Wobbles42

8 ms·

61.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
That is a good point -- though perhaps a better solution there would be to simply make the use of an asset as collateral into a taxable event, and treat money borrowed against it in excess of the original value as capital gains. I know this
62.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Perhaps the simple solution is to give those small business owners the option of selling their business to the government at whatever price the government feels it is worth. Any claim of valuation is really only meaningful as a purchase off
63.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
What is stopping it is the fact that the "wealth" they are being taxed on doesn't actually exist, so by starting a company and getting investment you create tax liability that is impossible to pay. Early stage companies have
64.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
This needs to be repeated more often. If I buy a house for $100k, and next year some idiot pays $1M for a very similar house three streets down, did I just magically make $900k? Should I be taxed on that gain immediately? Should I be forc
65.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Without society it's pretty hard to be well off in the first place. The entire concept of property becomes pretty meaningless without some very basic concepts of a legal system and territorial integrity. Without that you can only own
66.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
This. Separation of concerns is a good thing. In this case "people who spy on you" and "people who kick your door in and shoot your dog".
67.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
This is true. It can't be considered spyware as long as the beneficiary is publically traded.
68.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
The problem with this strategy is that the "instant death zone" is much much smaller than the "3rd degree burns over 100% of your body" zone. I don't share your fatalism, but I can't criticize it. It is an und
69.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
We aren't all rednecks. Or maybe we kind of are but some of us have engineering degrees.
70.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Tobacco because a trendy social cause. Alcohol did once too but that was 100 years ago or so.
71.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
I do understand this sentiment, but isn't the tension here that security improvements by their very nature are designed to break things? Specifically the things we might consider "bad", but really that definition gets a bi
72.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
I don't like cheating, but honestly I find your behavior hard to judge. The reality, to me, seems to be that universities sell credentials with learning as a sort of sideshow or window dressing. I've met a lot of excellent enginee
73.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
> The LLM users are so brazen that they just submit the prompt, copy the output, and call it a day. Is this not what all the potential employers claim to want anyway? I sometimes wonder how many of us are employed to actually make thing
74.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
You are forgetting the most important ingredient to what makes stack overflow what it is: the SEO that ensures closed threads always make it to the top of Google results.
75.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Content warnings make sense, and I do know what portions you are talking about, but they really are a fairly small part of only one of the books (IIRC the third one?). I wouldn't describe the entire series as torture-porn just for that
76.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
I read Starfish close to 20 years ago. He had a uniquely dark vision of the future compared to the zeitgeist in 2007 or so. It's been interesting living through reality since then. I fear the day will come when I reread his earlier
77.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They may or may not be doing the right thing for the wrong reasons, but at least they ARE doing the right thing. That decision was made by a set of humans, and likely at least some of t
78.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
> I think a big part of it is that failures in aviation safety cost lives This is an interesting point, and it certainly affects the incentives involved and the amount of resources allocated to mitigating the problems. I do think cyber s
79.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Aviation safety is mostly about learning from past experience. You mitigate known hazards that, once mitigated, stay mitigated. Cybersecurity is about adversarial hazards. When you mitigate them they actively try to unmitigated themselves
80.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Checklists solve the problem of forgetting specific details. They work very well in situations where all possible problems have been enumerated and the only failure mode is forgetting to check for one. They do not solve the problem of gett
81.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
I would take the existential dread a step further: am "I" even the same person I remember being yesterday? I seem to be a conscious entity, and I have access to the physical memory store in my brain, but am "I" actually
82.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Even in cases where the physical media survives, the issue remains of continued availability of working hardware to read the media. This might get better in the future though. We seem to be reaching the end of technology's exponential
83.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Careful. The real humans at the bottom of that rabbit hole are the individual shareholders. That is the real root of this problem -- the people that ultimately profit from this behavior (a group that, ironically, almost certainly includes
84.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
Freeze their ability to do anything period. Physically lock the incorporation documents in a prison cell. They won't need to do "basic life support", the documents will be provided with trays of food, water, and adequate op
85.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
No one ever suggests that we hold the owners of companies liable for what their companies do. I know that this is the entire point of limited liability corporations -- to divorce ownership from responsibility -- but maybe that wasn't s
86.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
> and then you're over What does this mean in practice? Apple is still doing business, has three years of profits from the malicious compliance, and appears to have attracted not much more than a sternly worded letter from a judge,
87.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
This tends to be a property of regulations in general. It costs money to comply. At a minimum you often need to hire an expert that actually understands the regulation and can explain how to comply with it. In general that cost doesn&#x27
88.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
#2 seems more probable to me for any given human being selected at random. #1 seems more probable given a human being that has been selected to head one of the most valuable companies on the planet. That's his entire job -- to play a
89.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
The "don't be evil" thing has always surprised me. Why would a company that has decided to embrace evil want to admit that publically?
90.
by Wobbles42 1y ago
I would agree that most people with that exact background would have learned the hard way to care about privacy. The single example that ascended to be the CEO of Apple though? That selection process would seem more relevant than any per

More ›