The rules about insider trading only exist to make poor people feel better.

Poppycock.

I feel like you must have slipped through a rift in the time / space continuum and are visiting us from another reality.

The first step would be to educate people with anarchist literature.

In 2025, we’re completely unable to expect “people” at large to engage in any kind of reasoning.

You can’t just propose to “educate people with anarchist literature” like that’s some kind of solution.

How do you propose to do that given the current slide into fascism?

Well yeah any potential solution is going to mean reduced potential profit, which you could describe as degrowth, but that would be the worst possible way to describe it.

The reason why we haven’t gotten anywhere with carbon reduction is because wealthy people block any efforts.

Telling them that degrowth is the solution is unlikely to motivate them.

console for quick and dirty understanding but inspector for more complex fixes.

Honestly, I don’t really have any idea how a laser printer works beyond the basics.

However, someone has invested the time to create an opensource inkjet printer. It’s a fair assumption that firstly, they know more about printers and hardware than either of us and secondly, they also know everyone prefers laser printers.

Those two assumptions lead me to the conclusion that there’s a significant barrier to producing an opensource laser printer of which you’re not aware.

My comment, although unnecessarily douchey, was an allusion to the age old refrain of open source enthusiasts everywhere: if the project isn’t good enough for you, fork it and make your own.

Ok, well… we’re all looking forward to you publishing the repo for an opensource laser printer then I guess.

Probably not that much I guess.

I mean if you could net $200 or so per hour of turd sifting I’d be game with the economy the way it is and all.

• I want to shit out gold instead of turds
• sure but that’s not possible
• yeah but I could be rich
• ok dumbass
• thank you, representative speaking on behalf of everyone …

Everyone knows that, but the comment you replied to explains why anything else just isn’t feasible.

Sorry I don’t really understand what your argument actually is.

Since the dawn of writing, legislators (kings / politicians) have laid down the rules. Regulators (police, tax office) have enforced the rules. And courts decide whether the rules have actually been broken and what the penalties ought to be.

In the vast majority of self assessment situations, it’s very obvious how the law applies to ones situation, there is very little doubt. You just follow the rules and face penalties for breaches.

In those few situations which are unclear, you generally have a range of options:

• review other similar cases heard by courts which might be analogous to your own.
• consult a specialist who can interpret and apply the rules for you.
• ask the god damn regulator where you stand and have them help you self-assess.

Finally, most legislation relating to corporate behavior has safe harbor clauses. That is, where someone has acted reasonably, taken reasonable steps, and made a good-faith attempt to interpret and apply the rules correctly, the regulator won’t penalise them even if they’re found to have breached the rules.

That is to say penalties are usually only applied where there’s a breach, and there’s no scope to argue that it was a reasonable error.

This is a fair and transparent structure with which to ensure the rules are applied fairly to everyone. It’s very robust, tolerant of edge cases, and the most efficient compliance structure we have.

I don’t really know what an alternative would be? If you want a regulator to publish a list of which apps / companies are effected in what way, that’s just nuts. The antithesis of modern democratic economic regulation.

Labor have a vested interest in keeping property prices high as they themselves are all landlords.

This is the dumbest theory that only a child would believe.

Australians have a vested interest in keeping property prices high. Everyone owns property, not just Labor candidates.

No it doesn’t. Our tax system works the same way. It doesn’t lead to overzealous deduction denial because people are worried about getting it wrong.

Its an efficient and transparent approach.

Labor are a party of and for Landlords.

Bullshit.

It was only 8 years ago Labor campaigned on removing capital gains tax discounts which would’ve been a huge kick up the ass for landlords.

They lost that election in spectacular fashion.

This is the right way to make laws and rules.

It’s the same way we do tax - self compliance. You self report but if you’re caught breaking the rules then you face punishments.

If the administration just made a list of who’s effected, it would be perpetually incomplete. This way, everyone is effected.

They can’t just unilaterally decide that your self assessment is “wrong” without explanation. Also their decisions about who is effected are public, and can be relied on by others to self assess.

When I first became aware of this project I was pretty dismissive.

I’m very happy to admit in this case that the project has come further than I thought it would.

Their FAQ says they have 8, paid, full time devs and resources for something like 18 months. IDK how much it really takes to get a browser off the ground but they’ve got something, at least.

I’m looking forward to their Alpha release in 2026, and really hope they can achieve that.

The project needs money from somewhere.

Are there any restrictions on a FOSS instance? Is there a pay wall?

I’m been trying to stand up a zulip instance. It’s working but I haven’t used it much. I want a feature complete jitsi instance to go with it and that’s only partially implemented right now.

That said, zulip does seem like the best option for me presently.

Haven’t tried revolt.

Mattermost seems to be perpetually entangled but being disentangled from some other suite. Confusing and frustrating.

I haven’t tried rocket chat for 5 years or so. I think last time I read about it people were complaining that the FOSS plan is very limited.