• 5 Posts
  • 65 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle
  • I believe it’s 1% for access to the “entire post-open ecosystem”, rather than 1% per project which would be unreasonable. So you could use one or thousands of projects under the Post-open banner, but still pay 1%.

    It will take years to develop the post-open ecosystem to be something worth spending that much on.


  • Piatro@programming.devtoRisa@startrek.websiteEnemies of glory have no honor
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Also chromosome tests aren’t a foolproof indication of sex anyway. People can have one set or another while still having the properties associated with the other sex, so it doesn’t really work as a definitive measure. The question is reasonable until you examine it and it’s motives.

    The question subtly suggests that if she had a Y chromosome then she has some biological advantage and therefore doesn’t deserve the medal she earned. Does she actually have an advantage from the Y chromosome? Are we going to ensure through DNA testing that all competitors are going to be exactly equal by genetics? If so, we’re going to have 8 clones of Usain Bolt competing for the 100m sprint. Michael Phelps arguably had a biological advantage by having hyper flexible shoulders, are we disqualifying those biological advantages? Of course not, so what do they actually mean when asking those questions about the chromosome? They don’t have meaningful answers to the questions I raise, they just want to add fuel to the fires of the culture war for their own political means.







  • If you’re British and employed your employer is legally required to provide a private pension I believe. You also get a state pension if you’ve been paying national insurance (most people will get this taken out of pay cheques before you ever see the money, same as income tax). Some employers offer “matching contributions” up to a certain amount. For example if you decide you want to send £100 per month into your private pension, your employer will also do the same, so your pension gets £200. These contributions are tax free so it’s a tax-efficient way to save money when compared to privately investing where you’d have to invest from your income, which has already been taxed and then potentially have to pay capital gains tax on profits.










  • I said in another comment but basically the left have a tougher message to sell than the right. The right says that the system works but it’s the foreigners/benefit thieves/refugees stealing your money/house/jobs. That is inherently quite easy to understand without much thought or critical thinking. The left on the other hand have to tell you all about Thatcher, Reagan and neoliberalism before we even get to the point of solutions which are usually incredibly radical like changing the fundamental economic model we’ve all been operating under since the 80s. Inherent in that is a fear that the left’s solutions will take assets and wealth away from people. While the right promises that your assets, wealth and property rights are sacred and that it’s the “other” that will have their assets, wealth and rights taken away. Again, very easy-to-understand messaging for the right versus the left.



  • I totally agree that neoliberal economics are essentially what we understand to be economics now. To be clear, I’m not blaming the left, I think it’s a case of they have a more difficult message to convey. To explain the problems that neoliberal economics has and to propose a solution to them is a really hard task compared with “it’s the foreigners at fault”. It’s a much clearer, more concise and seemingly solvable problem compared with “we need to overhaul the global economy”.