There are quite a few of those, my favourite: https://polymarket.com/event/will-jesus-christ-return-before...
If you put all your money on no, you get 4% if you win, and if Jesus comes back and you lose, money won't matter.
3,381 karma · joined September 2, 2013
fer at fer dot ex why zee
https://www.fer.xyz
meet.hn/city/53.3493795,-6.2605593/Dublin
Socials: - github.com/fejiso
---
If you put all your money on no, you get 4% if you win, and if Jesus comes back and you lose, money won't matter.
Though I agree it's bad math, even if 70% resolve to no, there's a high variance among all of them, and to know whether it's a good bet or not... you have to do your DD on that particular market. Even if you follow the Kelly criterion, randomly choosing bets will probably tank your bankroll sooner or later.
Lenin preached for state capitalism as a transitory state towards socialism. It's an integral part of the communist ideas, part of the direction even if not part of the ideal final state.
The reasoning behind Gentan was that a landless peasantry was more likely to revolt. It's not dissimilar to pre-1929 kulaks, though the kulaks were encouraged/enabled to become a relatively wealthy/middle class peasantry who employed people and were directly involved in the production without owning large swathes of land, acting as a kind of a social dampener against a revolution.
Unsurprisingly the Soviet Union killed the kulak model and moved to collective farming[0], which was arguably actually communistic.
In terms for pure access to the data/permissions, GrapheneOS seems to be the main (only?) choice. The default permissions apps get in current day Android allow to group activities and tie them to a single user across apps/sites.
[0]https://f-droid.org/packages/net.kollnig.missioncontrol.fdro...
Something worse than a bad model is an inconsistent model. One can't gauge to what extent to trust the output, even for the simplest instructions, hence everything must be reviewed with intensity which is exhausting. I jumped on Max because it was worth it but I guess I'll have to cancel this garbage.
Hard disagree on this one. It's a series of makefiles that depend on apt (or whatever pacman you choose), so for any heterogeneous environment it's going to constantly be uphill battle to keep working in terms of package naming, existence of dependencies, etc. You'd find yourself reinventing Ansible, but worse.
> It doesn't matter how great nix is because it's not alpine or xubuntu or suse or freebsd or sco osr5 or solaris or cygwin, it's nix.
Nix runs fine on most (all?) modern Linux distros, macOS, even WSL, and there are workarounds to make it run on BSD, though I admittedly haven't tested those.
> Even if this thing has bash-isms and gnumake-isms, I bet with minimal grief I can still use it on a Xenix system that doesn't even have a compiler (so no building nix) but does have ksh93 and make, even without leaning on the old versions of actual gnu make and bash that do exist.
Use it on Xenix (which last shipped in 1991) to do what? The package management was tarballs and compiling. Instead of reinventing Ansible, you'd be reinventing pkgsrc. Not sure what your point here is.
With home-manager I have the same packages, same versions, same configuration, across macOS, NixOS, Amazon Linux, Debian/Ubuntu... That made me completely abandon ansible to manage my homelab/vms.
Also adding flake.nix+direnv on a per project basis is just magical; I don't want to think how much time I would have wasted otherwise battling library versioning, linking failures, etc.
During the 60s and 70s, in order to accommodate baby boomers, new buildings were built on existing school grounds, and while they were not cookie cutter copies of each other, they followed the same architectural and civil engineering principles: identical ceiling height, same fixtures, same walls, same classroom door arches, same bathroom stalls, toilets, similar fire exit paths, identical heavy steel and steel wired glass external doors, staircase layouts...
But given every location had its own available surface and urban/terrain/attendance needs, they were anywhere from 1 to 4 floors, straight corridors, or in L, or rectangular with inner courtyard, with and without basement, and overall significant practical deviations from some common standard blueprint (though I never found the common denominator) but keeping everything else the same. It was extremely eerie and disorienting visiting a different school, or getting used to another school when you moved, especially after hours when they're empty.
It's probably similar to the khrushchyovki/stalinki residential buildings in post-Soviet countries, though I've only visited them well after the collapse and they've evolved on their own. Meanwhile these schools I mention, look actually frozen in time.
https://thedeepdive.ca/openai-locked-up-40-of-global-ram-wit...
Interesting mental exercise. It was explored in A Canticle for Leibowitz[0], novel in 3 parts (Fiat homo, fiat lux, fiat voluntas tua), the first set in the immediate post nuclear-war world, second 600 years after towards the end of the new middle ages, and the third 600 later in a typical futuristic scenario. The first part covers the religious efforts to preserve knowledge (even if said knowledge was not understood), and the second in the new renaissance from wielding such knowledge.
I wonder how LLMs, with their mistakes and all, would play a role in rebuilding civilization. Most media these days is not prepared for staying stable for 20 years, not sure how much and for how long it could be preserved. Perhaps mechanical hard drives in certain isolated environments?
I'm roughly the same as you in terms of information access, though whether I was a child is debatable; was 14 when I got my first dialup connection. My family wasn't tech-adjacent so it was me who pushed for it; the only control in place was the amount of time I'd spend there.
The only control I have in place on my son in terms of content is whether something is scary or if he won't be able to understand most of it, because arguably he's still too young for many things.
But once he's 12 I don't think I want to restrict most things in terms of content, and by 16 I personally don't care if he watches hardcore midget porn, as long as I have the chance to contextualise and explain the industry.
But.
What I'd rather control (or ban, even) is rather all ML-driven doomscrolling platforms and the "social media" that turned people no longer social. The Internet you and I grew up in no longer exists (or it's a small hidden fraction of it), and now it's a wasteland of engagement traps and corporate revenue directed dark patterns.
You and I learnt to separate wheat from chaff, research, deep dive, and what not. Internet is now, by and large, instant gratification loops and user tracking. I don't want my son (or myself, actually) pulled into that. Porn is literally healthier: you bust a nut and go on with your day, but I see some people wasting hours on end, reel-after-reel, with increasingly targeted ads shoved to their face. Hard pass on that.
Age control, if any, should lie in the hands of the parent/guardian. Make it by law a setting on the routers (new devices are <18 until admin approves them), or the ISPs for mobiles. I'm okay with that. Absolutely not on random third parties handling personal information filling the gap for every random website.
All of that leaving aside the fact that zero knowledge proofs solve this problem without sharing any sensitive information.
But of course, the corporations benefiting from this are not interested in pushing those, IMO reasonable, age controls.
I forgot about this since I started NixOS/home-manager everywhere.
One thing my son has always been obsessed with was planes. We started with paper planes, mainly the classic squarey one I learnt in school that has good balance of speed/airtime and tolerance to launching speeds and angles.
But he got bored and wanted more. We got deep in the rabbit hole of purely paper folding planes (and rockets), with regular visits to Ojimak[0] for more ambitious projects (they're 3D, glued, yet actually flying paper models).
Our latest endeavours involve keeping large Amazon delivery boxes to later take measurements, calculate weight balance, and creating airfoils by stacking several layers of cardboard in a tapered way to make gliders to throw outside (over 1m wingspan!).
In one of our walks we saw a man trying to put order in his garage; it was literally overflowing with home made RC planes, some were copies of standard designs, some quite unorthodox and some just plain head-scratching weird. We talked for a bit, he didn't even have technical background, and I was sold. Obviously it gets more expensive in terms of time and money, but I can't wait for my son to be old enough to dedicate time together in this direction.
That will make you tax resident in Germany as all of your financial interests are in Germany. It's not an extreme example at all, it's the basic case to catch.
>My original assertion is that unless you are American (or, apparently, Italian) the normal person can up sticks one day and wander the world, and so long as they never establish tax residency anywhere,
Or Spanish. Or Belgian. Or French. Or Germany. Or basically any OECD country, and most non-OECD ones.
>they will be living an entirely legal tax free[1] life.
Legal as long as they don't generate any income, and even then, wealth taxes could kick in.
>Of course doing so requires giving up the things humans need, like stability, so it is a terrible life for most, but the point is, it is legal and easy.
It's really not easy at all to do legally, but at least we agree it's difficult to do emotionally.
>"illegally of course" again, false. There is no universal tax law that we are all subject to.
That's the fun part: virtually all OECD tax laws are universal.
>The Common Reporting Standard is intended to combat tax evasion. A person who does not have tax residency is not engaging in tax evasion, they are just a person without tax residency.
That's sovereign citizen tier of delusional. Plus I proved again and again that tax residence isn't bound to only where you are/live, at all, for over a decade, for any developed country and most developing ones.
>Rather than speak in theory and hypotheticals, can you point to any real world examples of someone being charged / tried / accused of tax evasion because they didn't have tax residency?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67472496
She played the "I didn't stay anywhere for too long lol" card because she was touring most of the time, and she was slammed by the Spanish fisc on the basis of her centre of vital interests.
Literally most rock/pop stars would be living tax free if what you said was true, unfortunately for them it's not the case.
You won't find many high profile cases because the people who make money use expensive tax advisors who tell them not to do what you suggest, but since you're familiar with Germany, here's another: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/oct/25/germany.tennis
> Why are you framing it as a loophole? Not having tax residency isn't a loophole, just as not having a car isn't a loophole for a drivers license.
Not having a tax residency prevents you from legally doing business pretty much anywhere where it's worth doing business. I have to ask for a work visa in some countries I visit because of work even if there's a tourist visa-free regime for me, I literally am not allowed to do any work there. Would they notice? Probably not. But what happens if they do? That I and most importantly my company are in deep shit.
If you regularly return to Germany and generally to the same place there (i.e. family, friends), and you're not tax resident elsewhere, the tax administration will consider it your habitual abode. And, you guessed it, under the German Fiscal Code (Abgabenordnung), you are a tax resident if you have a domicile or habitual abode in Germany.
Plus, under Extended Limited Tax Liability (Erweiterte beschränkte Steuerpflicht), any significant economic presence in Germany (assets, German clients, participation in a company, bank accounts) will pull you into the tax jurisdiciton for 10 years, not only as permanent traveler but also if you move to a low-tax country.
So while different, it's similarly difficult. It's technically possible but you have to leave Germany and basically cut all ties, difficult if you're German.
If you're not German, you can completely escape the claws of the German fisc with relative ease. But if you're say Spanish, Hacienda will consider you tax resident in Spain even if you never ever lived in Spain (i.e. born abroad). There's all sort of sticky tax rules in numerous countries: you're tax resident until you prove you're tax resident elsewhere, the aforementioned nationality fallback, essential ties rules, the "domicile" concept (i.e. where you intend to live until you die).
Plus, and I reiterate, the difficulty in obtaining a simple bank account without a TIN and proof of address in most countries.
I'm sure there are corner cases with exotic nationalities and carefully selected tax jurisdictions with lax "tax residency" tests to rotate along, and numerous nomads fly under the radar for various reasons (illegally of course), but I assure you it's way more complicated than "lol just don't be American/Eritrean and travel all the time", plus tax laws constantly change, and not to leave you more loopholes.
If you add the legislative decree 209/2023 article 1 that modifies the tax code and sets the basis for the centre of vital interests, it complicates things even further for the "permanent traveler" for simply having a family or ever having been long term resident in a country.
The fact is that the country whereever you carry any legal activity will require you to prove you're taxed elsewhere not to tax you in place.
To carry out economic activity you'll need a presence, if it's a company it's corporate tax, if you're freelance you'll need a registered address.
Most banks will freeze you without a TIN and and address.
Plus the whole can of worms of the centre of vital interests or source-based taxation systems.
In the moment you input an address in the financial system, the tax administration will know, and they will knock your door for any significant income, plus arrears, pulling one of the cards from your house, and it's not going to be pretty.
More new at 9. Plus it's from 2019.
For example, "Will Trump talk Macron before 31 of March?". Someone is going to get scammed no matter what: the market rules will set some basic resolution scenarios, but you'll find sources saying it was a letter, or sources several countries and in several languages saying that it was an exchange between their offices/assistants, or smoke signals, or god knows what, while a single US source will say they talked without any further detail, or it is simply reported 1 month after the fact when the money has long moved wallets, and then people vote based on the combination of factoids they've been exposed to. In principle the perverse incentive of voting wrong to earn money will make you lose money on the UMA itself (unless there's a coordinated effort, which has already happened, but IME it's rather rare).
Other markets are indisputable bar black swan events, like, "how many Oscars will X win", if it's 6 it's 6 and no source will say 5 or 7. That makes opening disputes 100% a money-losing option.
Calling autocracy the sanctioning someone for being on the literal payroll of RT, state media of a hostile country where extrajudicial executions of journalists were commonplace before Roscomnadzor was given near absolute powers over media is, again, a very hard sell.