"It feels like the last 20 years we've spent rebuilding all the stuff Unix users had builtin 20 to 40 years ago: online editors, shared home directories, etc. All sorts of things are repeating again.
One of the things Unix had was composability. If there's a table on a website now and one on another website, and you wanna join them? Fuck you."
-- Joshua Schachter
CURATE YOUR FREAKING FEEDS.
UNFOLLOW people who post things you don't like.
FOLLOW more people who post things you do like.
STOP being an asshole.
Sorry for the rant, but this is happening more and more. This puritanical push for censorship needs to STOP.
@freemo @ejg I agree with what @freemo points out. People get outraged about how rich somebody is. And that is true. Except huge part of that wealth is only on paper in the fluctuating value of financial (and other assets). But nobody pays taxes over their net worth increases, we pay taxes from realised income.
Anyhow, these concepts have issues. For instance where I live, it can happen that you own say 50 shares of a startup (let it be 50%) which is worth 1000 bucks starting capital, then the next day investor comes along, buys another half for 1Mio bucks and the third day you have the tax office on your neck to pay taxes from a wealth increase (income) of 999k bucks, while all along your cash position did not change at all.
What I am trying to point out is this: Whenever people complain about rich people not paying tax on their wealth increases, the real question to them should be:
1. So how exactly will you legislate it so as not to harm everybody along the way?
2. And suppose if we all pay taxes even over wealth increases which are only on paper (because the stock you own or control went up due to market fluctuations, or geopolitics), what will we do when next year a person's net worth actually decreases? Will the tax office reimburse us, or what?
These are just headlines to cause outrage, nothing else. What actually helps is to tighten up the laws about income taxation and also classification what constitutes income and what does not. If e.g., Bezos has a salary of 1000 bucks and that's all he lives off, he shall pay taxes as a 1k income guy. But if he besides that lives in a house owned by Amazon Inc, drives a car owned by Amazon Inc. and flies Amazon-owned aircraft in his private capacity, then those effects should be counted as his income too. There are countries where this is sorted (at least on smaller scale) better.
> The Verge, which is owned by Vox Media, transitioned to offering its content on Google Docs before internet users swarmed the doc and started editing (editors accidentally left the page unrestricted).
https://www.vox.com/recode/2021/6/8/22524024/fastly-web-outage-news-websites
🤦♀️
@drifa The problem is that when there is a major outage everyone goes "oh isn't it terrible how there are like two companies that host 98% of the internet" but then when it comes back up and the opium of social media returns everyone just goes back to drooling on their keyboard and forgets about it
Just published Google lawsuit evidence indicates that like always retained users' location data, even if disabled in user interface, to the extent that its own employees flashed LineageOS on their phones to avoid tracking. Full thread on https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1398353211220807682
1. Wake up in a decent mood.
2. See news and/or discussions about the absolute cesspool that is politics.
3. Go back to being depressed.
Strongly suspecting that the easy access to information is one of the biggest contributors to the prevalence of depression. Every day we are reminded that no matter what we do, the world won't stop being an awful place because we as humans are just terrible in large scale management and overall rational thinking.
Software developer, open-source enthusiast, wannabe software architect. I like learning and comparing different technologies. Also general STEM nerd.