> but supposedly this is done "the good of all humans" what is just another communist party slogan.

Keep in mind research done there was an international effort. Some things being strongly funded and supported mostly be other countries.

International effort or not, still a biological weapon.

It looks that China was collecting viruses (what makes a lot of sense) + also cooking some biological weapons on the side. They didnt call it "biological weapon production", they called it "gain of function research", but it is still the same thing.

USA paid some money to be able to access this data (makes sense, the more data you have, the better) + probably they wanted to spy on the Chinese to see what is happening. Unfortunately they send people such as Daszak, who in my opinion looks like a Chinese double-agent, or someone bribed by China to be their mouth-piece.

Still we are moving away from the discussion: this "research" is basically against Biological Research Convention ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_Weapons_Convention ). And yes, I know that Russia signed the convention but does not abide it - they manufacture lots of biological weapons. But it is another problem.

> who in my opinion looks like a Chinese double-agent, or someone bribed by China to be their mouth-piece.

Are you an authority on the subject or are you making an unfalsifiable claim?

EcoHealth alliance is as transparent of an intelligence front as it gets.

I think part of that is due to nuclear power primarily being in decently wealthy areas with very strict regulations and high amounts of security measures being taken. Coal plants are in even the poorest, most run down areas and run by just about everyone. They’re the baseline for energy.

I support expanding nuclear energy in areas that are capable of doing so, but there are some places where nuclear would be an absolute disaster far beyond what coal could ever be.

You could imagine, if this were to be made a global priority, a UN organisation dedicated to running nuclear plants around the world, with protection by UN forces etc.

I can’t see it happening in the current anti-nuclear climate but I think it’s fixable.

Wont happen, there are much more nuclear plants set to be closed than created.

I’m one of those fools who took a few years off before college, after college, and decided to up and move to a faraway country while I was young.

It’s very likely I’d have more money if I went straight to work while I was younger instead of goofing off. I could probably have paychecks twice as big as I do now.

But you know what? My worst days in the place I live now are better than my best days in my home country. My money goes farther here. I feel like the things I do actually matter now. I had time to develop personal skills and I feel like a better person for it.

Want to pursue money and prioritize your last 5 years of life (and ignore the very real possibility you’ll die or become disabled before then)? That’s fine. But you’re not going to be a failure if you forgo that unless you’re defining success as purely moving up a massive corporate ladder.

How did you find the right country?

Where did you move to?

I was curious as well and it seems they are located in Japan, judging from another comment.

Just looking around my town, new houses in Japan are also dramatically larger and higher quality than older ones.

Older homes were one floor with single pane windows and basically single plane plywood walls. New ones have double paned windows, 2-3 floors, and some degree of insulation in the walls.

I’m not sure if that’s the sole factor driving price increases, but I imagine it’s one thing. Houses are generally treated as something to rebuild every 20-40 years here. But I could see newer homes being a buy once, keep your whole life deal.

That sounds like a great policy, honestly. Instead of devaluing workers in other countries, they treat them as equal to local people. It also means they’re looking for talent on a level playing field and not trying to skimp out by hiring “cheap” workers.

It sounds good, but I don't think it's that clear. You're actually introducing greater dislocations into remote markets by hiring at a unified standard across the board.

Suppose the average wage somewhere is $10K/year, and you hire a developer at $100K/year there. I would argue that it might be more beneficial in aggregate both to the remote community and to your company to hire two developers at $50K/year from the same place (assuming those are market clearing prices), both because of the effect on the remote consumption (the two people will consume more than one most likely), and the fact that you're spreading out the economic opportunity in the remote area that you are hiring in (now there are two developers who are well paid relative to the median versus only one - and it's also more likely to spur further investment into development in general).

This is precisely what outsourcing is. The idea that a company can get more for less. It’s pretty often criticized.

Or they just don’t hire them

Why wouldn't they? If you assume they're looking for value in exchange for money, they wouldn't care at all how great the deal is for the employee.

Location-dependent pay could go side-by-side with wealth-dependent pay. You already have a trust-fund and no college-debt? You only get half what others are making for the same work.

At the same time, there are people who lost their wallet and RIP to all that potential wealth. And then there are people who had their computer stolen/broken and then just downloaded Steam on a new device and had their games and saves ready to go.

Not that I'm defending centralized services like Steam, because I'm very well aware that companies have happily wielded their power to randomly lock people out of their accounts (like the main subject here). But crypto isn't solving anything either (or at least not yet).

>At the same time, there are people who lost their wallet and RIP to all that potential wealth.

Back up your password, in a safe deposit box, at a bank.

>And then there are people who had their computer stolen/broken and then just downloaded Steam on a new device and had their games and saves ready to go.

Back up your password, in a safe deposit box, at a bank.

>But crypto isn't solving anything either (or at least not yet).

How does it not solve a centralized entity taking away your license key? Sure they can stop honoring your key, but they cant remove it from you.

A license key alone is about as useful as a key in real life. If someone decides to change the locks, you're out.

Decentralizing that doesn't change anything. Crypto is once again just trying to solve something through burning coal and oil that was solved decades ago far more efficiently. Want to reclaim your game? Fire up a torrent. No need for a ponzi scheme.

You could have a system where a license is tied to a blockchain and not an account or person. It would presumably also mean that if someone gains control of your computer or account for a moment, they could steal your stuff and the company would be in the right to refuse you further survice.

Online games occasionally have stories of 'I got hacked and support helped me get my items back', where they just clone up new in game items. They wouldn't do that for things you are allowed to sell for real value.

So I think there's a real risk of trading one bad problem for another.

What's the tangible difference between this and email confirmations that you made a purchase?

If you lose track of the NFT that proves you bought it, that's no different than losing the email evidence. You're boned.

It's like saying you don't need to wash your hands because the food is cooked and hot.

That's fine, but in some places, that's basically saying you're the type of person to walk through dirty streets barefoot. No matter how #freethefoot and for personal choice you may be, people won't want you bringing your dirty feet and whatever they carry into their home.

I think you're looking for another example!

Walking in the world barefoot is a natural and normal thing. We should all probably be doing more of it, not shaming people for it.

The issue is mostly one of public health that has materially adverse affects on others.

Maybe it would be like driving on the highway without snowtires in the winter: it's reckless and you're going to hurt people. I think if most of us saw that happening (it happens) it kind of makes you mad to see how irresponsible it is.

Also the commentor above wrote about 'voting' concerning masks - it's not such a simple issue.

Democracy is not a 'Tyranny of the Majority'. It's why we have Constitutions etc.. Requiring people to do stuff in the normal course of their day is a pretty big step, we have to be mindful of regulating normative behaviours. It's easy to let rights slide away, we should have a bit better of a process for these kinds of things, and maybe tuck in a couple of laws after this is over for that purpose because the Courts don't have a lot to work with on a lot of these things.

One in three women dying in childbirth used to be a "natural" thing too, doesn't mean that we should give up modern medical care.

That has nothing to do with my comment.

Japan under-tested a lot pre-Olympics in a desperate attempt to salvage the event. After that point they had no more reason to hide the data. Tests that have been carried out since show very low positive rates, so there likely aren't too many hidden, untested cases out there.