you realise this is the "no true scotsman" fallacy, don't you?
what you're saying is "the market doesn't work as my moronic theories say that it will, so the only possible conclusion is that we don't have a free market".
it couldn't possibly be that your moronic theories about the market are, in fact, just fucking moronic, could it?
1. "mad cow disease" is a prion disease, not bacterial - completely unaffected by antibiotics
2. it's fucking bizarre watching the insane mental gymnastics of someone determined not to see that agribusiness and pharma corporations don't give a fuck about humanity or the long term problems they cause by using antibiotics on farm animals as long as there's some short term profit in it.
3. i bet you're the kind of fuckwit who demands antibiotics from your doctor for a cold or flu - in total ignorance of the fact that antibiotics are completely useless against viral infections.
4. weak doses of antibiotics are worse than strong doses for causing antibiotic resistance - more of the initial bacterial populations survive, passing on their relatively weak immunity to the next generations, with each generation getting slightly more immune.
5. antibiotic resistance is caused primarily by use on farms - where they use antibiotics in enormous quantities, with runoff from spillage and animal shit getting into the soil and nearby waterways. they don't just use it to prevent disease, they use it because it tends to slightly improve growth and weight of livestock.
the secondary cause is over-prescription by doctors - that's partly because of fuckwits like yourself demanding antibiotics as a magic cure for things they have no effect on, but mostly because pharmaceutical companies market them relentlessly to doctors.
6. not only should agricultural use of antibiotics be completely banned, without exception (no livestock is worth the resistance it causes. socialising that kind of expense is even worse than other forms of off-loading private expense onto the public) but marketing to doctors by pharmaceutical companies should also be banned without exception. Both with harsh and draconian penalties, appropriate to the fact that breeding antibiotic resistance is a crime against humanity.
7. the next time some libertarian-retard rants at you about how wonderful the free market is and how capitalism and profit are essential for medical advances, remember that pharma corporations only give a fuck about profit, not advancement, not progress, not humanity. They only "invest" in sure things - drugs that have already been developed and tested by PUBLICLY-FUNDED RESEARCH and known to work, all they need is marketing and safety trials. "Invest" meaning, of course, corporate welfare sucking at the teat of government, privatising the profit from research that the public has paid for.
say something costs a dollar to produce. a foreign subsidiary imports it for $1.50 and sells it for $5. That's $3.50 taxable profit in that foreign country.
now set up a subsidiary in a tax haven, and transfer ownership of everything to that subsidiary. then you can pretend that the foreign subsidiary buys the imported product from the tax haven subsidiary for, say, $4.99 and sells it locally for $5.00. at most, that's a 1 cent taxable profit...but actually that's a "loss" so untaxed...or, even worse, a tax credit to apply against other taxes that they can't evade.
this is one of several methods that apple and google and many other companies use to steal tens of billions of dollars from citizens in dozens of countries every year.
It works the other way too. Say you're a resources extraction company (oil, natural gas, coal, iron ore, whatever) and you want to avoid paying taxes and mining royalties to the country you're extracting the resources from. You set up a subsidiary in a tax-haven country, have them buy all of the extracted resources from you at a very steep discount (just barely breaking even, if that), and then the tax haven subsidiary sells them at full price. resources AND profit successfully extracted.
oh, and you don't even have to physically ship the resources to the tax haven country, you can do it all on paper or electronic records. the resources still leave the ports in the origin company and go direct to the actual buyer, but on paper it looks as if there's a middle-man.
both of these are easier if you have a compliant and/or corrupt government in the relevant countries. if not, you can tie them up in international courts for years or decades for "illegally" interfering with international trade if they try to stop you or even just slow down your rapacious looting of their resources.
if you've got a really compliant government you can get them to wear most of the costs of your business for you too - say a billion dollars for infrastructure like a train line to take coal to port; or guarantee your loans; or the old favourite of "tax incentives" to encourage you to hurry up and start ripping the country off.
1. those laws were passed so that companies in any nation, whether they surpassed local government capability, could not commercialise space. that's the point of the law, its purpose, not a bug that needs fixing.
2. the patriotic angle is both misleading and stupid as well as self-serving....if china's capacity and potential capacity for activity in space is so great, it will greatly outpace whatever a few US companies can do. the no-commercial-activity law restricts the chinese more than anyone - restrictions like that have an effect that is directly proportional to capability.
a successful repeal (unlikely) of the international laws would see china surge ahead of everyone else in space commercialisation, including american companies.
3. fucking corporations already own most of the fucking earth. we can't let them own space too, no matter how much they bleat and whine that they want to.
If socialism is going to work, it must be built atop a free market.
Entirely wrong, that is exactly the opposite of reality, the exact opposite of what works.
Socialism works quite a lot better if it tolerates well-regulated markets in luxuries, non-essential goods and services....as long as they don't make life worse for everyone and aren't corrosive to society, human well-being, or the environment.
You can't patch up laissez-faire capitalism by layering a few welfare programs on top, we've got decades of evidence proving that. They're inherently just band-aids, not solutions, because the solution is antithetical to capitalism.
By contrast, we've got decades worth of experience in northern europe and (in, more limited form, many other places around the world) showing that democratic socialism with well-regulated markets alongside DOES work extremely well...at least, it does until the international finance industry (aka Wall Street, american business) gets big and powerful enough to fuck it up.
Also, there's no such thing as a free market. It's a fictional ideal, a thought experiment, not a reality (and never has been)...and, without regulations preventing it, markets always tend towards monopoly capture.
a rising tide lifts all boats;
You're quoting trickle-down bullshit? and you somehow expect to be taken seriously?
Renters will only use this new platform if it provides them done benefit, some value. If it doesn't, renters will continue to use other existing services that do create some value for them.
You're ignoring network effects, which is the reason why facebook is dominant and will remain so for at least the foreseeable future.
The choice does not like with the renter, it lies with the landlord. As soon as a significant percentage of landlords list their properties on this site, renters will have no choice but to use it, no matter what the terms of service are. This will entice even more landlords to list their properties here (because that's where all the tenants are, and they'll get sucked in to a bidding war just like on ebay), forcing even more tenants to have to sign up if they want somewhere to live.
That's the business model of this company: to exploit network effects to bootstrap themselves into a monopoly, and then enjoy the benefits of economic rent (aka unearned income) ever after.
Easily solved by simply NOT having punitive exit clauses. They're not mandatory, there's no law requiring a landlord to be a vindictive cunt to tenants. It's even (gasp!) legal to have explicitly fair and reasonable exit clauses.
That doesn't blame the government for everything that's wrong with the world, so doesn't fit with the libertarian mantra "biznis gud, gubmint bad" but it's a fact.
This is not human nature, this is American business ethics (an oxymoron but, in short, "fuck you, fuck everyone")...which also infests American culture. The internet was working just fine until corporations got involved, until they turned it into just another place to do business and exploit people.
The fact that you think it's human nature is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome.
He's a Libertarian(*). Libertarians believe that coercion only comes at the point of a gun or other direct violence. They don't see exploiting people by saying "work for fuck all or starve/watch your children starve to death" as being anything even remotely similar to coercion. They believe that it's a "choice", freely entered into. They don't even see it as coercion when it's completely fucking obvious that the conditions enabling that exploitation have been deliberately engineered and maintained.
that's because they're fucking stupid selfish cunts.
(*) American-style Libertarianism. The word originally meant socialist, but was stolen by Rand-lovers, anarcho-capitalists ("regulations are evil!!!") and property worshippers suckered into believing that whatever is good for business and corporations is good for freedom, even as they're being driven into slavery by those corporations. Most of them are just deluded losers holding onto the dream that one day they'll be the one holding the whip. The word is tainted now, so non-american libertarians refer to themselves as libertarian socialists or left-libertarians.
A few words of advice for you: to get away with arrogance, it has to be justifiable, you have to be able to back it up with competence. And you just don't have what it takes.
You may think that you're smart but you're a fuckwit. Maybe you were considered to be smart in the outer-suburban shithole school you came from but that's not actually smart in the real world. You reason like a fuckwit, you deduce like a fuckwit, you misuse words and grammatical constructs like a fuckwit, and you do a piss-poor imitation of an arrogant takedown just like a fuckwit.
I suggest that you go back to Upper Bumfuck West or whatever inbred hick shithole you came from where you can lord it over people who ARE actually dumber than you. But interacting in the wider world? That's just going to be a never-ending series of depressing embarrassments for you.
> Is "legalistic shenanigans" a really twisted way of saying "legal"?
no. it means breaking the law with yet another version of the same old dodgy accounting scams, and getting away with it until somebody notices and points out that what you are doing is, in fact, breaking the fucking law.
because bullshit accounting practices that have the sole purpose of evading tax are fucking illegal in pretty much every jurisdiction in the world, including NZ and even in the corporate-arse-licking US.
so, no, "haven't been caught yet" is not the same as "legal". "legalistic" is also not the same as "legal", it's a shoddy simulacrum of "legal" that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
BTW, you know why specific kinds of tax evasion get made explicitly illegal even though they're already covered by existing general-purpose legislation? it's because slimy corporate cunts and their even slimier fucking lawyers are always trying it on.
shitty things get made illegal because people do them, or because it's easy to predict that they will do them, not just for the sake of making new laws.
Like most countries, NZ has laws against bullshit accounting schemes that amount to tax evasion. because every fucking tax evasion scheme that has ever existed has relied on bullshit accounting practices in one way or another.
Apple thinks they've found a clever loophole to side-step those laws. They haven't.
Corporate taxation is double-taxation because their employees and customers pay taxes. Really? Do you have any idea how fucking stupid this line of argument is?
it's no different to saying "i shouldn't pay tax because the shopkeepers i buy shit from will pay tax", who then say "no tax for me because my employees pay tax", who then claim tax-exemption by pointing back to the fact that the shops THEY buy shit from pay tax.
and sure, if you're a properly brainwashed American, you'll think you're "clever" by saying something like "Yeah, exactly! Tax is theft". but tax is how civilisation is paid for. It's why you're not a slave in some shit-poor stone-age (or bronze-age at best) economy. It's why you can read, it's why you can do at least basic arithmetic (and can hopefully count your change when you buy shit). It's why countless things that you take for granted in your life exist and are maintained.
Every fucking cent has passed through multiple hands and has been taxed multiple times as it cycles through the economy. Exempting corporations from paying tax because of that is just fucking cretinous.
The problem with corporate income tax is that it is always possible for a mutlinational corporation to shift its profits to whichever country offers the lowest tax rate, unfairly enriching that one country. The best solution is probably to get rid of corporate income tax altogether
yeah. just like the best solution to burglary is for everyone to put all their possessions on the front lawn to make it easier for thieves. fucking idiot!
This isn't the first time corporate taxes have caused problems: remember the court battle in which the E.U. argued that Apple owed more taxes to the Irish government, despite the fact that the Irish government didn't even want those revenues
That happened because Apple was using Ireland to evade paying taxes in the countries where they sold their products. Unsurprisingly, those countries were pissed off by that tax-evading loophole, so took court action to force Apple pay the same tax regardless of where they claimed to be making the profit, making the whole profit-shifting bullshit pointless. Or worse than pointless because the administrative overhead in creating and maintaining that bullshit also has a monetary cost.
Also, the government of Ireland had a responsibility to the **PEOPLE** of Ireland to collect that tax, regardless of how many kickbacks and bribes the MPs took not to collect it.
Apple isn't paying income tax because they aren't turning a profit on sales of the phones in NZ.
That's exactly the problem, the loophole that they have set up and are exploiting.
With fancy (i.e. bullshit) accounting practices, they pretend that they make no profit in NZ (so why the fuck are they bothering to sell anything there. or in Australia. or anywhere else they pull the same bullshit scam), that all profit is made by their Irish subsidiary.
Nope. Tax evasion definitely falls into the former category, wrong regardless of "legality". Especially if achieved via legalistic shenanigans. And doubly so if those shenanigans are only possible due to favourable tax laws and interpretations obtained via corrupt political lobbying and campaign financing.
Corporations benefit from all the things that taxes provide - roads, police, education, and thousands more - so they should contribute to them as well.
hate to break it to you, but you're NOT a temporarily embarrassed millionaire. These tax scams you're championing (out of some brainwashed mindless fantasy that one day you'll "make it" and be part of the exploiter classes rather than the exploited) are NEVER going to benefit you. They're stealing from you, and from everyone else.
google can claim it's not an ad but that's exactly what it is.
spammers also always say "my spam is not spam, it's important information that you need to know". they're fucking lying too.
advertising in all its forms is a crime against humanity. manipulation, lies, deception, propaganda, psychic assault, normalisation - even reification - of consumption, and all the other varieties of bullshit.
Two of the essentials, anyway. Not enough by themselves, but necessary.
make everyone use git or similar, and have all merge requests reviewed by coders who are both willing and capable of explaining what's wrong with the submitted code AND offer pertinent, targeted suggestions for fixes and improvements.
a code review without learnable critique is next to useless. it's not an opportunity to say "fuck off, your code is shit", it's an opportunity to teach and encourage improvement in your colleagues.
This helps the more experienced coders to improve too - explaining something to someone else is a great way to enhance your own understanding.
Slashdot Mirror
you realise this is the "no true scotsman" fallacy, don't you?
what you're saying is "the market doesn't work as my moronic theories say that it will, so the only possible conclusion is that we don't have a free market".
it couldn't possibly be that your moronic theories about the market are, in fact, just fucking moronic, could it?
1. "mad cow disease" is a prion disease, not bacterial - completely unaffected by antibiotics
2. it's fucking bizarre watching the insane mental gymnastics of someone determined not to see that agribusiness and pharma corporations don't give a fuck about humanity or the long term problems they cause by using antibiotics on farm animals as long as there's some short term profit in it.
3. i bet you're the kind of fuckwit who demands antibiotics from your doctor for a cold or flu - in total ignorance of the fact that antibiotics are completely useless against viral infections.
4. weak doses of antibiotics are worse than strong doses for causing antibiotic resistance - more of the initial bacterial populations survive, passing on their relatively weak immunity to the next generations, with each generation getting slightly more immune.
5. antibiotic resistance is caused primarily by use on farms - where they use antibiotics in enormous quantities, with runoff from spillage and animal shit getting into the soil and nearby waterways. they don't just use it to prevent disease, they use it because it tends to slightly improve growth and weight of livestock.
the secondary cause is over-prescription by doctors - that's partly because of fuckwits like yourself demanding antibiotics as a magic cure for things they have no effect on, but mostly because pharmaceutical companies market them relentlessly to doctors.
6. not only should agricultural use of antibiotics be completely banned, without exception (no livestock is worth the resistance it causes. socialising that kind of expense is even worse than other forms of off-loading private expense onto the public) but marketing to doctors by pharmaceutical companies should also be banned without exception. Both with harsh and draconian penalties, appropriate to the fact that breeding antibiotic resistance is a crime against humanity.
7. the next time some libertarian-retard rants at you about how wonderful the free market is and how capitalism and profit are essential for medical advances, remember that pharma corporations only give a fuck about profit, not advancement, not progress, not humanity. They only "invest" in sure things - drugs that have already been developed and tested by PUBLICLY-FUNDED RESEARCH and known to work, all they need is marketing and safety trials. "Invest" meaning, of course, corporate welfare sucking at the teat of government, privatising the profit from research that the public has paid for.
it's the opposite of free software - when the software (or the corporation who wrote it) owns you.
popular with microsoft, apple, google, and many others.
the transfer pricing scam.
say something costs a dollar to produce. a foreign subsidiary imports it for $1.50 and sells it for $5. That's $3.50 taxable profit in that foreign country.
now set up a subsidiary in a tax haven, and transfer ownership of everything to that subsidiary. then you can pretend that the foreign subsidiary buys the imported product from the tax haven subsidiary for, say, $4.99 and sells it locally for $5.00. at most, that's a 1 cent taxable profit...but actually that's a "loss" so untaxed...or, even worse, a tax credit to apply against other taxes that they can't evade.
this is one of several methods that apple and google and many other companies use to steal tens of billions of dollars from citizens in dozens of countries every year.
It works the other way too. Say you're a resources extraction company (oil, natural gas, coal, iron ore, whatever) and you want to avoid paying taxes and mining royalties to the country you're extracting the resources from. You set up a subsidiary in a tax-haven country, have them buy all of the extracted resources from you at a very steep discount (just barely breaking even, if that), and then the tax haven subsidiary sells them at full price. resources AND profit successfully extracted.
oh, and you don't even have to physically ship the resources to the tax haven country, you can do it all on paper or electronic records. the resources still leave the ports in the origin company and go direct to the actual buyer, but on paper it looks as if there's a middle-man.
both of these are easier if you have a compliant and/or corrupt government in the relevant countries. if not, you can tie them up in international courts for years or decades for "illegally" interfering with international trade if they try to stop you or even just slow down your rapacious looting of their resources.
if you've got a really compliant government you can get them to wear most of the costs of your business for you too - say a billion dollars for infrastructure like a train line to take coal to port; or guarantee your loans; or the old favourite of "tax incentives" to encourage you to hurry up and start ripping the country off.
1. those laws were passed so that companies in any nation, whether they surpassed local government capability, could not commercialise space. that's the point of the law, its purpose, not a bug that needs fixing.
2. the patriotic angle is both misleading and stupid as well as self-serving....if china's capacity and potential capacity for activity in space is so great, it will greatly outpace whatever a few US companies can do. the no-commercial-activity law restricts the chinese more than anyone - restrictions like that have an effect that is directly proportional to capability.
a successful repeal (unlikely) of the international laws would see china surge ahead of everyone else in space commercialisation, including american companies.
3. fucking corporations already own most of the fucking earth. we can't let them own space too, no matter how much they bleat and whine that they want to.
Entirely wrong, that is exactly the opposite of reality, the exact opposite of what works.
Socialism works quite a lot better if it tolerates well-regulated markets in luxuries, non-essential goods and services....as long as they don't make life worse for everyone and aren't corrosive to society, human well-being, or the environment.
You can't patch up laissez-faire capitalism by layering a few welfare programs on top, we've got decades of evidence proving that. They're inherently just band-aids, not solutions, because the solution is antithetical to capitalism.
By contrast, we've got decades worth of experience in northern europe and (in, more limited form, many other places around the world) showing that democratic socialism with well-regulated markets alongside DOES work extremely well...at least, it does until the international finance industry (aka Wall Street, american business) gets big and powerful enough to fuck it up.
Also, there's no such thing as a free market. It's a fictional ideal, a thought experiment, not a reality (and never has been)...and, without regulations preventing it, markets always tend towards monopoly capture.
You're quoting trickle-down bullshit? and you somehow expect to be taken seriously?
You're ignoring network effects, which is the reason why facebook is dominant and will remain so for at least the foreseeable future.
The choice does not like with the renter, it lies with the landlord. As soon as a significant percentage of landlords list their properties on this site, renters will have no choice but to use it, no matter what the terms of service are. This will entice even more landlords to list their properties here (because that's where all the tenants are, and they'll get sucked in to a bidding war just like on ebay), forcing even more tenants to have to sign up if they want somewhere to live.
That's the business model of this company: to exploit network effects to bootstrap themselves into a monopoly, and then enjoy the benefits of economic rent (aka unearned income) ever after.
Easily solved by simply NOT having punitive exit clauses. They're not mandatory, there's no law requiring a landlord to be a vindictive cunt to tenants. It's even (gasp!) legal to have explicitly fair and reasonable exit clauses.
That doesn't blame the government for everything that's wrong with the world, so doesn't fit with the libertarian mantra "biznis gud, gubmint bad" but it's a fact.
This is not human nature, this is American business ethics (an oxymoron but, in short, "fuck you, fuck everyone")...which also infests American culture. The internet was working just fine until corporations got involved, until they turned it into just another place to do business and exploit people.
The fact that you think it's human nature is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome.
now everyone can be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
He's a Libertarian(*). Libertarians believe that coercion only comes at the point of a gun or other direct violence. They don't see exploiting people by saying "work for fuck all or starve/watch your children starve to death" as being anything even remotely similar to coercion. They believe that it's a "choice", freely entered into. They don't even see it as coercion when it's completely fucking obvious that the conditions enabling that exploitation have been deliberately engineered and maintained.
that's because they're fucking stupid selfish cunts.
(*) American-style Libertarianism. The word originally meant socialist, but was stolen by Rand-lovers, anarcho-capitalists ("regulations are evil!!!") and property worshippers suckered into believing that whatever is good for business and corporations is good for freedom, even as they're being driven into slavery by those corporations. Most of them are just deluded losers holding onto the dream that one day they'll be the one holding the whip. The word is tainted now, so non-american libertarians refer to themselves as libertarian socialists or left-libertarians.
A few words of advice for you: to get away with arrogance, it has to be justifiable, you have to be able to back it up with competence. And you just don't have what it takes.
You may think that you're smart but you're a fuckwit. Maybe you were considered to be smart in the outer-suburban shithole school you came from but that's not actually smart in the real world. You reason like a fuckwit, you deduce like a fuckwit, you misuse words and grammatical constructs like a fuckwit, and you do a piss-poor imitation of an arrogant takedown just like a fuckwit.
I suggest that you go back to Upper Bumfuck West or whatever inbred hick shithole you came from where you can lord it over people who ARE actually dumber than you. But interacting in the wider world? That's just going to be a never-ending series of depressing embarrassments for you.
> Is "legalistic shenanigans" a really twisted way of saying "legal"?
no. it means breaking the law with yet another version of the same old dodgy accounting scams, and getting away with it until somebody notices and points out that what you are doing is, in fact, breaking the fucking law.
because bullshit accounting practices that have the sole purpose of evading tax are fucking illegal in pretty much every jurisdiction in the world, including NZ and even in the corporate-arse-licking US.
so, no, "haven't been caught yet" is not the same as "legal". "legalistic" is also not the same as "legal", it's a shoddy simulacrum of "legal" that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
BTW, you know why specific kinds of tax evasion get made explicitly illegal even though they're already covered by existing general-purpose legislation? it's because slimy corporate cunts and their even slimier fucking lawyers are always trying it on.
shitty things get made illegal because people do them, or because it's easy to predict that they will do them, not just for the sake of making new laws.
Like most countries, NZ has laws against bullshit accounting schemes that amount to tax evasion. because every fucking tax evasion scheme that has ever existed has relied on bullshit accounting practices in one way or another.
Apple thinks they've found a clever loophole to side-step those laws. They haven't.
The NZ government does NOT have laws that allow this.
Apple lies and says that they make no profit in NZ because they buy their own products at artificially inflated prices from themselves in Ireland.
NZ wants to close this lying fucking bullshit loophole.
and fuckwits like you support Apple when they whinge about the prospect of not being able to evade taxes any more.
Corporate taxation is double-taxation because their employees and customers pay taxes. Really? Do you have any idea how fucking stupid this line of argument is?
it's no different to saying "i shouldn't pay tax because the shopkeepers i buy shit from will pay tax", who then say "no tax for me because my employees pay tax", who then claim tax-exemption by pointing back to the fact that the shops THEY buy shit from pay tax.
and sure, if you're a properly brainwashed American, you'll think you're "clever" by saying something like "Yeah, exactly! Tax is theft". but tax is how civilisation is paid for. It's why you're not a slave in some shit-poor stone-age (or bronze-age at best) economy. It's why you can read, it's why you can do at least basic arithmetic (and can hopefully count your change when you buy shit). It's why countless things that you take for granted in your life exist and are maintained.
Every fucking cent has passed through multiple hands and has been taxed multiple times as it cycles through the economy. Exempting corporations from paying tax because of that is just fucking cretinous.
yeah. just like the best solution to burglary is for everyone to put all their possessions on the front lawn to make it easier for thieves. fucking idiot!
That happened because Apple was using Ireland to evade paying taxes in the countries where they sold their products. Unsurprisingly, those countries were pissed off by that tax-evading loophole, so took court action to force Apple pay the same tax regardless of where they claimed to be making the profit, making the whole profit-shifting bullshit pointless. Or worse than pointless because the administrative overhead in creating and maintaining that bullshit also has a monetary cost.
Also, the government of Ireland had a responsibility to the **PEOPLE** of Ireland to collect that tax, regardless of how many kickbacks and bribes the MPs took not to collect it.
That's exactly the problem, the loophole that they have set up and are exploiting.
With fancy (i.e. bullshit) accounting practices, they pretend that they make no profit in NZ (so why the fuck are they bothering to sell anything there. or in Australia. or anywhere else they pull the same bullshit scam), that all profit is made by their Irish subsidiary.
Nope. Tax evasion definitely falls into the former category, wrong regardless of "legality". Especially if achieved via legalistic shenanigans. And doubly so if those shenanigans are only possible due to favourable tax laws and interpretations obtained via corrupt political lobbying and campaign financing.
Corporations benefit from all the things that taxes provide - roads, police, education, and thousands more - so they should contribute to them as well.
hate to break it to you, but you're NOT a temporarily embarrassed millionaire. These tax scams you're championing (out of some brainwashed mindless fantasy that one day you'll "make it" and be part of the exploiter classes rather than the exploited) are NEVER going to benefit you. They're stealing from you, and from everyone else.
are you inbred-level stupid or a paid corporate astroturfer?
what do i really think?
the problem might start getting solved if we hang a few thousand marketing people and advertising execs for their crimes. provide some disincentive.
or, for poetic justice, drown them slowly in pits full of shit.
google can claim it's not an ad but that's exactly what it is.
spammers also always say "my spam is not spam, it's important information that you need to know". they're fucking lying too.
advertising in all its forms is a crime against humanity. manipulation, lies, deception, propaganda, psychic assault, normalisation - even reification - of consumption, and all the other varieties of bullshit.
Two of the essentials, anyway. Not enough by themselves, but necessary.
make everyone use git or similar, and have all merge requests reviewed by coders who are both willing and capable of explaining what's wrong with the submitted code AND offer pertinent, targeted suggestions for fixes and improvements.
a code review without learnable critique is next to useless. it's not an opportunity to say "fuck off, your code is shit", it's an opportunity to teach and encourage improvement in your colleagues.
This helps the more experienced coders to improve too - explaining something to someone else is a great way to enhance your own understanding.
use pass, a gpgv2-protected password store. available packaged for most distros or direct from https://www.passwordstore.org/
graphical frontends also available for those who prefer them.
s/dedication/Servility Quotient/
Hey fuckwit, these laws aren't to protect you - you can fuck off and die horribly in a fire for all anyone cares.
They're to protect everyone else whose lives you are putting in danger by your risk-taking narcissistic indulgence.
Risk your own worthless life however you want as long as you don't put other people at risk.