tifik

Firefox through snap has been the last straw for me as well. Not quite enough to ragequit on the spot, but next time I have to install a new OS, it won't be Ubuntu.

I would put "misinformation" into quotes, because iirc the policy was written so vaguely that it basically allowed them to fine you for whatever they disagreed with.

These are well known in general Czech population (I mean the fact they occured, not necessarily all the details), and it is not uncommmon to use the verb "to defenestrate" as a joke when talking about mounting some form of protest.

Source: Born and raised in Bohemia.

I think you are operating with a different definition of "knowledge" that the parent does.

For me its mostly projecting my own insecurities onto others. Being in a space where you are guaranteed a shared interest with others (places hobbies get practiced at, volunteering gigs) is a great way to aleviate the fear of rejection, looking like a weirdo, creep or whatever.

Its unclear if you are talking about yourself or making a general observation about people around you, but in case its the latter: I believe this to be very much subject to strong confirmation bias. You dont open up because you believe thats just not what people do. But I find that to be false 9/10 times I break through the fear and show genuine interest.

Safe spaces would include anywhere people that share a common interest gather, for me thats a climbing gym I go to regularly. Volunteering is also great in regards to meeting people that share similar values.

Fair point.

To be precise, by difficult I meant 'practically impossible', which to your point would certainly apply to pretty much anyone from outside of what is considered 'western' countries. While there certainly always is a process, if you are already a citizen of any western country, immigrating to another one is relatively easy in comparison.

I imagine for gargantuan companies with significant amount of pull for talent there is always a good pool of candidates in later stages of the hiring process to pick from.

That sucks. I moved first, then started looking for a job, because I was afraid of this exact scenario. I am not Russian but I imagine that for Russians it is likely very difficult to immigrate into a western country without a job offer in the current geopolitical situation. Good luck.

The current SI job market definitely made me reconsider my previous approach of finding greener pastures every 2-3 years. Being the newest person in a company during mass layoffs would be butt-clenching. A good reminder to all of us that we are not special and good times don't last.

> Why would you assume it's not both?

I do not believe parent assumes that, but rather states they hope it's not the latter on its own (or at least not a major driver in the decision process).

But like.. Im not claiming its the while story, but definitely a piece of it.

And you just took the info I provided, and added another piece of the puzzle. The observation that more spam exists in US/Canada still applies, is supported by my anecdote, and explained by your analysis. To me, very much proving this info is indeed relevant to the debate.

Unless we want to go super meta about relevance and usefulness.

I learned new things, thank you.

I spend roughly 50% of time in Canada and the other 50% in Europe, mostly Czech Republic.

I have two phones, and usually just put the one for the country Im not currently in on a charger and hide it away in a drawer, and take it out only when Im packing to go to the other continent again.

The Canadian phone usually gets 50-100 spam messages and missed calls during the 2-3 months Im not using it.

The Czech phone has never had a spam message or missed call on it ever.

I dont see why strories like this would have no bearing on this discussion. Its relevant, anecdotal evidence.

First time hearing the term 'private longevity'. Doesn't sound quite right to me. Sort of implies there is some kind of 'public longevity'. Wouldn't 'personal longevity' make (slightly) more sense?

Edit - I'm an idiot, ignore me. It's clearly not 'private longevity' but 'private companies [that deal with longevity]'

Just for the record, the original title was 'The real cause of depression is not what you think it is', or sth very close to that.

I am happy to see it was changed.

I made it a principle to never click a title (or a thumbnail in case of e.g. youtube) that is intentionally this click-baity.

If it's a topic I genuinely am interested in, I just look the information up somewhere else.

It's an answer to the parent, which specifically says...

> those who idolize free markets, say the government should not "pick winners", and rail against the nanny state.

...but then act in the opposite way to the beliefs they say they hold.

The comment you are replying to adds that the group of people that behave like this likely has an overlap with people that...

> use the Bible as a weapon without embodying the values of Jesus.

So to me that would be a group of people I'd readily label as hypocrites, self-dealing populists or straight up liars.

I know this is an unecessarily long comment for what might just be a typo, but I'd like to know If I'm getting this right myself.

I believe 'a pleb' is short for 'a plebeian'. 'Plebs' would be plural of 'pleb', so 'a plebs' seems incorrect.

I could be wrong though. English is not my first language, and I'd love to be corrected if I indeed am wrong.

No user data input either, so why bother.

I have worked in a genomics lab after finishing a bioinformatics master's.

It was my first fulltime job, and by far the most chill. People were great. The PI was laid back, the whole lab went out for beers every now and then - and not because of a mandatory startup-style 'bonding' event. We genuinely enjoyed each others company and hung out outside of work. I never had that in any other job, which were/are all commercial operations.

The vibe and the power structure felt very different. More level. There werent any purely managerial roles, everyone was doing at least a bit of 'science'. And even junior ICs like me got to coach undergrads every now and then. Most of the operational budget comes from grants, on which you have to deliver. The pay is not amazing, so most employees really are in it for the science.

Or I was still young and naive and was lucky all of the two layers of management were all nice people.

Ultimately I left, as the grant money coudnt keep up with offers I was getting.

It is still the job I am most proud of. I love talking about it, and it really sucks that even a well funded lab cant really afford market engineering rates.

> Using the model to generate content that is cruel to individuals is a misuse of this model. This includes, but is not limited to:

... >+ Sexual content without consent of the people who might see it

I understand that it's their TOS and they can put pretty much anything in there, but this item seems... odd. I don't really know why exactly this stands out to me. Maybe it's because it's practically un-enforceable? Are they just covering all their bases legally?

Trying to think of a good metaphore; let's try this: If you are an artist and someone commissions you to create an art piece that might be sexual, can you say "ok, but you have to ask for consent before you show it to people", and you enshrine it in the contract. Obviously gross violations like trolling by spamming porn are pretty clear cut, but what about the more nuanced cases when you say, display it on your personal website? Are you supposed to have an NSFW overlay? Isn't opening a website sort of implying that you consent to seeing whatever is on there, unless you have a strong preconception of what content the page is expected to display?

I might be hugely overthinking this.

> ruined

Parent didnt say or even suggest that.

> when being gay was literally a criminal offense straight guys didn’t have to worry about holding hands

He's making an observation. Have you been to Turkey at around the same and have a different experience?

Letting your employee be out of the country for 3-6 months every year on a tourist visa is a lot different from actually getting incorporated in that country and paying income taxes there.

>for your US employer

US/Canada have a very interconnected labor market, so in this context your comment is perfectly valid, and I would guess there are additional rules for this specific case. For literally any country other than US though, I don't see why it would be an issue for Canada or the country of origin, even if you do it repeatedly year over year.

> It's about whether you're working at all.

Yes, but 'work' also has a legal definition. My research mostly involves Canada, so I will cite from the IIRC [1]:

"What kind of activities are not considered to be “work”?

    An activity which does not really 'take away' from opportunities for Canadians or permanent residents to gain employment or experience in the workplace is not “work” for the purposes of the definition.

...

- long distance (by telephone or Internet) work done by a temporary resident whose employer is outside Canada and who is remunerated from outside Canada;

...

We recognize that there may be overlap in activities that we do not consider to be work and those activities which are defined as work not requiring a work permit in R186. However, the net effect (no work permit required) is the same."

So yes, you can work remotely from Canada, while on a tourist visa, for a foreign (non-Canadian) employer.

A lot of OECD countries have treaties (look up 'double-taxation treaty between A and B'), that govern this.

1 - https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/co...

It comes down to how you define 'working from a country'. Doesn't it mean 'being employed by a local company and paying income taxes' there?

If I go on a vacation and respond to a few work-related emails, am I breaking any laws because I'm working on a tourist visa? Yes, that is ad absurdum, but I'm trying to point out that it's not as clear cut. There is a line that international treaties define, and staying someplace (sometimes even up to 6 months) and working there doesn't necessarily have any income tax implications for you or your employer.

> Close to 100%

Can you share the source for this data? I find it exceptionally difficult to believe.

I do not condone people doing anything illegal. But you can maintain the lifestyle of a 'digital nomad' while not breaking any laws whatsoever. I definitely do not believe that 'close to a 100%' of people would risk their jobs, the wrath of the tax man and potential prison time by not abiding by the relevant legislature, especially given that there are usually many available options.

> upend the local economy and pay no taxes I understand that taxes are important to maintain local infrastructure, but up to a certain point, isn't it beneficial having a few people literally bringing in foreign money to pay for the same products and services other locals pay for? There are places that officially encourage that behavior.

I understand how that might eventually upend the local economy - it's called gentrification and while digital nomads certainly contribute to it, it surely can't be fully blamed on them. Places where people want to live at will eventually get gentrified in some shape or form.

The logic behind labeling digital nomads as illegal immigrants completely eludes me. I genuinely don't understand why you would make that assumption.

To me the main difference is that you can still focus on work while showing up. I wouldn't be able to just bring my laptop to an in-person meeting, zone out and clank away on your keyboard. This largely removes the main issue I had with most meetings - that I have to stop doing useful work.

It really depends on your definition of attractiveness, which would be highly subjective. For the author of the article, the things you would consider unattractive clearly didn't pose a big enough issue to counter the things they do find attractive.

Estonia is a member of NATO, so it "doesn't matter", in the sense that Estonia being a target means that all other members of NATO are a target. Of course practically speaking it is a bigger issue for Estonia than for say Canada, but at least within EU, I would not let that aspect be a major point in deciding places to move to.

So I take it Lebanon doesnt operate on the strict islamic system of banking, that I thought was designed to prevent financial collapses like these? Or am I just wrong in assuming that said system is meant to be more robust?