I think this comment is, while factual, slightly misleading. Only around 16% of people "living off the government" are public servants, from which over 50% are for essential services like education health or public safety.
Over 50% of those "living off the government" are pensioners, so mostly coming from a pool of people who already worked (and most of them in the private sector), and paid their share in taxes. In spain, the private sector makes 70% of the active workforce, while the public sector around 13%, self employed 13%, and unemployed 10%.
I know Spain (and Europe) have quite a lot of structural problems, but I fail to see how having so many pensioners has anything to do with AI regulations.
If pensions come from government funds it matters if you are looking at the impact on the economy. The taxes pensioners paid have presumably been spent, so while their past contribution is an argument for their entitlement to pensions, it does not solve the problem of where the money will come from.
Its even worse in the UK where we have a special additional income tax (NI) on earned income (things like investment income are exempt), that is higher on people with low to moderate incomes, that is primarily used to pay (current) pensions (a little bit is set aside for future pensions, but there is only enough set aside for less an an year of payments).
It does not really make a big difference if the pensioner saved 100k while working and put it in their couch, or if they payed it in ekstra taxes which got saved by the government, or if the government presses new money.
The important part is how large fraction of the population work, not where the money for the remaining fraction comes from. Money is only a representation of value, value created by the working fraction.
True, but that is at a different level and a bit more complex. I was talking about the problem of government finances - i.e. government revenue vs expenditure.
Setting aside money, and where you put it, makes a big difference. It might be in a sovereign wealth fund, or used to finance govt debt (as in the small fund that exists in the UK) or invested in shares by a private pension fund, or be a liability of a past employer. In some of those cases value might be generated in another country.
You are right in principle but there are big practical differences too.
>Previous reports had also indicated that some number of Russian troops operating in the Red Forest experienced the effects of acute radiation syndrome after preparing this base area, but there remains nothing to substantiate this.
years ago I did the same, I vaguely remember following a blog post to do it. I put the scripts on github and some people found it useful. There's a deb package now that does it called overlayroot.
They might not explicitly, but you have the right to take any data you have or they might have on you of any service, no matter if you have an account or not: aka right of access. I don’t know if it has been used this way, but it might be a possibility.
Calling out anthropomorphization of corporations when related to morality or politics while attributing rationality or self-interest is a contradiction.
Corporations have no self-interest or do not think. Corporations are human artifacts composed of human beings that have specific rules applied to them in the great game in our societies, and tend to behave accordingly. This behavior have patterns that we as humans recognize unsurprisingly as human, because they are composed by humans. A corporation is a as rational as a group of humans can be.
Corporations do not always "act" in their self interest, and we can (and in my opinion should) expect moral obligations from them as we do with humans.
This is hilarious, though it would likely only show you the public version of a page, so a basic login feature would "protect" against that. Unless people are willing to give their credentials to such a website, then I suppose it might become an arms race of sorts.
i was thinking of all sorts of ways how a testing platform could prevent this workaround. but then i realized that with the same effort they could just prevent answers showing up in the source...
The parent mentioned not what alphabet does, but where it gets (most) of its revenue from. Google is making phones, but not really making a lot of money from them. So the question is, what is the future of alphabet?
