MasterBlaster

joined 3 years ago
[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I appreciate that you took the question seriously and offered a useful response.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

No, since you didn't make any money and were not taxed. Also, the bond issuer is now in bankruptcy and/or being sued into bankruptcy. I might even get back the principle depending on the output of the legal proceedings.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Lol! Ya got me! Yeah, autocorrect is a bitch, and I failed to verify the text. Socks = stocks. (And it tried to change it to sticks that time).

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Lol! You have zero clue. I'm close to the opposite of the on line spectrum. I learned how to be informed in the old days, when we were taught his to read and research.

When I don't know something, I look it up. In discussion forums, I read the other comments before making my own, usually. If someone tells me I'm wrong, I go see what shows up elsewhere on the topic. Most importantly, I'm not immediately condescending or insulting.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I see your point, but disagree with the approach as a long term policy. We can limit the accumulation by taxing the profits. If we can't do that, then the wealth tax won't be any more successful as they will hide that, too.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

That's why we have the taxes we have. As you point out, business works with the help of society. However, taxing it as property is a completely messed up approach and will lead to there being little incente to to invest. That's why we tax profit, not mere existance, as we do for property.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world -2 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

I didn't think I had to explicitly repeat what I said in a couple other comments I made on the matter. I won't cut and paste that for you, (and since you set the mode to name calling) shithead.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world -2 points 16 hours ago

So, the government should decide how much wealth its citizens should have, and enforce that? I think there are better ways to approch this than turning citizens into subjects.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world -1 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

How long does one own property, and what resources are used by structures on that property that the community has to supply, maintain, or upgrade? What damage might said structures cause to the community while in use? What is lost by the community by selling that property to a private owner? How does a community fund its own services, governance, police, fire department? How are roads and power lines built?

Now, what community is incurring costs by someone owning a stake in a business? What resources does that transfer of money take away from the community? What is the community? What did that community supply to make it possible to invest in that company or buy that stock?

It might not be rocket science, but it is not a "no brainer". Stocks, like "intellectual property", have no physical presence. They are not semi-permanent objects taking physical space or requiring physical resources to create or maintain over time. They do not take physical resources that can no longer be used elsewhere.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world -1 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Note that property taxes, when reassessed every 10 years or so, are also adjusted with changes to the mil rate, as appropriate to keep taxes from property assessment changes from causing people to leave town.

Equities change in value daily. How should those be assessed, and what is the proper response when the equities decrease in value by 30% during a market crash? Does the government refund the previously paid taxes? What if that money is your retirement income?

At what point does a tax on equities essentially become a continuous draw-down of wealth on the same money year after year, resulting in absolutely no incentive to invest in business and for that matter a situation where it is impossible to build up any wealth? How will startups be funded? How will large, shoot for the stars projects be funded?

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 12 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Forget 39%. We have greater national debt as a percentage of GDP than we did in 1944. We need to reinstitute the tax brackets from then until 1965, which had a top rate of 90%. There are reasons we had a middle class back then, and this is one of them.

 

I want to install Graphene on my Pixel 6. It is rooted and i use NeoBackup for app state, wifi, call logs, etc.

I do not want to startvfrom scratch and rebuild everything. Is it possible to port most of my data?

 

It's been a few years since I've needed to install a version of Windows on a PC for personal use. I have a license for Windows 10 Pro, but today I found out it is no longer possible to get through the installation without first creating an account with Microsoft.

I don't want to do this. Does anybody have any way to get around it? The stuff I've read online basically ends up being create your account switch to a local account after installation and delete your account. I want a better solution. Would installing a much older version of Windows 10 work? The whole reason I got an msdn license back in the day is so I didn't have to do this.

Edit: 10/2/2023

I thank you all for giving me advice and ideas. Much I had already tried before posting my question here, and some suggestions and experiences led me to keep at it. Here's my experience for others who have a similar problem.

I downloaded the ISO from Microsoft - Win10_22H2_English_x64v1. I used Ventoy to launch the installer. The first time I went through, I connected to Wi-Fi. As soon as I did that, it sealed my fate. By this time in the process, it installed the boot partition on my HD and saved this information so every time I tried to restart the installer, it always went through language, keyboard, then "enter email address". All the suggestions for fake values simply triggered "This email is already used. Please choose another", and that was it.

I was getting ready to wipe the partition and try again, but decided to turn off Wi-Fi in the BIOS first to see if that worked. It did. This time it tried to convince me to set up the network and failed and I was able to create a local account.

The way this multi-version installer works is annoying. It installed Windows Home edition, so I had to "know" that I could go to settings and enter a key. Once I put in the key, it "upgraded" to Pro edition, and I was done.

Next time I have to do this, I'll see if Rufus works. It seems that will remove some annoyance. Either way, I will avoid configuring Wi-Fi until after install next time. I gotta say, I am not looking forward to the day when I must upgrade to Windows 11. So far I've been able to avoid actually buying a new copy due to my aging MSDN key. By the time I'm forced to "upgrade", I might have to cough up some cash for something I don't want, but am forced to own.

It should be illegal.

Anyway, now that I know I can still use my MSDN key to get an updated Win 10, I feel a bit more comfortable with re-imaging my Dell laptop from dual-boot to Linux only, then install Windows as a VM for these times I need to use it. Fortunately, that is increasingly rare.

2
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by MasterBlaster@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
 

I included a comment that is a prime example of how willfully blind people are concerning the value of privacy. This was part of a thread about a mews post of a person who had his Amazon Smart Home bricked because a delivery person thought he was racist.

It's a troubling read, because if most people really are this way, the fight for legally enforced privacy will fail.

What do you think of this?


Do you think they could have turned off the in the first place if they did not have personal details tied to those devices and full control of those devices?

Yes, assuming that we still need an input device of some sort. Because the input could make it give a different output, such as not running, even if it didn't know that you were the one it was blocking.

Maybe that couldn't cascade to all of your devices, but certainly the ones that received the input that caused them to brick themselves. But, then again in a mesh network they probably could send a brick signal to all co-networked devices.

What if someone decided to use something you did in the "privacy" of your own home to blackmail you? Embarass you? Would you feel safe?

I certainly wouldn't like that. Fortunately, those actions are illegal. The problem here isn't privacy, so much as it is blackmail.

It doesn't matter to me, if a passive recording picks up me doing something embarrassing. The thing that matters is using the data in the wrong way, or not having controls around the data.

What if something you do all the time suddenly becomes illegal and you could be prosecuted based on surveillance footage inside your home?

Well, I guess I'd better stop doing that thing or move. But, that is only marginally relevant to this case.

If you are a criminal, there will be evidence of the crime.

Do you think they cannot access the video and audio from those devices?

Sure they can, but passive access isn't a problem. The problem is using the data badly.

45
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by MasterBlaster@lemmy.world to c/lemmyworld@lemmy.world
 

As lemmy grows organically, there will be continuous increases in duplicate communities. This poses a long-term problem because I don't think most people want to subscribe to half a dozen or more communities that are essentially the same.

Is there any chance that the thought leaders of Lemmy which probably includes the largest servers owners could come together and start proposing ideas?

I see a potential troubling issue with the idea in terms of combining the existing history of the duplicates communities.

Perhaps a new concept of community@global could be thought through.

view more: next ›