throwawayacc2

I had a recurring donation set up for wikipedia. I really like it. It’s useful. But I hate woke politics. So, yeah, I no longer have that recurring donation.

I genuinely don’t understand why people feel the need to shove their ideology down peoples throat every chance they get.

Comments like this make me wonder just how divergent peoples outlook on life are.

I’m with the guy you responded too, making a billionaire lose money is way funnier and interesting.

But even in a normal company, I never really understood this loyalty/ethics thing.

To me, it makes sense to do the very, very bear minimum and “steal” as much time as possible. So you can use it for your self.

A job is you selling time to someone else. It’s simply incomprehensible to me someone would willingly give extra of their time. Equally not attempted to claw back as much as their time as possible.

I suppose there’s an element of game theory, there are points in time where it’s worth to go that extra mile to achieve something that will put you in a better position, but those are the exceptions not the rule.

Not judging you, I’m glad people like you are out there. My life is better due to people like you and I am thankful for that. But, yeah, I guess I’m just fascinated at the differences in outlook.

All that said, I hope Trump is never allowed back

Asking honestly, why?

I am genuinely curious to understand the reasoning behind this line of thinking.

I am literally harmed by ads. In my case, I suffer from internet addiction you see and those extra load seconds and interruptions are deeply harmful to me. They trigger anxiety and panic attacks.

But that’s just me. Other people are harmed way more! Maybe you can wave away my ad inducted anxiety but can you wave away people with epilepsy? Can you wave away people with ADHD? Can you wave away people with accessibility needs? Can you wave away people unwillingly outed as lgbt by the ads they are served? Can you wave away predatory ads? Can you wave away “making the world worse” through ad enabled miss information?

As for lettuce I am allergic to it. I will literally die if I don’t remove it.

Your move.

If I had an answer for this I’d be pitching my startup somewhere. I honestly don’t know what the alternative will be. But I am sure there is on. Forcing people to consume ads just isn’t sustainable I think.

I genuinely don’t know how to even approach this.

Here’s something that sprang to mind.

A slaver to his slave: Your attempts at achieving freedom are undermining a business model that is letting a lot of people enjoy cheap clothing, and that would be selfishly making the world worse.

What’s your thoughts on that one? Genuinely curious.

The way I see it, I’m not “making the world worse”. Waving away the can of worms opened by the notion of “making the world better/worse”, I genuinely cannot understand how refusing to consume something makes me selfish.

I’m not selfish for removing lettuce from my burger and I’m not selfish for removing ads. The problem is not with me. The problem is with the business model.

People not liking something drives innovation. Instead of doubling down on something that is not working and telling people “stop being a bad person and consume the ad” perhaps the business should find an alternative way of monetising.

I wrote this before and I will write it here again.

There is a burger place.

The burger place offers free burgers.

They are able to do this because Big Lettuce pays the burger place to put lettuce in their burger.

When I go and get a burger from the free burger place, what I do is I remove the lettuce from my burger. I just don’t like it.

I made no agreement with the burger place to eat lettuce.

They assume I will. They try to convince me to. They might even try to make the lettuce hard to remove from the burger.

But what has not happened, unlike you are implying, is an agreement that I will consume the lettuce.

I’m not going to stop going to the free burger place. I really like free burgers. And I won’t stop removing lettuce from my burger either. I deeply dislike lettuce.

So, instead of telling me to stop going to the free burger shop because I like removing lettuce, how about you tell the shop to stop giving away free lettuce?

If people really like their burgers, they will pay for them.

If their burgers aren’t really that good and people consume them just because they’re free, maybe the burger place should go out of business.

This would not be an issue if we didn’t live in an absurd system demanding constant growth.

Yeah but those weren’t really “refugees” were they? You can’t call your self a refugee if you cross who knows how many borders from Syria and Afghanistan all the way to Sweden. And then add insult to injury by vacationing in the countries they are “fleeing” from.

Sweden wasn’t “the lone member state that did the right thing” and the illegal immigrants were not “dumped on Sweden”. Sweden made a very bad choice opening up to what is very clearly a criminal cohort going out of its way to abuse welfare.

And the same goes for Germany. Even more so because their incompetent leadership invited the entire middle east to Europe.

If you really wanted to “help out” and “be humanitarian” Sweden and the rest of the EU should have established safe zones in Africa. And end what is essentially a ferry service from Africa to Europe. Migrants go on dingy inflatable boats 5 miles of the coast, issue an SOS and get transported to the EU. If this isn’t incentivising illegal migration, I don’t know what is.

You can’t expect to conduct a policy of ethnic replacement which is what Swedens policy has been for the last few decades and don’t get resentment from the native population. You reap what you sow. The only good news is, the tide is turning.

OP, the Stripe guy said this

We’ve been investigating this case for the past 24 hours, and it's not straightforward. I can’t share more publicly here, but we’re in touch directly with OP.

Can you lay out your version of the events please and give written permission for the Strip guy to lay out his version as well?

Curious to see how the two line up.

OP can you lay out your version of the events please? And also give written permission to the Stripe guy to lay out his version? I want to see how the two compare. Feel like watching some drama this evening.

I’m surprised I haven’t seen this further up. I suppose it might be because it’s less perceived as software but, there were definitely protests against Uber.

Not only was Uber protested against, in some places successfully, but there were pro Uber protests as well.

Also as a somewhat funny anecdote, it wasn’t a protest as you describe, with people on the street but my aunt told me how a few years back there was an upgrade for the OS at the place she worked at. We’re talking completely non technical boomers having to switch from Windows 98 to Windows 7 or something like that. They were pissed! They were arguing with the boss about it, complaining non stop, saying how they don’t understand anything anymore and pretty much did an informal go slow for a few months.

The progressive equivalent is the long march through the institutions. There absolutely was an organised “progressive” drive to increase their ideological base. And yes. The same long march is now happening from the other side. Progress is not always in the direction you like.

* Long march through the institutions: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_march_through_the_insti...

The case I was thinking about is something like, let's say there's a obviously mentally ill guy thratening to kill people. I'm talking hobo smeared with shit, reeking like all hell, tattered clothes, broken bottle in hand, screaming obscenities and frightening people with death threats in parking lots. You know, regulard tuesday evening in LA.

I think the police should be allowed to arrest this man. A DA might decide to file this new mental health charge against him. Assuming the crazy person doesn't accept the plea deal he would be offered, voluntary commitment in a mental health facility, this goes to trial. If the trial finds the defendant guilty of being insane, he is forcefully commited to said mental health facilty.

Are there issues? Sure. Is it somewhat ok because it's done via due process? Maybe. Is it better then letting potentially violent crazies in desperate need of mental health treatment run loose? Absolutely.

I mean, you could say the same thing about jail sentences right? Presumably this forced treatment would be done via due process. Maybe in cases where a medical sentence is issued, half the jury are psychiatrists or neurologists or have some appropriate qualification.

Whenever I hear about daylight saving I remember this thing I read on the internet. Apparently it’s a native american saying. “Only the white man think he can cut the top of a blanket, saw to the bottom, and get a longer blanket”. If it’s a real saying or not I don’t know but it’s a good saying I think.

Changing the time seems silly. I can think of better solutions just at the top of my head.

1. Instead of changing the time ( God, what an arrogant concept this is ) why not change your schedule/working hours.

2. Instead of changing the time or working hours, just keep going as it is. We have artificial lights we don’t really solely on the sun, and in most places it’s not like lights are not used anyway.

3. But people want some sunlight. Well they don’t get it anyways in the north and they get it anyways in the south. Daylight saving is only partially effective around the 45th degree parallel. So, how about give people a midday break, make them go outside, touch grass. Productivity might actually increase.

I think people can come up with better reasons and ideas if they ponder more then the half minute I spent while offering a sacrifice to the porcelain god.

Why are people like you a thing? Why all the spite? Why all the desire for punishment?

Honestly, I don’t get this mindset.

When you see someone doing better than you, why is your first thought “I must put him down” instead of “I want to learn this too”.

You understand wrong what kiwi farms is. The moderation there is far better to facebook for example. Not in small reason due to the fact they don’t censor. They comply with the law. Unlawful content is pulled down immediately, lawful content stays up. Cloudflare lied to you when they said “human life is in immediate danger”.

In matters like this, it’s best to actually look at how both sides present the issue.

Lol. Are you for real? Try expressing any concerns about the excesses of the trans activists or concerns about the demographic replacement of europeans. People who do that wish they were treated like communists in the 50s!

We have different definitions of censorship. To me that is not censorship.

Censorship is making information functionality unavailable or altering it. Delete it or deliberately make it very hard to access or change it’s contents.

If you click a button or even add a message ( apart from the content ) that is not censorship. That’s why for example I don’t consider it censorship when youtube added covid messages to certain videos.

What you have described is nothing short of a horror dystopian hell scape. My God, listen to your self man!

If no keywords were triggered for misinformation, and none of the eyeballs on that post marked it as misinformation or offensive

Keywords? Who decides the keywords? What are you going to do when normal words get a coded meaning. Remember “milk” and the “ok” sign. 4chan is going to have a field day with this! What about the ((( echos ))). You gonna write a regex for potential use of non letter characters?

Marked as misinformation. What, you’re going to ask the ministry of truth for input? Do you think this will achieve anything except build an echo chamber and increase division? The same for offensive. What’s going to happen when all posts by trans people are marked as offensive? Or that doesn’t count cause you’re ok with it. Should we establish a Ministry of Morality, perhaps with a morality police like the saudis to tell us what’s offensive and what’s not?

Everything you wrote is, I don’t even know how to call it. It’s evil. It’s evil, that’s what it is. You have though up an evil system whose only outcome will be oppression, division and resentment.

speech that is legal should be free everywhere.

Yes! This is precisely what should be the standard. Everything that is not explicitly illegal is legal and protected. No corporation should prohibit legal things.

You can’t be serious. Are you serious? Spam is not censored. You have access to it. You click on the spam folder and you can read the spam email in all it’s glory!

And before you even mention auto deletion, you can disable that. I think that should be opt in not opt out but, yeah, spam in not being censored.

Good. This is especially welcome news in the context of the unprecedented attack on kiwi farms.

As I said in a different thread, we have laws preventing businesses from discriminating. We do not allow shops to put up “no blacks here” signs. Why do we allow infrastructure providers from doing essentially the same thing?

Censorship, of any kind from anyone, government or corporation is an abomination that must be stamped out. We cannot have a civilised society as long as censorship is accepted.

If you want to do that, we might as well simply declare anarchy, and let everyone deal with the criminals and warlords who will take over, and that's no exaggeration.

Bruv …

Honestly I can’t tell if you’re for real or no. You already did that! California. People robbing stores in broad daylight, nothing happens to them. Chicago. Do I need to say anything about that third world enclave? Bloody hell man, chaz. A literal warlord took over!

What are you doing to yourselves? Snap out of it America!

It doesn’t matter if it’s like the flu or something else entirely. That’s just a poorly articulated way of saying “it’s not so bad that it warrants the restrictions”.

Restrictions are all but gone at least in Europe and society is still functional. And it would have been sans restrictions too.

Haha I must say, HMRC has got to be the most well documented jurisdiction I dealt with. I think you are right with HMRC. But I incorporated in one of the tax friendly countries in Eastern Europe. The way I understood the rule is, I only need to try to make an income. And I do. I have a paypall button. But, there’s no rule on the cost/income. I’m just spending money to try to make money, which is what every body does. I just happen to do it with less success.

Not even a moment.

So, the reason I sent you that link is if you look at the numbers, that 21k per month pre tax turns into 8k cash in hand per month after tax.

That is nothing short of insane to me. That is almost 3 quarters of your money taken by the government. Maybe you can live with that. I can’t. It’s insane to me. I simply refuse to participate in that.

As for taxes, I get your point. Sounds good in theory. Until you realise people like me are not that uncommon. That 25% I still have a say on is going to go to my charity. A social change sort of charity. A charity aimed at offering educational alternatives to promising young leaders. The sort that will grow up to question the justice of your tax regime and advocate for it’s dismantling. And with a bit of luck and push from other rich people, give it a few decades and it will go away.

But to answer you:

1. 1% flat tax, applied to income for people and profit for businesses.

€1000 goes into your business -> you’re left with €990 -> you take them all out as dividends, you’re left with €980.1

This will provide an annual bulk income.

2. Flat transaction fee. Every time money changes hands, the government skims 0.1€ from it.

This will provide a steady income stream.

You buy a laptop, you pay €1000 for it, the vendor only gets €999.9 - This is not something operators worry about, this is done automatically by the banks.

But this won’t be enough to <insert something here>. Well, tough luck. Better start prioritising. Start by cutting foreign aid. Start by cutting aid to ngos shipping migrants from africa, start by cutting welfare to illegals, get rid of the useless government bureaucracy like “period dignity officers”, plenty of stuff to cut.

Make do with less, that’s what I would tell the government.

I will answer your questions but first I want to show you something. It’s the link at the bottom.

In the UK there’s something called IR35. Without getting into to much detail, the client will decide if you fall inside or outside. If you are inside or outside you will pay different amounts of tax.

Not that long ago I was offered £1000 per day inside. That seemed like a really good rate to me. Or so I thought. In a month, 21 working days, that’s £21k per month, how much can taxes be right? Let’s call it £17k - I mean c’mon, £4k per month in taxes is already ludicrous. I couldn’t possibly be more. Right?

Please go to the link and plug in £1000 per day. Look at what it says you get cash in hand at the end of the month and tell me, does that seem ok? Is that tax worth paying?

https://www.contractorcalculator.co.uk/insideir35contractorc...