question of whether it was genuinely a peaceful programme with civilian applications or a clandestine effort to develop nuclear weapons. India's nuclear programme involved a pattern of exploiting civilian cooperation to build military capacity. The deception lies in how India used international support for peaceful purposes, while developing and later openly declaring nuclear weapons, without being held fully accountable like other NPT-defying nations. India began its nuclear programme in the 1940s and 1950s with so-called declared peaceful intentions. Homi Bhaba, famous Indian physicist, led the foundation of the Indian nuclear programme. Initially, the country gained international cooperation from Canada and the US under the promise that the nuclear material and technology would not be used for weapon purposes. However, India viciously diverted plutonium from a reactor supplied by Canada for 'Smiling Buddha' tests. Indian scientist Raja Ramanna, who led these so-called PNEs, lately confirmed this assertion in 1997: "The Pokhran test was a bomb, I can tell you now An explosion is an explosion and a gun is a gun, whether you shoot at someone or shoot at the ground I just want to make clear that the test was not all that peaceful." In 1968, US National Security Archives also recorded that, while visiting Trombay's Canada-India Reactor, Canadian inspectors were unnerved by data suggesting that India was heading towards developing a nuclear device. This declassified US State Department telegram revealed that Canadian nuclear experts told US diplomats about reactor fuel which had been irradiated at a low enough level to produce weapons grade plutonium. According to them, if India wanted, it could produce up to 12 kilogram of plutonium a year. Another set of US-declassified documents revealed that long before India detonated a nuclear device in May 1974, the US Intelligence Community was monitoring and analysing Indian civilian and military nuclear energy activities. US State Department official George McGhee indicated to Secretary of State Dean Rusk that people throughout the State Department seriously contemplated helping India to acquire a nuclear explosive. It was proposed that "it would be desirable if a friendly Asian power beat Communist China to the punch" by detonating a nuclear device first. Another CIA intelligence report observed in 1964 that India had all of the elements necessary to produce a nuclear weapon and it had a capability to assemble a bomb quickly. India did not plan to complete the work on a bomb initially because Indian government was convinced that the Chinese would not have an offensive capability for at least five years. India was relying on President Johnson's assurances for aid in the face of any threat by China. While mentioning Indian role towards nuclear non-proliferation regime, former Indian Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva Amandeep Gill added that India was championing the debate on asserting worldwide moratorium on nuclear testing. However, the world witnessed that the country later backed off from signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as it tested its nuclear weapon device in May 1998. Furthermore, after the Indian PNE in 1974, a nuclear suppliers group named the London Suppliers Group (now the Nuclear Suppliers Group or NSG) was established to strengthen nuclear exports and safeguards which met for their first meeting in Nov 1974. Yet the NSG, at the behest of the Bush Administration, agreed in Sept 2008 to exempt India from some of its export guidelines. Ironically, the world remains ignorant of this fact that the very same NSG which was formed in response to 1974's nuclear tests granted a "clean waiver" to India. Since then, India has concluded numerous nuclear cooperation agreements with foreign states. An alarming situation is that these civil nuclear deals are helping India to freely build up its domestic uranium reserves for weapon grade nuclear material. Many studies acclaimed the fact that India operates world's fastest growing nuclear programme. For instance, a Harvard University study suggested that India has the capacity to produce 2261-2686 nuclear weapons. According to another study, India has sufficient material and technical capacity to produce between 356 and 492 nuclear weapons. A study published by Bulletin of Atomic Scientist estimated that India has the capacity to produce many more nuclear weapons than commonly thought: 1,044 nuclear weapons (914 plutonium-based and 130 uranium-based nuclear weapons), obtained from different reactors. Therefore, its unsafeguarded nuclear material and spent fuel pose serious regional and global concerns for proliferation. In addition, nuclear modernisation of India further makes it obvious that New Delhi is expanding its hegemonic designs beyond this region. India is in a process of increasing its ICBMs missile ranges including Agni V (5000km plus) and Agni VI (10,000km-12,000km). This indicates the country can potentially target US territory too. Similarly, India's entry into Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) is also providing an edge to India for extending its missile ranges and accessibility towards dual-use military technologies. It is certain that New Delhi's membership to the group disturbs the balance of power in the region as India is modernising its missile and space programme. As a result, contrary to ground realities, the US and other foreign states have turned a blind eye towards India. Washington is preparing India as a so-called 'net security provider' in Indian-Ocean Region - as a counterweight to China. For this, the last 10 years of Indo-US defense cooperation has been strengthening Indian military muscle and directly causing regional security implications. All in all, Indian brinkmanship to the South Asian region offers dangerous security implications. India's regional dominance is evident in its stance on military modernisation and strategic expansion. Post-Pahalgam incidents reveal that extra-regional forces have also played a crucial role in regional dynamics of South Asia. The BJP-led Hindutva leadership still remains vulnerable to potential nuclear risks in the region. Hence, a dialogue on regional peace and security in South Asia and resolution of the Kashmir dispute should be a priority for international community. Mahvish Malik The writer is a Visiting Senior Research Associate at Strategic Vision Institute, Islamabad
Express Tribune
a day ago
- Express Tribune
Disney weighs AI future in film production amid legal risks and union pushback
Disney is cautiously navigating how to incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) into its film and television production, balancing innovation with concern over its legacy and legal exposure. A plan to use AI to create a digital double of Dwayne Johnson for the live-action Moana remake—with his cousin serving as a body double and AI-generated facial replacement—was ultimately shelved over concerns about intellectual property ownership, privacy, and union backlash. The company has since taken a conservative approach: CEO Bob Iger and legal chief Horacio Gutierrez emphasize that while AI holds transformative potential, it must not compromise the integrity of Disney's classic characters and storytelling. Disney has also sued AI firms—such as Midjourney—for using its copyrighted characters without permission, underscoring its commitment to protecting intellectual property rights. Projects like Tron: Ares, originally targeted for AI integration, were abandoned due to the risk of negative publicity and ongoing negotiations with actors' and writers' unions. At the same time, Disney is cautiously exploring AI use elsewhere, including personalized Disney+ clips and an AI version of Darth Vader in Fortnite, consistent with the company's ongoing $1.5 billion stake in Epic Games. Internally, Disney has established an AI review committee that vets any use of generative tools in corporate workflows; requests must be approved within 48 hours. Yet employees and creative partners remain wary about the implications for labor, copyright, and creative control. Disney is not alone. The broader Hollywood ecosystem is under pressure from lawsuits, union scrutiny, and regulatory uncertainty as studios wrestle with how to harness AI without undermining artistic authenticity. With stakeholders divided between innovation and preservation, Disney's actions reflect a cautious path forward in a rapidly evolving landscape.
