LeanderK

then maybe I am wrong! I just see those enormous SUVs all the time (probably small for americans), clogging the street and not fitting into parking spaces. With enormous, wasteful hoods. If you're family is big we have fitted in a van just fine and could also drive to our vacations.

> run the company like Adobe (explicitly)

what does this mean?

I don't think you can drive a SUV in a city and fit 3 children in there. It's just too enormous, think about how massive it would be. We drove a van when I was small (VW sharan), which is the reasonable choice I think. I think SUV-type cars are generally too big for a city, except the smallest and a family should by a van as a van does generally not have such a large hood and it's height is not so high.

Big cars in a city have negative consequences for others. This is not only about enviromentalism, but increasing walkability, liveability and bike-ability in dense city environments. In my last city (Tübingen), you have to buy a "parking pass" as a resident to park in the neighbourhood. They recently greatly increased the price for an SUV, which I think is a good idea.

this really is a nice straw-man argument. I stated that I don't trust your comment (even if you just plainly state you're an expert...an expert in what?). If you don't like it, don't try to deflect by attacking my personality.

The amount of downvotes shows that it's a common sentiment and this reply is pretty childish I think.

Random people proposing unrealistic solutions is something I personally am very tired of. It just really derails any intellectual discussion with baseless fantasising. For example it often happens for discussions on EV. So if you don't state your experience in any convincing way your comment is just noise to me. I won't research your credentials and google you just to judge wether it's random sci-fi or a realistic comment, there are just to many of these comments. I think the down-votes you got reflect this general sentiment. You don't have to explain your experience but then your proposition might not be taken serious. Your comment is also so short that it is really indistinguishable from the sci-fi spam comments.

maybe it's cultural? I'm in germany for the context

Not colleagues, but people outside his work (it's an advanced startup, so everyone still knows everyone). For example older relatives or random people who found out he works 80%. Sometimes it's really a random condescending person.

I've seen some strange criticisms after a friend of mine transitioned to a 4-day week. Like whether he has any ambitions, doesn't want to work etc. He is a very committed, good programmer really kinda keeping the company running. I bet he gets more stuff done in 4 days than others in 5. But he has a very active private, social life. He goes a lot on vacations, has hobbies or is just actively enjoying life. He's also in europe so quite a bit of vacation.

Programmers usually have a comfortable salary, even with 80% you're still above average and have a lot of disposable income. Maybe a smaller apartment but who cares.

He has such an enormous quality of life that I kinda suspect that all the ones got it wrong. In the end life is not about grinding for the man, it's just a means to an end. They should justify themselves, not him. It's also really stupid considering how committed he is, he just has a rich life besides work. I see others just working inefficiently, trying to dodge responsibility and being kinda lazy. But he get's criticised.

I really don't get how a blanket no union-policy is legal? Wouldn't this just deny the workers basic rights (to unionise)? To me it feels like "blanket no minimum wage policy" or "blanket no workplace-safety standards policy". Wether to form a union, and collectively bargain, should be the decision of the workers without any say of the corporations.

It really feels to me like "I am sorry about you trying to establish workplace safety standards but we unfortunately follow a global no workplace-safety standards policy and do not agree to minimum workplace safety standards in other parts of the world".

Not swedish but very, very uncommon in germany (I actually wasn't sure whether it's illegal but apparently not, it's just not common). Usually the company tries to negotiate with the union to stop the strike, so this is probably seen as very confrontational.

I don't know for how long they are striking so far, but I would see it as unbelievable confrontational, a show of force from them to prove that they dictate the terms of employment without negotiations or coming to a compromise. I feel I would not accept that.

Usually it is seen that companies have a responsibility to look after their employees.

I wonder, how is "obamacare" viewed after those years? Was it a success? Ist there partisan disagreement and a realistic chance that it might get repealed?

while some are negative effects of other activities (smartphones etc.), some are just in decline because their usage is in decline, which is ok.

I haven't used the library to check out a book in years and I rarely write something by hand except to take notes. And despite me having taken post-graduate level pure math-lectures, I will struggle to solve an equation system that involves concrete numbers instead of variables that also don't cancel, i am just astonishingly bad at mental arithmetic.

I disagree for some, like "inability to conduct a scholarly literature search on a topic (other than coming back with 8 blue Web links)" and "inability to read a daily newspaper or weekly news magazine to stay informed about current events". Some don't care and some do, so they either research or try to be as lazy as possible. I can imagine it's always been this way.

are they really hand-soldered? They look so small! Isn't there a machine that is cheaper for high volume soldering of those small connections?

> Fitness is not a 1-D line

I never thought about it this way but this is really insightful. I was assuming it will be an endless war but if the cost gets prohibitively high to maintain resistance we have a real advantage

oh come on. I don't think "Germany is the best". In fact, I am leaving germany soon for a new opportunity in the UK. I wouldn't otherwise, right? But it's because it's a great opportunity in a beautiful city I always wanted to live in.

I hope it's not Switzerland, internationally recognised tax haven. If your country profits from the tax-avoidance of the rich then I won't consider it.

I agree that the pension scheme is really the achilles heel of the german state, as the pensions schemes are not really determined bye their true worth. But that's literally only one function of many. And the it also has good sides, as you there's less risk of serious poverty in old age.

> Germany could remove all federal income tax

While it's certainly a big part, it's still the minority of the federal budget and so you could only reduce the federal income tax. Things like research, social safety net for work-seekers, healthcare or major transportation routes are in the hand of the federal state.

EDIT: In the end I am not really arguing that germany is best. But I am arguing that in germany the taxes fulfil important functions and in the end they manage to deliver on most points. You might not want to accept it, but then moving abroad or changing the system from within is the only way to do it, but not staying in germany and avoiding taxes. Pay your fair share if you do your business in germany. I am convinced that successful entrepreneurs have social responsibility, because economy serves society and not the other way around.

> highly corrupt state

germany is usually ranked as one of the least corrupt states. I know there's corruption happening but it's just not comparable to highly corrupt states, I've been in a few e.g. venezuela. I also have at least some experience with the workings government via courts/day to day life of judges or the inner workings of the administration of munich and I haven't seen corruption at all.

I bet it's a tax haven leeching of the countries around it.

To be honest, I also don't accept the argument if only you are well off in a poor country where everyone suffers but you make big bucks with a low tax rate. Are they enjoying a comparable healthcare? Adequate pension? If so, you should have been taxed more. I am a social democrat by heart and think that in the end economy serves society and successful entrepreneurs have inherent social responsibility because of the economic power they have.

I am sorry but you can not work in the company or build a company in the country and avoid taxes. Your taxes go directly into these things. All the rest of the society has to pay taxes, they can't avoid taxes on their car via an elaborate foreign holding structure. The only way to change it to your liking is via politics, or build it in a different country respecting their rules. Get involved in local politics, especially the state of the school system and many other things are decided on a very low level that can be directly influenced by your district.

Everyone contributes and we get back free education (our universities are still good btw. and for certain topics really good) and from what I hear about schools from parents they still work, even with expanded care times. Bürgergeld exists if you really hit a rough spot. Super cheap public transit (50€ per month!) and autobahn is still existing.

You say that what Germans lack in competence they make up with arrogance, but it's really to complain about everything and be super pessimistic all the time. You can not just choose to avoid taxes, that's just highly unethical and unfair to everyone who's paying their share and super selfish. I stand by my word:

F*k you if you avoid taxes

you are not forced to live and do business here. Feel free to move to another country if you don't like the taxes. But you can't just avoid the taxes because you feel like it. I don't care how much you would loose by not avoiding taxes.

Society only functions if everyone contributes. And the rest of society pays their taxes, you know. They can't avoid paying taxes on their car through a foreign holding structure. It's a slap on their face because you feel like you should have more.

> People can move in from other countries, you know.

You can also move away from germany. But you can't move to germany and avoid taxes while creating a company here (OP was literally: Bootstrapping a SaaS Business in Germany)

why is this even the first thing that comes to mind when thinking about the legal form? This is highly unethical in general and really just super selfish.

F*k you if you avoid taxes, especially in a country like Germany where society paid for your university studies etc.

I don't know how to judge this comment? Is this essentially recommending dodging the taxes via a more complicated holding situation and the "do vacation in Germany", so essentially operate from germany?

If so, I think this is highly unethical. Corporations have to pair their share to keep the society functioning...not just "normal" peoples with their salaries while all the profits get sucked into a foreign black hole.

it might be how you're using the computer. It shows by touching (not scrolling) the trackpad (and if I correctly remember also the magic mouse?).

> Yes, MacOS Has them set as "Only Show When Scrolling" by default, which is probably the most ridiculous setting.

I have used MacOS every day for 10 years and i've never, except in exceptional circumstances, used the scrollbar to scroll. I don't see anybody in my circle using it. They all have the "Only Show When Scrolling" setting on.

I don't think this is ridiculous and I would enable the setting if turned off by default.

I also spend 99% percent of my time in full-screen mode in safari, vscode or terminal. So the top bar is also hidden by default. I think this is much more focused.

> embracing dependent types (which are actually simpler than where Haskell has been heading) rather than building increasingly complex approximations of them

very much second that! haskell has band-aid type-level programming that is so awful, but sometimes so useful, that it's really hurting a lot. I would just really like to deprecate type-families and would like to see as a the first step some non-dependently typed type-promoted functions. There's a great, pragmatic, proposal I would really like to see implemented. I, personally, don't need dependent types thaaaaaat much but type families are so unergonomic and really a dead-end I think. It's just stupid.

it's sad to see that the dependent haskell progress is losing steam and, as it is my impression, getting maybe a bit lost in the weeds?

germany, but in a more mature startup and not an old, big company

> Middle income America has cheaper housing, food and durables with higher wages than middle income in Western Europe.

Is food really cheaper? That's not what I heard but I don't know.

But that's a weird take. Quality of life is not entirely dominated by your purchase power if you have enough to sustain life. What about having time for culture, friends, family, quality of the environment, safety, access to healthcare etc. The only exception may be housing.

Some cities here (in europe) have an absolutely incredible quality of life and I would never factor in the price of groceries because it doesn't matter. Everyone in the middle class can afford groceries. Housing maybe, in some cities it's a real issue, but I personally don't care as much because I don't really need an abundant apartment so I always find something. I want beautiful cafes just around the corner, vibrant, active culture from fine art to independent, small artists and beautiful parks and buildings.

I would never trade it for a big car and a big house in some suburb.

A friend of mine is working 32h a week and I am starting to think that he has figured out how to really improve his quality of live. On a programmers wage you're still middle class, you just earn so much. And he's travelling so much, meeting friends, getting into hobbies or just enjoying a really nice coffee in a cafe, taking in the beautiful autumn lights, while everyone else is working that you're always a but envious.

> We basically have two economies, they will certainly only further diverge.

a very interesting take. Given that europe completely failed in developing FAANG-like companies, i wonder how the US economy with the FAANG-like top tech performers removed compares to it.

Of course this removes a significant part of the US economy and is not fair, but it's still interesting.

but some of the EU members were literally communist countries not so long ago

I can't access the text because it's behind a paywall, but at least in the visualisation you see at least europes countries. And it's a headline, it can't reduce the complexity without loosing something.

> 1 million to 1.5 million is far less than 100 to 1000

this is very simplified and if there's a continuing trend then the first has an an abundance of money and the second just has a bit.

I don't think the critique is fair at all. These are statistics over a population, of course it's meaningless at first for the individual but that's just because of the noise. In the long run there's an impact.