>Every year, I have to dig up receipts for what we spent on daycare, what we spent out of our HSA accounts, etc. The government doesn't track any of that.
Aside from the daycare costs (as an aside, creche in Ireland is quite decent[0]), isn't all of that is still reported to the IRS? Your HSA isn't sitting in some dark corner that the government doesn't know about, ever since the Patriot Act, yeah?
I'm fairly certain it is reported to the IRS because Americans find getting bank accounts overseas quite cumbersome because your government strong-arms agreements that demand that Americans' overseas bank accounts are reported to the IRS. Surely, more domestic reporting shouldn't come as a surprise or shock.
>I guarantee you that if you make false statements using Ireland's online system for claiming tax credits, you're under penalty of perjury as well.
What do I get for a broken guarantee[1]? :)
This batering back and forth really only arrives at the conclusion that I originally posited:
Those of us in the PAYE system[s] would abhor having to do things the American way and this wasn't meant as an affront (and I apologise if anyone may have taken it that way).
Our tax agencies are responsible for keeping track of these things and the only things we're responsible for is reporting status changes and/or providing receipts for other proofs of burden (such as Independent Contractors who file as Directors of Umbrella Corporations and need to write-off business expenses).
>Is this similar to PAYE or do you actually have to submit a tax return but it's pre-filled for you?
As long as your PAYE is like Ireland's (ROI) PAYE, then the American's system is far-removed from it.
Even though their tax revenue office gets the reports from businesses for how much they were paid and how much taxes they paid, the Americans still need to fill out a tax form - every year - to repeat the same information (it's an added benefit for the prison system, in that mistakes on tax forms can equate to jail time). They get a form from their employer (which their tax office also has), that contains all of this information.
>In the UK, most people don't have to submit a tax return at all. Not sure the actual cost of this, but the convenience is unparalleled.
Aye, it's the same in Ireland (ROI). You can just call-up or email Revenue and they check if you've overpaid, by how much, and they just send you the money. No forms. No bullshit. No threats of jail time. It's pretty deadly[0].
You want nothing to do with the Yanks' tax system, trust me.
>I wonder what more it will take to have something actually be done about this, haha.
It's the CFC/Ozone Hole problem[0], all over again; only at a much larger and far more damaging scale. Humans, despite all of their best qualities, are still going to human.
>Perhaps this is selecting for desperate job hunters who send thank you notes.
That's entirely plausible. I mean, you're probably <insert arbitrary percentage here> more likely to not turn an offer down, even if it's below the cost-of-living for the area in question, if you're willing to go to those lengths, yeah?
Their solution to the problem of having offers turned down seems to be not to investigate why but to just hire the people most willing to take them... I mean, they found a loop-hole but to quote the Big Lebowski: "You're not wrong, Walter, you're just an asshole."
>What about 95% of the content on the internet that ads pay for?
This is such a pedestrian argument, as if advertising pays for the content to be made and then hosted - when the truth of the matter is that someone else pays for the content to be created (and hosted) and that cost is recouped (with additional profit added on top), after the fact by advertising.
For example, advertising companies are not paying for YouTube content creators to create their content and then for it to be hosted on YouTube. Advertising companies seek those with the largest audience (typically, that requires having made content a priori, yeah?) and then make partnerships with those people and, then, those people may make videos pushing those products.
WSJ, since this is predominantly an American board, doesn't have advertisers paying their reporters', photographers', editors', etc. salaries. Advertisers are not paying for the content to be created or to be hosted. All of that is done by WSJ, who then recoups the costs via advertising, yeah?
So, the only point at which "95% of the content on the internet that ads pay for" is true, is (predominantly) after the content has been made and hosted and is only true over time (e.g.: not with immediate effect).
>Malware isn't advertising
You have that backwards from the OC's comment: Advertising networks have been used to push malware.
>...and security is an issue in any industry and sector.
This comes across as a whataboutism, "So? Other industries have security problems, too!" and, whilst true, largely ignores the fact that those other industries (mostly at large) weren't leveraged as attack vectors to spread malware. (I'm assuming your meaning of "industry" infers the meaning of "commercial industry", that generates revenue in exchange for a product or service, which would ignore the obvious things like P2P and the like.)
>But online ads and the technology that makes them work have played a considerable part in the development of almost every aspect of what we’ve come to enjoy as the free and open internet of today.
Online ads and free and open internet are not synonymous and I really wish that people would stop trying to equate them as such. The pervasive advertising systems that are running today (e.g.: Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, etc.) aren't running to make the internet free and open but to squeeze out more profit margins for their respective shareholders and nothing more.
Were online ads the cause of the move from dial-up to "high-speed" internet? I'd argue it was actually pictures, graphics, movies, etc. and the desire to be able to consume those at a reasonable rate that caused the move from dial-up to "high-speed" internet.
How did advertising play a role in the development of that portion of the free and open internet? (Genuinely asking, in case I'm missing something here.)
Right!? You can't have prisons run by for-profit companies and then expect everyone to believe you want low recidivism rates - much less low crime rates. Bodies make the businesses money, businesses making money keep running the jails/prisons, and "being tough on crime" gets the votes - so it's a self-perpetuating machine.
>These services are ludicrously expensive. Video calls cost 40¢ per minute in Newton County, 50¢ per minute in Lowndes County, and $10 per call in Allen County.
The use of the video system is now compulsory, in person visits are banned, and another at-cost for families of criminals is seemingly tacked on because... ...freedom? Capitalism?
At what point do we agree tapping the families of inmates (note: not the inmates, themselves) out of money is going too far?
Why not just say "dump Windows"? It's a good OS, if you want someone to hand-hold you, but as somoene once elegantly put it: "Trying to hack in Windows is like trying to dance in bodycast."
>Reverse Engineering.
They list scripting but, as saagarjha notes, knowing how to program is a pivotal quality. Otherwise, when you reverse engineer something, how do you know what the feck you're looking at?
For example (I'm aware of the irony of this example), it does me no good to reverse engineer something in ILDASM[0], if I haven't the faintest idea of what it is I'm looking at.
True, even in post-mortem debugging (assuming I have the objects from the heap), it's not like I'm going to exclude the addresses of objects in my write-ups (or as they're exposed via commands, such as !sosex.mdso[0]).
In native, if you're on the stack (e.g.: not using pointers), then addresses don't mean much of anything and if you're using pointers, memory optimisation means the address could mean feck-all after a cycle or two (assuming you've looking at an iDNA/TTT[1]).
So, to agree with you, who are agreeing with me: It is quite odd that this would be a principal argument for proquints.
>Debuggers could input and output memory addresses as proquints as an alternative to hex.
...but why? In debuggers, you're not concerned with memorising the address of an object as much as you are concerned with what the hell is mangling said object. There's no "value-add" for proquints, here. If you were live-debugging in a session with someone else, sure, but how often are you generally doing that?
>Network tools such as browsers, ping, netstat, traceroute, etc. could input and output proquints as an alternative to dotted quads.
Again, what is the value-add? Since I've known 4-octet IP addresses and numbers my whole life, it would take more effort to translate from proquint, to understand the output on the screen. Adding a translation layer in a cut-over fashion instead of a phased-in fashion just seems like wholly unnecessary overhead, only intended to further justify the proquint, yeah?
The title is misleading: "A book" tends to inclinate that it's not a specific book, which is the anithesis to the fact that the Boekenweekgeschenk very much is.
Feck me, if that isn't the broad stroke of painting with imbellishment, deriving from what I presume to be too much personal investment.
The author, through their own admission, was detached as feck from the patient and the relative they talk with at the end; he even mentions judging them for keeping her in the hospital. You call that "heartfelt"?
Pretty much landed the blame where it should fall but it's not the only one. Take a look at PDFs with DRMs and what happens when those companies no longer exist or the like. It's chasing the almighty <insert currency here> that locks you into licensing to watch, instead of ownership.
Long live the VHS days... (...damn the man, save the Empire.)
Aside from the daycare costs (as an aside, creche in Ireland is quite decent[0]), isn't all of that is still reported to the IRS? Your HSA isn't sitting in some dark corner that the government doesn't know about, ever since the Patriot Act, yeah?
I'm fairly certain it is reported to the IRS because Americans find getting bank accounts overseas quite cumbersome because your government strong-arms agreements that demand that Americans' overseas bank accounts are reported to the IRS. Surely, more domestic reporting shouldn't come as a surprise or shock.
>I guarantee you that if you make false statements using Ireland's online system for claiming tax credits, you're under penalty of perjury as well.
What do I get for a broken guarantee[1]? :)
This batering back and forth really only arrives at the conclusion that I originally posited:
Those of us in the PAYE system[s] would abhor having to do things the American way and this wasn't meant as an affront (and I apologise if anyone may have taken it that way).
Our tax agencies are responsible for keeping track of these things and the only things we're responsible for is reporting status changes and/or providing receipts for other proofs of burden (such as Independent Contractors who file as Directors of Umbrella Corporations and need to write-off business expenses).
[0] - https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/pre_school_e...
[1] - https://www.revenue.ie/en/personal-tax-credits-reliefs-and-e...