When I grew up in early post-Communist Czechoslovakia, McDonalds was where the richer kids went and later bragged about. The menu used to be too pricey for a random Czech.
These days, fast food is comparably cheaper than it used to be, but still relatively expensive for the poorest fifth of the population. As long as someone poor can cook, they are better off cooking at home and only going to fast food restaurants on holidays or so.
(I’ve spent a few years living in north India as a foreigner)
But you don't have to go very far up the socioeconomic ladder even in India to get to a strata of the population who would not send their kids to beg in the streets. People there wish to protect and provide for their kids as much as anywhere else in the world.
This is a bit of a sweeping statement. Colonization has a big role to play here also. When the british left india the average life expectancy was barely 40. Many other former colonies struggle with poverty and the socioeconomic disaster that it brings along. India has improved since then but has a long way to go.
I agree completely. Colonization set the stage for many of the persistent struggles faced by many in the developing world. But colonial powers didn't teach people in India how to oppress their own people, even if they wasted no time taking advantage of and amplifying the pre-existing situation.
Today, when a country as productive as India (they are self sufficient in food production) still has large numbers of children going hungry, it suggests that there are serious issues with distribution of basic resources like calories. Yes, it has improved, but not nearly enough.
Also, the US is not orders of magnitude better in this way, since we have millions of children relying on "last-resort" food security programs - vestiges of the New Deal - that are under constant threat of being cut. Before these programs were enacted in the 1930s, children were indeed going hungry in the streets of the US, and it continued for a long time afterwards (and sometimes to this day).
If we didn't have these programs, I'm not convinced the situation wouldn't be more like India, since we have equivalent fundamental social ills that drive children into precarious hunger situations.
Then the state government did what any sensible government will do. They filed a case against the journalist for criminal conspiracy maligning the image of state government.
Since last few years it has become fashionable to call Indians who criticize the government "anti-national" as if nation = government.
If anything, the measurable differences between ex-colonies, when it comes to their current state, are maddenigly confused. People tend to forget that even smaller European nations were sort-of colonized, the Czechs and the Slovenes by the Austrians, the Slovaks by the Hungarians, the Serbs by the Turks, the Finns by the Swedes and later by the Russians.
And it seems that it mattered who colonized you. Long term, former Austrian and German colonies are doing okay, Hungarian less so (sorry, Hungarians, but it is true!), Russian and Turkish ones much less so. You can still see the difference e.g. in Romania, when you cross the former Hungaro-Turkish border, or in Poland, when you cross the former Russo-German border. Even 100 years of independence didn't erase the differences.
Taiwan is a bit interesting because much of the migration happened post world war with the rise of the CCP. While Chinese presence there predates this wave, most ethnic Chinese there are migrants. The aborignese aren't particularly well off.
With regards to German colonies doing OK I'd like to point you to the African colonies like Central African Republic.
British occupation in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan broke down a lot of industries. For instance industries like Wootz Steel, Muslin which had a very long history were in effect dismantled as the British could not compete.
> During the period of Company rule, the East India Company imported British-produced cloth into the Indian subcontinent, but became unable to compete with the local muslin industry. The Company administration initiated several policies in an attempt to suppress the muslin industry, and muslin production subsequently experienced a period of decline. It has been alleged that in some instances Indian weavers were rounded up and their thumbs chopped off, although this has been refuted by historians as an misreading of a report by William Bolts from 1772. The quality, finesse and production volume of Bengali muslin declined as a result of these policies, continuing when India transitioned from Company rule to British Crown control. 
Probably the easiest of alln3 is to fly to some poor country and do the stuff there (supported by a local lawyer).
I think that, by law, whenever debt is sold, the person that owes the debt should have the right to buy their own debt at the sale price. The current system is full of moral hazards, and this would help level the playing field.
(Sorry to hear about the bankruptcy. That really shouldn't be possible, anywhere.)
and that said user could ever be convinced to open some,
and that said user could access them on a machine apart from the infected.
They are completely bonkers.
That's a cultural thing in the UK. The rules are different for the famous, where you can influence the behaviour of others by publicly endorsing a cause; but for private citizens, to boost about their good deeds? Frightfully infra dig
I think if I needed to do this in a UK community where I wasn't already known then I'd speak to a MP/councillor and say I wanted to fund them having a meal with X poor families so they could hear about their struggles and such.
It's actually an interesting challenge.
You could probably donate '5 family pizza dinners' to a school in a poorer area, eg for a school fair.
"m'am, it's a long story...they have my files. Also, I am recording you. Who wants breadsticks?!"
Now, if it asked you to buy some pizzas and just hand them to some less fortunate kids, you could probably do that without interacting with the police. You'd still need to be careful, but it could probably be done.
> Droplock is a tool to help you when your laptop is stolen... The thief is prompted with an option to donate to charity (through JustGiving, another BattleHack sponsor) or pay the laptop owner directly via Braintree. If they fail to take one of these options, the laptop gets locked down until payment is made.
I don't think there's a risk if any great outbreak here. A bunch of scriptkiddies took some open source project and modified it with some silly instructions.
Alternatively, I could see this used in one of those scam calls. They set up remote accesslike normally and then months laltrr the6 infrct their victims and the "trusted Microsoft technician" gives them a call to steal even more off their money. This time there's an actual piece of malware that gets removed, solidifying trust in the scammers even though they were the ones to infect the victims in the first place.
(Hence many of them operating out of the former USSR.)
Theres a difference, though, between an extensive ransomeware attack and an experiment by a bunch of amateurs. The chance of key recovery is much greater if there are dedicated criminals behind the attack, but amateurs also don't get the widespread reach that the media coverage might suggest.
I think the characterization of scriptkiddies as hopeless people is a bit romantic. I was something of a skiddie when I was young and I think a lot of their behaviour can be attributed to teenage recklessness.
The former USSR certainly has their fair share of scriptkiddies but they're around in every country. When the USSR was still around, the west had its fair share of phreakers that developed into the hacker subculture and established the code of honour that evolved into the cybersecurity communities of today.
Responsibility always lies on those who created the malware.
But also on hospital IT if they didn't take precautions.
Hospital IT soaks in a special set of impossible choices.
Vendors lock them to insecure OSes and inflexible contracts. Regulations are equally inflexible. In general, security is in tension with providing patient care, especially in emergency situations. And all this stuff is super expensive, which means making do with old gear in a lot of places.
I am in no way defending incompetence. But the reality is grim.
Why? They look that scary?
Your sample is probably biased in some way. I've met many who feel trapped in wage slavery, here in the USA.
On a related note (and I get negative feedback whenever i say this, but) this is the future of all software developers as i see it. If you can do your entire job remotely, then "remote" is going to get optimized over time.
It does not make sense to spend your time in USA (for example) coding when you can stop at developing the specs and send it overseas to be coded for half the cost or less. Architects dont lay bricks, and brick layers dont need to understand architecture. Accumulating knowledge of many different types of syntax for expressing the same principles is something that is only going to depreciate in value over time.
I think you are assuming I was implying overseas work to be all short-term contract work but I am not saying anything about the paperwork. The paperwork will write itself such that the relationship between a remote worker and the company is identical whether they are in texas or india. And itll happen that way because of financial incentive to do so
It's already happening. People from NY and CA are moving to Texas and Georgia, and then their salaries are being reduced to adjust for cost of living - but they still make really good money for Texas or Georgia. Maybe those SWE think they are irreplaceable, but what they have effectively demonstrated to the company is that the work itself can be done entirely remote, and so when it comes time to replace them - they will look for a cheap remote worker. Maybe today it is tough to find good replacements in India, Ukraine, etc, but over time (on the order of 1 generation would be my bet) those replacements will be much easier to find over there.
I am hesitant to believe what I think you are implying here. Do you think everyone in cheaper countries would prefer to live in more expensive countries? Even if provided a stable income far above everyone in their area?
I also dont know what would be soul-crushing? It's doing what we do here, just over there.
But standard of living isn't really the reason someone would be miserable at work -- the real thing that makes this a bad arrangement is loss of agency, both for the off-shore contractor, and for the supervisor. This is where I accused you of not having done this before, because in my experience, and several friends' experiences, working with lower-paid, lower-experience software teams is extremely frustrating.
As others have pointed out, coming up with specs is a frustrating and unsatisfying process, and is akin to writing code, except that you don't actually get to run the code and see the fruits of your labor. Because of your working arrangement, the people actually making the product don't have the agency to take ownership of its architecture, and instead you get a whole bunch of copy-paste. If you push back and say, "no, this isn't what we agreed to," then they push right back and say that your requirements are unreasonable, because they don't have the expertise to architect the project right.
But suppose you decide you don't care about architecture, because that's what expensive people do, and you're hiring cheap people, then what's the harm? They can do things their way, even if it's less efficient, right? Except that now the team living with the bad architecture is responsible for fixing all the inevitable bugs that come up, and every time a bug is "fixed," another bug pops up somewhere else, and you, the supervisor/customer, are now responsible for all of it. You can keep filing the bugs, but you can't fix them yourself. Or maybe you can fix them yourself, but you can never improve the overall design, because your decisions will always be overridden by the copy-paste brigade doing the "real" work.
It's a world where all the code bases are awful and nobody gets any job satisfaction.
If nothing else, Land Price will be a big driving factor. If both sides have equal budget for commodities and investments, overseas wins on home budget.
this does not need to be a contract arrangement. The person hired overseas could be hired indefinitely to support the product, with typical transition plans in place. same as today with local workers.
>coming up with specs is a frustrating and unsatisfying process, and is akin to writing code, except that you don't actually get to run the code and see the fruits of your labor
We might be operating with different levels of "specs". I am not saying you need to tell them exactly what to write.. it would be the same as a manager talking to a subordinate at a tech company today. You tell them what needs to be done and they have the skill and autonomy to do it.
I agree that this arrangement does not work with low-experience overseas workers. However, the point I am trying to make is that I think overseas experience will catch up way faster than the local need will become more complicated. So even if local employees maintain a lead in skill and experience, overseas does not ever need to catch up to them - they only need to catch up to necessary qualifications. Local people can offer more, sure, but this is a field that discourages over-engineered solutions. That implies there will be significant diminishing returns on all the extra skill local employees provide.
Again, this is not the case today because the lower experience workers are not just lower experienced but too inexperienced in general. Some time in the future they will still be lower experience, but they will be experienced enough. the only question is when, which is a gamble, but i think soon. On the order of 5 - 20 years would be my bet. It already happens but is a rare exception to the rule - so that timeframe is how long for it to become a common occurrence.
Good luck with that. Please, do try it and report back to tell us how it went. My prediction:
No matter what you do, the spec will be incomplete, and if it's large enough, it will contain contradictions. The culture of not questioning superiors in many of "overseas" will make it hard to notice and only after substantial time without progress someone will realize the problem. That person or group of people will start communicating with clients and overseas to work out the problems in the spec, accumulating additional overhead. The changes and additions to the spec will render a lot of work already done unusable, so the overseas team will have to start from scratch. Then, they will work on the code, while you will be wondering if they're working or not. If it turns out they do, sooner or later they will provide you with some results. The result is going to be pretty bad, because competent people don't want to work for $2/h, no matter where you go. But you will get some result, and will begin testing it. You will discover a lot of bugs, and then you will have to fight tooth and nail to have them fixed, because nobody will want to take responsibility for the failures. At this point, the project will be a year late, and will have flown past all reasonable estimates in terms of required funding. In the end, you're forced to contract consultants - you'll have to sell your kidney to pay them - who will make the product barely-usable some 2 years after anticipated launch date.
the point is that lower cost of living areas will promote remote work to transition there from high cost of living areas over time. The pandemic already showcased this.
Youre right that the end result will probably be worse than what we have today, but that will not stop it from happening. they will figure out how to be good enough
For script kiddies, it's mostly for the lulz.
Even worse: when I was a kid trying to hack around everyone had some (probably false or based on rare occurrences) where the hacker/script kiddie would get caught but employed for their skills instead of prosecuted.
Look at the people who make laws, they dont have the intelligence or morality to even teach a TL;DR to everyone at school. Talk about set up to fail!
And when they upgrade the laws they dont even inform each and every member of the public, let alone let the public debate whether its a good law or not.
Democracy is the ultimate criminal act because people are tricked into having laws forced upon them by a small minority of criminals who decide what is best for you. Democracy is parenting of adults.
And yet the stupid keep holding up the law as an example of righteousness without knowing ALL the laws. What is the definition of stupid? A law abiding citizen.
A fully participatory democracy where every citizen votes on everything? Or authoritarianism?
What like Switzerland?
(This is part of my broader idea that "cybersecurity" will remain nearly entirely impotent until we figure out a way to inject real liability. When something breaks, someone needs to pay or be punished. It's that simple. Perhaps start with Microsoft.)
Since you have 1 karma: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
When I see sweeping, often incorrect generalizations, I will respond.
His statement in the parenthesis seemed unnecessary. I wanted to point out that his premise could also be applicable to the gunslingers.
Now, watch my karma go negative ;)
Some won't like what they see.
>laltrr the6 infrct
*later they infect
Arguably I don't live in a developed country, but it's a US state...
heh yeah and some kids are very well trained to defend themselves. An offer like that to a larger than average pre-teen or teen may result in way more than you bargained for. If they see you as a threat and the flight/fight coin toss lands on fight, well, you're in for a ride.
Getting permission to post photos of kids on social media is probably the hardest part.
This shouldn't be too hard, just ask their parents
For a no profit hack, honoring the promises would lead to funnier/more interesting situations.
Screaming kids at Pizza Hut aside, we can't make other people have empathy. They have to find it and explore it themselves, perhaps by seeing others do the same.
It's especially ironic that someone with lowered empathy would be demanding someone else show fake empathy publicly before giving them back control of their own computer.
Or maybe you happen to be a 97-year-old retired nun, who everyone in your neighborhood knows, and it'd be fine. Not trying to be judgemental or anything.
I don't think that's particularly incorrect, isolation from neighbors and the invisibility of the poor makes it a heck of a lot easier to ignore their problems.
I'm not sure in this case it's sympathy or empathy, it sounds like mere facilitation of the potential for future relationships and dialog between poor kids and people well enough off to own their own computer.
Imagining these hackers trying to individually determine whether someone has done a good enough job of pretending they're nice and whether a victim is themselves too poor to do this stuff... pretty amazing that they'd declare themselves the arbitrators of whether something is sufficiently repentant.
And posting it on social media? What, are we doxxing ourselves now to get out of ransomware attacks? I don't even have twitter or facebook or instagram or whatsapp... for good reason! Why make it performative, someone could just send them receipts if the goal was to help regardless of publicity.
I am definitely not suggesting this approach will help, it seems like a ridiculous solution that's all about exploiting performative compassion for the sake of the hacker's egos...
But I also disagree with your statement as a blanket claim. Kids are forced to go to school and while they'll be resentful of the system or their parents or their teachers I haven't really seen kids being resentful of each other and certainly their peer group develops social cohesion and empathy for one another.
Everyone forced to do community service doesn't necessarily resent the people they are helping, they resent the judicial system.
At least, that seems like the rational response to me, it would be incredibly petty to resent some kids you take to dinner just because you're doing it due to blackmail. Resent the blackmailers...
Needless to say, deploying the ransomware discussed in the link would not be a chaotic good act. More like neutral or chaotic evil.
¹ And just to be clear, don't actually do this. I'm never going to do this, never have done this, certainly am not doing it at the moment, and I advise that no one else actually do this. There are better ways to use your time.
What can Jeff Bezos do more positive than creating Amazon?
What can Elon Musk do more positive than creating Tesla and SpaceX?
This is probably the cheapest ransomware unlock that's ever been put out there (unless you're based in the US, then good fucking luck on the medical care clause). If you're a company whose security policies are too terrible to survive a ransomware attack, then you'd rather be hit with this one than any of the others.
This is probably only viable in smaller communities where people know one another, which may or may not show something about the authors of the malware. It's not just a social "issue", but rather one of population density, where you end up not knowing almost anyone around you personally.
Approaching random people, worse yet, kids, with promises of food in any metropolitan area or even moderately sized city would be viewed as exceedingly weird and creepy. Source: Eastern European country.
I get what the malware authors were trying to do, but it sounds like a somewhat naive and perhaps detached from reality implementation of a "sort of positive" idea.
It would have been way more viable to understand that payments for scammers work because they don't take hours or days of mucking about, but rather a payment through whatever means are available - which could also be applied to making the people affected donate to any number of charities of their or the authors' choice.
1) Good luck suing poor individuals to get your money back
2) It's hard to fathom what kind of asshole you'd have to be to walk into an ER, record a video of you offering people money to help pay their hospital bill and then demand that money back off-camera.
I don't think you picked up on who this asshole is in this situation
Most of the places my mother has helped have gift processing employees (the folks who take in the findings and figure out the tax credit to the donor and figure out where in their ledgers it fits) who are not able to keep up with their work load. Which, to be completely honest, most of the time is because the gift processors aren't really that good at their job, but it is what it is (entry level job, low pay, high turnover, etc). It's basically a closet-space problem, though. If the gift processors are more competent, the whole operation is usually more competent, and there's more work per person, so it comes out in the wash.
So weird gifts like "residual royalties on secondary sales" are likely to get ignored. The harder it is to put a rock-solid, today-dollars value on a gift, the more likely it is to get rejected or just ignored and never actually processed, sitting in limbo where the donor thinks they've gave but there are no actionable funds for the org to spend, because it's a huge tax fraud liability waiting to happen.
That said, that's orthogonal to the point. The GP said charities could set up crypto wallets to accept donations and as I pointed out, some already have.
So you donated nothing?
But well, hopefully it has a IP filter to not hit countries with universal healthcare. /s
And asking stranger kids "Hey kids, want some KFC?"... that should go well. "The hacker 4chan made me do it!"
We paid for TV and parking(and we could have gotten free taxis to the hospital/doctors appointments but she didn't want to ride with a stranger...)
Are you talking about 3rd world countries?
Any specific you think about?
Btw the "free" tier system is a joke in Germany. Waiting months for an appointment is the norm for anything more serious than a cough, unless you're privately insured which all the rich people and interestingly civil servants are. Tells you a lot when those working for the government don't use the public insurance themselves.
People may be surprised to hear that someone with a medium income (by EU standards) can get better healthcare in Africa than in a place like Germany. Or at least for now, the ANC is working hard on destroying the private healthcare sector in SA.
The teeth problem I'm aware of and find it quite unfair indeed.
Nonetheless cancer doesn't make you poor in comparison to the USA.
Still something which has to be fixed in Germany.
But you still have the option to go private if you want.
As for the US I'm not an expert but my gut feeling is that people compare apples to oranges just like with most of these international comparisons. Cost of living is much higher in the US first of all. Things are simply more expensive in general and American salaries are a lot higher for anyone moderately educated. No one I know who's moved to the US has any problems with insurance, they can simply afford it.
Now if you compare a government sponsored system in Germany with private insurance in the US, of course the former will be cheaper (be careful though, some of the real cost is hidden). But like mentioned you also get completely different treatment. Cost in the US could likely be cut by making the service worse. If you want to pay even less, have you looked at the Chinese system? Germans are massively overpaying in comparison to the PRC and it's ruining the middle class. /s Gotta sinophy your healthcare with 10 Yuan TCM pills for cancer treatments. Because cheap is apparently the goal when it comes to healthcare.
Btw, here's the kicker if you want to discuss price: With the top notch treatment you get in private South African clinics, people still pay less for their private insurance over there than the government mandated low quality one in Germany. I know because I've used both.
The critisism is coming from USA to.
>The critisism is coming from USA to.
Dumb people exist in the US too - color me surprised. It's not about defending the US healthcare system, I'm sure there are enough issues worth criticizing. However almost every time one sees such reports it turns out the people were simply under-insured or outright uninsured if you actually bother to look at the details and not just the headline. So in Germany you have similar high bills, people are simply ignorant of this because the true cost is socialized and the tax payer pays for it. Have you never wondered how a fully privately insured person living a comparable lifestlye at the end of the month still has more disposable income in the US compared to Germany?
The bills are smaller. USA is paying a high price for their health system. This one is statistically shown.
It was the worst time of my life. I had to pay a private psychiatrist to treat her. A very good one - we plotted together a plan to partake on her fantasy and administer a risperidone injection which was super effective. She is fine now and visits said doctor once in a year only.
Sure you can go to a general clinic but the doctor will forward you to the proper specialist queue which might take months or even years.
From a country that had it, it usually means: ugly hospitals, sad faces, long queues for treatments (I mean wait time for "free" treatment can be well over a year).
There is no free lunch.
On the other hand, I usually can get my kid to doctor same day, while using private healthcare provider (paid by my employer) it is almost impossible, 2-3 days wait.
On yet another hand, to get registered to my local doctor I need to use phone and start calling when they open up (8am) - sometimes I can't get to registration. The private healthcare has a normal website where I can look up registrations - so it is less time consuming (and automateable to some degree).
Private hospitals are rare here, and most of real work is done by public ones. Because the hospitals don't have enough money, they e.g. don't provide separate meals for people that need them (e.g. you had a digestive tract operation), so it is up for the family.
Good thing recently is that if your kid needs to go to hospital, there might beds for parent to stay with the kid (I'm not sure if that is that common in all hospitals)
Primary care is provided by private doctors and hospitals, so it is almost like a business. Doctors offices have websites, and get reviews from general public. You choose where you go to. All health insurances cover almost all of them. The doctor's offices are "competing" to provide a good service - being clean, solving problems correctly, not charging too much etc.
The government spends what ever money it allocates for healthcare on Public hospitals that focus on expensive medical equipment(labs, diagnostic machines etc), and treating chronically ill patients.
In an ideal world, you go to private doctors to figure out what is wrong, and then use the public facility if you can wait, and get the surgery/medicine/treatment for free. Often times, the private doctor refers you to a public doctor with a specific note that says this person needs this particular surgery using this particular medical device.
However, this systems leaves a big hole in catering to the poor who cannot afford to go to a private doctor for primary care owing to costs. No system is perfect. I think this model has the most potential for better healthcare.
AFAIR there was such proposition in France some time ago, I don't know how they solved that.
I think universal healthcare is a social must and we need to fix it instead of talking it down.
There are problems with puclic healthcare that needs solving, but I would much rather focus on thoose problems than pumping insurace companies with money so private hospitals can charge 10x-100x the price of a treatmant (compared to Europe for example).
In the UK there is a department called NICE which uses health economics to understand how to best utilize the funding for the national health service to best improve health outcomes (generally measured by increasing QALY or Quality-Adjusted Life Years, but there are multiple measures in reality). This means that if there is a £500k treatment that could save the lives of a 70 year old, but there is a £1m treatment that could save the life of a 20 year old, and there is only budget for one, it would go to the £1m treatment because it has the biggest impact on QALY.
So the treatments that don't get approval are usually those that have a poor return. Note that it's usually the whole treatment that gets approved / denied rather than particular patient (or it is approved for a particular subset of people).
The other issue is capacity - so for instance, if there is only a limited capacity to perform MRI scans, then triage is required.
A few countries forbid this, including Canada.
The free market should decide. If you created enough shareholder value then you'll have enough to pay for their treatment like God intended.
They aren't outright denied, just backlogged for years. Need a hip replacement in the UK, and you're a smoker? Good luck trying to get it within a year.
Because it turns out that healthcare is a service, and just making it "free" doesn't magically make it immune to scarcity.
This is not donating to the poor.
> Activity 2: Take five less fortunate children to Dominos, Pizza Hut or KFC for a treat, take pictures and videos, and post them on social media.
It's one of the required activities to allegedly get the decryption key.
In the US places like that exist as well but under 13s aren't just hanging around to invite out and feed.
No one's going to get that type II from a Zinger or two.
It’s really an issue with personal responsibility more than food choice.
An interesting reality nevertheless.
Mr.Robot is incredible show, Sam Esmail, Rami Malek and Christian Slater potentially created the top series of the decade, but this is not the reality.
About whoever is behind this ransomware, of course this is nothing "fsociety-level" though the general intentions (hacking powerful ones and changing of powers) gave me a similar vibe.
I don't think it's the goal.
I guess I might as well just smash my hard drive with a hammer if I get this.
Am from a country with universal health care. It's not uncommon to die waiting for treatment or there simply not being any way to get the treatment in my country. Raising money to visit the US for treatment is a pretty common thing here as a result.
Blaming poor implementation is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
What does not work is a system where all things are private and everyone is at the hands of the market. That is something one of the richest countries in the world has shown us over and over and over again.
It's more like "having to postpone treatment so long that it doesn't work."
The same also applies if you have to fight with scheming insurance companies.
The government, all of us, have most to gain from a healthy society. And a dead person couldn't care less about their health. It's about time our systems reflect that!
No, they sound like someone who learned about the US from internet memes, but doesn’t have firsthand experience. For example, hospitals in the US do not generally collect payment at the time of treatment so it wouldn’t really make much sense to show up to one and try to pay for someone needing urgent medical care
Also, the opposite of your country is not America. Aka just because you don't observe something in your country doesn't make it automatically American.
Good, value-creating citizens never had to consider joining a clan before because they were able to easily capture profits from their own labor without much extra effort on the value-capture/extraction side (they could focus purely on value creation)... But as this is becoming increasingly difficult to do, they will be forced to join their own clans to ensure that they can capture more of the proceeds of the value which they created. Since it cannot happen naturally as it did before, it needs to happen via explicit political means.
You can think of workers' unions as a kind of clan... This is happening everywhere in the economy now and IMO, it will only get worse as governments become more extractive and corrupt and as it becomes more profitable for people to spend their time and energy engaging in extractive activities rather than productive activities. The degree of corruption and aggression within clans will have to keep rising to match the corruption and aggression of governments.
"The true test of a man’s character is what he does when no one is watching."
― John Wooden
edit: taming em-dashes
The first time I donated something was after a friend shared a social project they helped in LinkedIn. That was when I thought "hey, I'm kinda wealthy now, I probably could help.".
So, I understand where you are coming from, influencers and shit, but there's a real chance that by doing any charity publicly you might trigger others to do as well.
But what if your example encourages others to give?"
That's totally fair but then we also complain all the time that media is only filled with negativity and despair. Let's be rational and appreciate public displays of good deeds for what they are, good. If some people use these as a distraction from mischievous deeds on the backside, that's an other matter.
"Only in darkness are we revealed. Goodness is not goodness that seeks advantage. Good is good in the final hour, in the deepest pit, without hope, without witness, without reward. Virtue is only virtue in extremis."
I only had to sleep in the streets one single cold night, I wouldn't have mind in the slightest to be filmed thanking the helper in exchange for a warm room, I definitely would had feel I got the upper hand on such "deal".
I've read somewhere that all donations that Paul McCartney makes come with a rider that if his name is leaked, the donation is withdrawn.
Regardless of whether this is true, I think that's the way to donate if it comes from your heart.
If somebody wants to also build a hospital and plaster their name on it, let them! As long as somebody benefits.
The one that will build this will enable a disruptive market where people can finally become much closer to their ideal self, by the effective means of social pressure, real-time e-coaching and monetary incentive.
Does this actually exists?
With that being said, the US already spends more on public healthcare than Canada does, so the problem is a lot more complex than where should the money come from.
That's because it's mostly all going to predatory insurance and drug companies rather than to doctors and other medical professionals. Universal healthcare cuts out all the needless middlemen and and incentivizes governments to put reasonable caps on the profits of drug companies.
You didn't actually agree in a mutual contract with everyone when you "traded" your property, except for the agreements the government upholds with its system of laws that forms the social contract and taxation is a clause in that contract.
An economy of pure traded labor, like trading foot massages or whatever, wouldn't actually have property.
Another person want to build a music instrument. He need some special kind of tree, with some specific size and age, so he want all of us to not cut that tree. Does he make a fence to protect the tree while it's growing? Does he hire a bodyguard for the tree?
Hunter-gathering is coercion-free unless someone other group want hunter-gathering in the same place. An once farmer arrive, it gets more complicated.
No coercion here. There is no force or threats of violence involved in these scenarios. Imposing a negative externality on someone is not necessarily coercion.
> Another person want to build a music instrument. He need some special kind of tree, with some specific size and age, so he want all of us to not cut that tree. Does he make a fence to protect the tree while it's growing? Does he hire a bodyguard for the tree?
That would likely be coercion. Unless he planted the tree, or acquired it by consensual means from its previous owner, he doesn't have any more right to the tree than anyone else. Although, I don't think it would be as bad as if he had taken the tree from someone who had already cut it down because in that case he would have deprived them of the product of the labour that went into cutting the tree down as well.
Merely using resources isn't coercion but it doesn't "result in property" unless you also apply coercion to exclude others from them.
(Seems like a pointless word game you're trying to play here.)
That's a difference between physical objects and trading pure labor itself (like the trading foot massages example).
>The group’s multiple-paged ransom note suggests that victims perform three socially driven activities to be able to download the decryption key.
Wow, just that sentence alone makes a flood of memories come back.
(Purposefully doing my morning... executive time... in a place I never went when I was younger to get a fresh look at things.)
Just so everyone is on the same page, The Goodwill company is not good at all. They used to be, maybe, but they do this thing where they pay people less than minimum wage who often do their job better than folks with a "normal" IQ.
It was also widely known in my hometown if you donate to them, the employees pick off the good stuff so it rarely meets the shelves -- anyone who was a serious computer hobbyist would do deals on Craigslist, since unlike eBay, if someone just starts walking away with your device without paying you can physically stop them or call the cops.
I'm an enviornmentalist, I don't believe in getting the newest anything if the old works, so often I'd sell a previous device after doing my best to wipe the hard drive.
Only once did I have an issue on Craigslist, and it was after I had moved to a new state.
I had someone I sold a cracked iPhone threatening to sue me and a bunch of other nonsense. I told them the ad said as is, and I had assumed they were buying it for the parts, which they paid a more than fair price for, and that it was unsurprising that an iPhone with a cracked screen would fail, and they can meet me at kroger for their money back minus a restocking fee, like you'd expect at Best Buy, if they promise to never contact me again.
I picked Kroger because they had an armed security guard, and apparently literally doing the sale inside the lobby of a college town police station wasn't enough to send a message: I am operating in the open, I am giving you a fair deal, we are not friends, and I get very angry when I have to put a bunch of thought into how to convince someone to never make me feel unsafe again.
(I'd love to find an analyst role, but I don't know how you land those, my email is in my bio if anyone is having staffing issues and wants to make an offer.)
Modern monetary theory describes taxes as primarily tools to reduce some effects of income inequality (and that is not done anymore) and, most importantly, provide the value of money. In essence, taxes (and the threat of imprisonment if you do not pay them) is what makes paper, and now numbers on computers, a thing you will die without.
A primary human right is you own the fruits of your labor. Period.
(Might as well claim that the government's income collected through taxes is the fruits of the government's labor.)
But I’ll add that claiming you have to work for free for part of the year is a silly way of looking at at. You’re never forced to work for free for even a single hour! You just have to pay a fixed percentage of your hourly wage in taxes, an arrangement which has been in place across every developed country for many decades.