zygimantasdev

I think your point about a choice of taxes is very close to my argument of involuntary taxes. While I agree there are some things that you must contribute to have law and order - there are other things I don't want to subsidize. If my town lacks sidewalks, cars drive too fast and etc. - why should you pay for other towns problems first? Because somebody needs more votes from that other town they get to take my money against my will?

Also, for example, I don't like some study programs and I really like some of them. Problem is - I can't choose which ones to subsidize for students. If that's the case - I wouldn't subsidize any of them, but I am forced to do so. Even if I think its harmful.

I think this problem arise/will arise in many different places: North vs South Italy, Catalonia vs Spain, young people to carry aging population and etc.

I think your goal is impossible. Even in soviet union that wasn't the case. The best specialists (let's say top surgeons) will always have more influence. If you know that your survivability rate is 50% higher at one surgeon hands than the rest - won't you pay/do whatever you can to survive?

If you are taxed involuntary - isn't that stealing? Well technically by law it is legal and enforced for everyone, but it still is stealing. For example: if everybody is under the immoral law and some people are better than others at avoiding the immoral law - is it morally okay for those people to avoid that law?

Edit: by involuntary I mean if person can't choose. Not talking about businesses

Gitlab reputation went down quite a bit from my perspective. No time given to migrate.

I guess we grew up with stories which gave us +5 resistance to socialism. Stories about how in almost every group were people who would report you if you talked about some "threat" to union. Stories about how everyone was living in socialism and they were building communism. Once communism is built - nobody needs to even walk in streets - you will have conveyor belts everyone taking everywhere. Stories about how in the west capitalists were using everyone as slaves and how you as a citizen had power to control. Stories how streets were empty and you had to wait for car for 8 years to buy it (price was insane too). Everyone was stealing from factories, selling "behind table" and etc.

Well there is no difference. If majority oppresses minority (democracy) - how is this different from Bolsheviks. You kill/take assets from the rich, make private entities illegal and then it is the same. If you allow freedom for people to open a shop to sell meat in your local area - well its capitalism then.

Thank you for reply, it is extremely interesting. Can you recommend books/any type of articles on this topic?

Personally my thinking changes from Turing Machine to more math like with each year I do functional programming

Maybe Elm itself is a killer app, but certainly not elm-ui. I don't think Datomic is a killer app too. Its certainly not comparable to Rails/OSes at scale

I would argue all currencies are unreliable ,because they go down in value due increase of supply. Throwing 2-4% every year sounds awful

What is your point of reference? Since software before electron apps was result of capitalism too

All this China censorship made me think. Starting to get this feeling that more and more choices made by me (to buy/to use/endorse) are becoming more like a political votes. Just happy there are things/ideas free from politics

If every humans wants to protect earth and "Selfishness of individuals triumph over long term global cause" - how come selfishness doesn't fix this problem? Seems like a contradiction to me

If you paid for the game client(wow) it is not illegal to play in private servers

I guess what I meant - I looked at these issues differently, others probably too. Apple, Google "selling out" to be in China? Oh well - that seems reasonable since its a big market. South Park put it into different perspective. I guess that is what art does

South Park is spot on this season. You could say they are good with predictions, but I think they just gave different perspective to something that already has been happening (episodes on China censorship)

"climate change and environmental degradation have serious effects on human health" - can you elaborate? Do you mean mental health?

On the top post on that link:

"Red Hat urges the FSF board to seize the opportunity during its current leadership succession by appointing a president and members of its board that are more diverse, including from a national, racial and gender perspective."

at least in my country's constitution discrimination based on race/gender is forbidden (No person should be limited by law or granted privileges based on his sex/race/nationality/... . Statement like this is exactly that. I imagine other countries have similar laws - how are things like that acceptable?

FP enables better concurrent/parallel code. I would say that is more important when CPU core count is increasing

This is how U.S traffic looked - https://i.imgur.com/X10kmms.gifv

Source: reddit

What's bad about java in 2010? Java is still alive today, while Ruby with Rails were overtaken

That sounds like an interesting read - could you provide a link?

Well, for me it seems two ideas are mixed up here. Non profits can do exactly that - instead of focusing on profits they can maximize other "stakeholders". Corporations with goal to maximize profits are not going away, because investors will not invest into non profits expecting return on investment

Your kids could be the ones who innovate and fix the environment problems, therefore your argument is not valid

Ugh, in my experience, 28C is way too much to think/code in a productive manner

Your statement is true for throwing exceptions, however you cannot catch exceptions in pure way

Imagine a signature like this:

function oneDividedByX(x: Double): Double

oneDividedByX(2) // 1/2

oneDividedByX(3) // 1/3

and so on.. Except with zero. With zero you get an exception, however nothing in function signature mentions about such result. You only expect a double

In Either case - it solves the problem, because the signature would be like this:

function oneDividedByX(x: Double): Either[ComputingError, Double]

As for throwing exceptions - it can be done in pure way, but catching exceptions cannot