Everytime an engineer tries to push slack on a consultant all they see is a new interface, shit loads of noise, gifs etc (cultural issue rather than tech stack obviously) and no real extra benefit vs the cost of learning something new when what you have today ticks all the boxes.
I also use both as I'm a partner on the engineering side of the business but also run a large consulting pod - I really don't care which one anyone uses. I don't personally see Slack being better 'enough' to justify the effort of switching for those that are already on teams.
Very true. I know a couple of people who like Teams, they work in healthcare and education. I think that mostly just speaks about the horrid quality of the software they usually have to face.
Each and every tech worker I know loathes Teams with passion. On the upside it's like a common enemy so there's a small team building aspect to using it.
Are you American? I tend to find tastes in tech differ across the pond. An American literally sent me a link to a google doc the other week - I couldn't believe anyone would send a final professional doc in anything other than Word - you can't even get proper section numbers without a poor plugin....
Every organisation in Poland I've worked at has used google docs and GSuite.
On the other hand, we're mostly using it for few page design doc, and have no idea what "final professional doc" or what "proper section numbers" are and why would anyone care.
Just avoid comments about peoples personal appearance all together. Maybe somebody doesn't want to be told they're short or dark or whatever. I was introduced to a guy via email and spoke to him on IRC for nearly a year before he came to the office, when he arrived he was wearing a dress and carrying a handbag - I decided to not comment on his appearance. Try it...
But then you're essentially defining racism as "anything that gets you in trouble."
It's perfectly reasonable to adjust coming anywhere close to discussing race as a strategy to avoid getting fired, but it's insane to redefine racism based on that.
We're doing that, and it results in a constantly expanding definition of racism, to where there are now "microaggressions."
Keep in mind, if you're white, you don't care: as you suggested, you just avoid talking about certain topics and carry on.
If you're a minority group, all these white people are, against their own apparent interests, agreeing that there's pervasive racism everywhere. The minority person has to live believing that all this is true.
We ought to have empathy and get this right so we don't contribute to a pervasive falsehood that makes people's lives seem worse than they really are. What's no big deal for us can be a ton of stress for others.
The question was wrong anyway. You don't have to "cut back on services as a tax haven". Cyprus, Singapore, Swizzerland in the past, etc, have all kinds of state services...
Maybe the one asking had in mind some derelict tax haven islands in the caribbean or so? Not all tax havens are like that...
No, services cost money and have to be paid for. That was my argument. Still interesting that you guys find that there is ground for argument - an irrelvant topic would not be ground for argument, wouldn't it?
and here is one of two reviews (the other one isn't so good either).
"This is the worst book I have ever read. Not organized, inconsistent tabs, incorrect spelling, punctuation, and grammar.
Many of the points on tax sales are not fully explained and the reader is left with gaping holes in understanding the tax sale process. Some of the points are incorrect on how the tax sale process works.
I would not recommend this kindle to anyone, especially someone someone looking for guidance on the tax sale process. Perhaps this kindle could be useful in an English class as an example of what not to do."
A lot of people want a step by step guide with easy to understand rules and clear steps.
I read those types of guide books when I got started and many exist. When I tried to follow them in real life they missed so glossed over so many other problems or situations that can come up. The knowledge of local rules and past experiences and sound judgement was lacking. I found the best way to learn was from conversations in coffee shops / outside auctions from people who have been doing this for years.
This book tries to copy that style with a focus around specific topics that come up. Raw knowledge, warts and all.
You should seek a really good therapist, you're far too young to be 'over it' already.
You can live an authentic life, you just don't know how because 1, you're a kid with zero wisdom and 2, you don't yet know what is important (related to point 1).
I found that reading philosophy helps, even just a little bit. The absurdists figured it out I think. Absurdism also helps with coping with the belief in determinism I guess, but I am still in conflict.
It was indeed an enjoyable read in tandem with the followup post. Some years ago, I was in the 'Pure Land' and in a weird way I was happy that I never 'grew up', by that I meant that the educational system didn't kill my curiosity as it does to most kids, and that I found everything interesting in some way and I was never really bored of things.
I guess I lost that curiosity during the last parts of my thesis and covid lockdowns last year. The thesis and the internship after beat the curiosity out of me simply because doing *good* research was neigh impossible with my limited resources. I remember desperately trying to make progress but when everything takes ages to complete, it is easy to lose interest, and deadlines make everything harder.
I tried to get back to that state of mind, but it can be quite difficult at times.
In many developed countries, 42% tax would cover healthcare, a pension you can actually live off of, and fully-paid education for all of your children. Californians get none of those things, and I don't really understand what it is that they get over (e.g.) Washingtonians for the extra ~30% in taxes.
In the states, tax is obscure but painful -- you feel it when you pay it, like a sales tax not included in the price or a complicated tax form. In Europe, tax is hidden but smooth -- like a VAT built into the cost of everything or a 3-box tax form (in NL)
They get protection by the US military and promotion of Californian business interests throughout the world through Federal institutions. Not to mention: friction free access to a large labor pool and US domestic market etc.
I get your point that the US doesn’t provide as much social services as other developed nations. Almost all these nations depend on US hegemony to not have to spend as much on their military. This is a choice that the US made. There are good arguments for scaling back military spending and increasing social spending without compromising US hegemony though, however those choices may not be politically expedient so here we are.
I don't want to address the hegemony point beyond I disagree on the need or even effectiveness of US military.
But I would want to point out the curious phrasing and of your first paragraph and what that says about USA way of thinking. All these points are business targeted while all european points are individual targeted.
> But I would want to point out the curious phrasing and of your first paragraph and what that says about USA way of thinking. All these points are business targeted while all european points are individual targeted.
I don't think there is anything curious about this way of thinking. And US hegemony plays directly into this!
Pre-World Wars, European nations had their colonies and their militaries and the priority of thinking was along similar lines: access to expansive markets, large pools of labor, protection of business interests etc, chiefly through colonies.
WW2 changed all of that, reducing European nations to client states (no disrespect) of the US, that funded their reconstruction. Colonialism was no longer allowed, and European nations could not freely pursue foreign markets without competing with US companies, which would always get precedence. With no real way to compete with the US militarily, and with NATO aligning with their immediate geo-political needs anyways, European nations invested heavily on Social Services, rather than blow up their military budgets. This geopolitical equation hasn't changed post WW2 and you have generations of people that consider social services as the primary function of their Government.
However, its a fundamental mistake to assume that a Government can provide effective social services without having a strong economy. Strong economies require successful businesses.
> However, its a fundamental mistake to assume that a Government can provide effective social services without having a strong economy. Strong economies require successful businesses.
Umm... I would say the social services in european countries are pretty successful.
It can depend on what to compare them to (and for what class, which changes a lot in terms on access to commercial clinics, etc.). What countries are you comparing to?
I can get into the nuances of it, but honestly even on surface level, just the single point that my Health care is not linked with my job gives me infinitely more control over my life.
WA residents get all of these things with 0% state tax, and only a bit more in property taxes. What Californians get for the extra taxes (and Washingtonians too, for that matter, for a large fraction of theirs) is a jobs program for incompetents that occasionally achieves something good as an unintended side effect; known as government.
I frankly have no idea why US govts on all levels, and from all parties, seem so much more incompetent than many European/Asian ones (I have a pet theory), but they are.
> They get protection by the US military and promotion of Californian business interests throughout the world through Federal institutions. Not to mention: friction free access to a large labor pool and US domestic market etc.
And Washingtonians do not? What you wrote does not address the question that the parent poster asked.
If you have children, you lose out on child benefit between 60k and 70k, which adds an equivalent 10% in that margin.
Between 100 and 120k there is also the loss of personal allowance, which results in a marginal tax rate of 62% in that bracket. If you have children between the ages of 3 and 4, you also lose out on 15 hours/week childcare, resulting in that marginal tax rate hitting 89%
I don’t view paying my own individual debt as a tax. I have a percentage of my pay deducted and diverted to my retirement account. That’s not a tax either, even though it’s percentage-based on my pre-tax amount and directly deducted.
You can opt out of your pension contributions. You can’t opt-out of paying student loans, which is an available option with other debts.
Student loan deductions reduce a balance that doesn’t impact your credit score, can’t chase you for repayment (unless you do something stupid like move country and fail to inform them) and doesn’t impact lender decisions. Most people have no hope of repaying their ‘loan’ in their lifetimes and instead expect the loan to be written off after 25 years. U.K. student loans being debt is a technicality, it’s a tax with a countdown timer that might be shorter if you’re baller.
You aren’t wrong, but hitting 6 figures at age 30 is very far from the typical experience. Outside of London it’s not guaranteed you’d even hit £60k.
Plan 2 students are screwed, with the high interest rates and slower repayment schedule I wouldn’t even be sure non-London devs would finish paying it off.
I charge more per hour for my consulting, I had a bottle of wine that cost about that last week for dinner. What revenue do they actually get out of that model?
To be fair, they do much more work than CentOS ever did (or Rocky would have to do).
In fact, Ubuntu does too much development for its own good. People jumped on it because it was “a usable Debian updated more often”, and they got all sorts of crazy UX experiments.
