4 ms·

> all income should be in the public domain. Would you mind sharing your passport data and income numbers here so that it becomes public domain?

frenchyatwork 5y ago
Is it not obvious that one person's data being public (and the resulting information asymmetry) is a lot different than everyone's data being public?
- ghostwriter 5y ago
  it's not obvious, could you clarify why does it make a difference whether there are more people sharing such data with you? For instance, if I believe that open-source projects have to be released with a public domain license (effective zero license), it doesn't matter if others want to follow my example, I can still apply my beliefs onto my projects to my own percieved benefit.
alkonaut 5y ago
This is the same argument as ”if you want higher taxes why don’t you donate money to the state?”, which is of course a non-argument. Taxes (and thus income) is public information in several countries and they don’t appear to be Orwellian hellscapes.
- ghostwriter 5y ago
  > This is the same argument as ”if you want higher taxes why don’t you donate money to the state?”, which is of course a non-argument. why is it a non-argument if everyone knows that talking the talk is different from walking the walk? Higher taxes is not a means to itself, it has a specific goal of funding causes that you care about. Now, if there's a cause that you deeply care about, why wouldn't you donate your own money towards that cause as a matter of your exercising your free will instead of desiring that everyone else are unuiformly forced into following your ideals?
  - alkonaut 5y ago
    Taxes and charity are two completely different things. People can indeed donate. But arguing “I think there should be more public spending on X and I’d be willing to pay higher taxes for it” a political position. Not sure if you are insinuating that anyone who holds this political position but does not donate money towards the cause are somehow hypocrites? “Desiring that everyone else are forced to follow your ideals” is basically what most politics is about when it comes to public spending and taxes.
    - ghostwriter 5y ago
      > Taxes and charity are two completely different things. I couldn't agree more with it. One is a compulsory extortion, another is a voluntary action. > Not sure if you are insinuating that anyone who holds this political position but does not donate money towards the cause are somehow hypocrites? I'd like to understand why certain people would rather prefer a compulsory extortion for everyone than a voluntary action for themselves and other like-minded people. Even at the level of the mentioned politics, public spending is not especially effective and efficient approach towards funding your causes [1]. [1] https://www.thecity.nyc/2019/4/4/21211167/no-relief-as-pricey-park-bathrooms-put-pressure-on-taxpayers https://www.thecity.nyc/2019/4/4/21211167/no-relief-as-price...
      - alkonaut 5y ago
        > I'd like to understand why certain people would rather prefer a compulsory extortion for everyone than a voluntary action for themselves and other like-minded people I think if you don’t understand that already, it’s likely I can’t help you understand either. I suggest traveling to and reading about functioning welfare states and high-tax societies. Perhaps it’ll clear up. If not, reading and traveling is rarely a waste!
        ghostwriter 5y ago
        > I think if you don’t understand that already, it’s likely I can’t help you understand either. But expressing your reasoning here doesn't have to be predicated purely on your percieving my capacity to understand it. You could just express it in a token of good will. I've switched three countries with three different languages so far. Coming from one of the currently non-existing Soviet states, I think I've got a pretty useful cultural and political background to understand and see the real difference between welfare- and small-government states than most of westerners by birth out there.
Athas 5y ago
I don't know if passport data is supposed to be confidential (i.e. if it can be misused), but I have no compunctions about sharing my salary information. Last month I made the equivalent of $5615 (after deducting pension payments), from which I paid $1886 in taxes. It's ultimately subjective what counts as "personal information", but my income is not me, nor is it particularly about me. I think it would be fine for it to be public by default, as in Norway.
- ghostwriter 5y ago
  > but I have no compunctions about sharing my salary information. the difference here is that unless there's person-identifying information (which the article mentions as "personal data"), it's not yet _your_ salary information, because we don't know who you are. But if you provided a few more non-confidential details about yourself, such as the name of the company you are employed by, your role and the department, then even without disclosing your confidential details, the provided salary is a lot more valuable piece of information about you. There are numerous outsiders with a various range of intents that might find this information about your economical wellbeing extremely valuable.
  - Athas 5y ago
    My name is Troels Henriksen and I work as assistant professor at the University of Copenhagen. That is a unique combination, so it identifies me as a person. I'm not averse to my income being connected to my identity.
    - ghostwriter 5y ago
      Nice to meet you Troels. If you don't mind, I've got a few more clarifying questions: - Is it your only source of income? - Do all assistant professors at your University earn the same amount of money or is it based on individually chosen fields of research / classroom hours they take?
      - Athas 5y ago
casualrandomcom 5y ago
For sure, as soon as everybody shares his own

frenchyatwork 5y ago

Is it not obvious that one person's data being public (and the resulting information asymmetry) is a lot different than everyone's data being public?

ghostwriter 5y ago
it's not obvious, could you clarify why does it make a difference whether there are more people sharing such data with you? For instance, if I believe that open-source projects have to be released with a public domain license (effective zero license), it doesn't matter if others want to follow my example, I can still apply my beliefs onto my projects to my own percieved benefit.

alkonaut 5y ago

This is the same argument as ”if you want higher taxes why don’t you donate money to the state?”, which is of course a non-argument. Taxes (and thus income) is public information in several countries and they don’t appear to be Orwellian hellscapes.

ghostwriter 5y ago
> This is the same argument as ”if you want higher taxes why don’t you donate money to the state?”, which is of course a non-argument. why is it a non-argument if everyone knows that talking the talk is different from walking the walk? Higher taxes is not a means to itself, it has a specific goal of funding causes that you care about. Now, if there's a cause that you deeply care about, why wouldn't you donate your own money towards that cause as a matter of your exercising your free will instead of desiring that everyone else are unuiformly forced into following your ideals?
- alkonaut 5y ago
  Taxes and charity are two completely different things. People can indeed donate. But arguing “I think there should be more public spending on X and I’d be willing to pay higher taxes for it” a political position. Not sure if you are insinuating that anyone who holds this political position but does not donate money towards the cause are somehow hypocrites? “Desiring that everyone else are forced to follow your ideals” is basically what most politics is about when it comes to public spending and taxes.
  - ghostwriter 5y ago
    > Taxes and charity are two completely different things. I couldn't agree more with it. One is a compulsory extortion, another is a voluntary action. > Not sure if you are insinuating that anyone who holds this political position but does not donate money towards the cause are somehow hypocrites? I'd like to understand why certain people would rather prefer a compulsory extortion for everyone than a voluntary action for themselves and other like-minded people. Even at the level of the mentioned politics, public spending is not especially effective and efficient approach towards funding your causes [1]. [1] https://www.thecity.nyc/2019/4/4/21211167/no-relief-as-pricey-park-bathrooms-put-pressure-on-taxpayers https://www.thecity.nyc/2019/4/4/21211167/no-relief-as-price...
    - alkonaut 5y ago
      > I'd like to understand why certain people would rather prefer a compulsory extortion for everyone than a voluntary action for themselves and other like-minded people I think if you don’t understand that already, it’s likely I can’t help you understand either. I suggest traveling to and reading about functioning welfare states and high-tax societies. Perhaps it’ll clear up. If not, reading and traveling is rarely a waste!
      - ghostwriter 5y ago
        > I think if you don’t understand that already, it’s likely I can’t help you understand either. But expressing your reasoning here doesn't have to be predicated purely on your percieving my capacity to understand it. You could just express it in a token of good will. I've switched three countries with three different languages so far. Coming from one of the currently non-existing Soviet states, I think I've got a pretty useful cultural and political background to understand and see the real difference between welfare- and small-government states than most of westerners by birth out there.

Athas 5y ago

I don't know if passport data is supposed to be confidential (i.e. if it can be misused), but I have no compunctions about sharing my salary information. Last month I made the equivalent of $5615 (after deducting pension payments), from which I paid $1886 in taxes. It's ultimately subjective what counts as "personal information", but my income is not me, nor is it particularly about me. I think it would be fine for it to be public by default, as in Norway.

ghostwriter 5y ago
> but I have no compunctions about sharing my salary information. the difference here is that unless there's person-identifying information (which the article mentions as "personal data"), it's not yet _your_ salary information, because we don't know who you are. But if you provided a few more non-confidential details about yourself, such as the name of the company you are employed by, your role and the department, then even without disclosing your confidential details, the provided salary is a lot more valuable piece of information about you. There are numerous outsiders with a various range of intents that might find this information about your economical wellbeing extremely valuable.
- Athas 5y ago
  My name is Troels Henriksen and I work as assistant professor at the University of Copenhagen. That is a unique combination, so it identifies me as a person. I'm not averse to my income being connected to my identity.
  - ghostwriter 5y ago
    Nice to meet you Troels. If you don't mind, I've got a few more clarifying questions: - Is it your only source of income? - Do all assistant professors at your University earn the same amount of money or is it based on individually chosen fields of research / classroom hours they take?
    - Athas 5y ago

casualrandomcom 5y ago

For sure, as soon as everybody shares his own