Yeah… I’m pretty sure the white space is part of the spec for a QR code.

Sounds reasonable. Why not both? Both sound good.

It is the standard. Now. Currently.

If you don’t like it, might I suggest a guillotine or several. Worked for the French.

https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-fraud-ruling-property-valuation-michael-cohen

A former sitting president has been indicted, if not convicted of this very crime. You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t believe it’s that uncommon.

It can just be flipped on it’s head;

How are you going to enforce taxing on value, the person can just cite whatever value they want for the asset.

I said investors

This would effectively lock out every small investor

But sure, now we’re just insulting each other, I’m going to ignore that and try to answer your point.

TBH. US tax is weird as fuck, and I don’t know nearly enough about it to have more than a high level discussion on it. In my head, this would simply change when you’re paying taxes, as opposed to how much.

But… Nope. Tried to reason about it, can’t think of a nice clean way out. It’s friday afternoon. I’m out.

What is your alternative solution to the over all problem?

You said small investors not Wallstreetbet degenerates.

Someone here has made a false assumption. In fact, I’m pretty sure we both have made several. The question is who has made a fatal false assumption? Let’s go.

My root comment, at the top of all of this, was my idea that perhaps we should consider gains “realized” when they are sold OR used as a collateral in a loan.

Your assertion is that it would wipe out small investors.

I would question how many small investors are using their small investments as collateral in a loan?

I was talking for a hypothetical world where that law isn’t a thing and simply paying capital gains in “realized” gains is.

Nut hey, yeah, sure, 100mil works too.

How so?

“Oh no, I made money, better put a small percentage of my gains away for tax season, just like I do with all of my income, because I’m American and lack a good PAYE system”.

Depends on the exact implementation, but sure, you could happily write a version where an initial home loan isn’t hit, and only “top up” loans against the INCREASED value of your home is targeted.

You’d have to put some controls in there for that solution to work. Hitting new homeowners with an immediate tax on “earning” $1,000,000 to pay for their house seems a bit cruel.

I’d rather we went back to taxing the rich properly and stopped having crumbling infrastructure.

There’s a very good reason they should be taxed; half a dozen people are richer than god, and basically never pay any real amount of tax.

Where I’m from, we don’t do that. All dividends come with an “imputation credit,” which basically says “this money’s already been taxed.”

“Yes*”

*As with all rules, it can vary by country. As I understand it, the US tends to double tax dividends, which is a rabbit hole of why the US market chases valuation so hard

I think a law stating you can’t borrow against unrealized gains would be sensible.

You can keep your unrealized gains forever, live of your dividends for all i care, and pay no tax. But realizing them, either through selling or borrowing against, triggers a taxation.

We need a better funding model for open source.

Praying that people will donate enough to support your browser isn’t exactly great and really doesn’t work for most open-source projects.

Unless they are doing something new in that space, it’ll just he smooching up to big donors in back rooms.

At least Firefox is open about their deal with Google.

And we’re also talking on a more local scale here, so this would be more centric around a single country, or north america specifically.

North America is an interesting example here, because North America HIT peak oil once, way back in the 80’s, and it was only with the invention of Fracking that it came back.

Yeah but idk about this one. Perhaps at the scale of CDNs and proxy distribution,

Once upon a time people debated if virtual hosts were best practice or if that would affect their SEO. We’ve definitely progressed since then, both to conserve IP addresses, but mainly because DDOS prevention is best done centralised (Looking at you Cloudflare).

critical difference here was also the consumption of oil. It’s gone down significantly since then as processes have moved to other materials and more efficient methods of manufacturing,

Do you have a source for that? Because this seems to suggest fossil fuel and oil demand might of roughly plateaued the last few years, the dip looks pretty welly correlated to Covid.

IPv4 addresses are a static pool, yes. But we’re continually using them more efficiently, the same as Oil. The difference being that Oil has a limit on the amount of energy contained in its chemical bonds, but you could quite happily host 1,000 or 10,000 websites on a single server.