Please remain seated until the seat belt sign is turned off.
bstix
joined 2 years ago
Jeg har set en del regneark fra forskellige offentlige myndigheder (Erhvervsstyrelsen, Skat, Danmarks Statistik), som næsten altid indeholder input validering af en slags. Skjulte ark, låste celler og VBA kode, osv.
Det kan sikkert sagtens laves i LibreOffice, men det vil blive vanskeligt finde nogen til at lave det, og det forudsætter også at modtageren (private virksomheder) bruger det, hvilket de ikke gør. Det offentlige er ikke toneangivende på software.
På det punkt er f.eks. Norge foran os. Der kræver myndighederne at man indsender i et standard format eller alternativt indtaster manuelt i deres web formula. På den måde kommer de helt udenom at være afhængig af brugerens software. Danmark er på vej i samme retning, men der er mig bekendt ingen faste deadlines for hvornår det bliver et krav at benytte standard formater, og jeg frygter også at vi på bedste danske manér vælger at tilpasse og udvikle en ny standard istedet for at bruge en "hyldevare".
Det er måske en ting som er bedst at løse på EU-niveau.
Jeg var inde og se Regan Vest tidligere på ugen. Heldigvis var det ikke os som blev fanget derinde ved strømafbrydelsen i går.
Anyway, det kan klart anbefales. Super spændende.
The voters from DF mostly switched to other populistic right wing parties. In total very few voters moved across the middl, even if the middle has moved further to the right.
People are being polarized more which is exactly the intention with the foreign propaganda. So, no, Denmark did not solve the problem.
Math is off.
He makes 30% more than her. If she makes 100, he makes 130. The total income is 230.
Her income is 43% of that (100/230) and his is 57% (130/230).
Why does it have to be static in the first place? Why not just let them contribute what they can, when they can, since the money’s not tight?
Who is to decide when and what they can pay then?
It's also as much about determining the disposable income. If she has a different opinion on what is reasonable to spend on other things that could easily become a can of worms.
"This is what you need to contribute to the household, whatever you do with the rest of your money is not my issue" is much better than: "Hey, I know you're low on cash but maybe if you cut back on lattes, avocado toast, gambling, booze and cigarettes, we would be able to pay the bills."
In reality, the fixed amount isn't very fixed anyway. If one part can't pay, it's still unlikely that the partner would kick them out. But as long as money isn't that tight, it's simply better to allocate a fixed amount to the household, so the money isn't disposable for random spending, so they don't risk overspending or increasing expensive habits.
This isn't just to curb the costs, but also to avoid the situation in which one part becomes financially dependent on the other, which is also a recipe for disaster for both parts.
Sure, it would be better with a peaceful solution: Russia should stop attacking and pay for the damage they've already done.
The solution proposed by Putin and Trump is not peaceful.
The CEO isn't paying that salary. It's a cost of business. A business you're paying for as a customer. All the customers pay a percentage of a nickel extra for shopping in a store that has a cart returner on the payroll.
I suppose ithe job pays badly and isn't very interesting. It's not something I'd waste my life doing. I wouldn't want my kids to do it either. Actually I wouldn't recommend it for anyone. Life has much more to offer than pushing carts all day.
So, congratu-fucking-lations, you've created a job that nobody ought to do and made everyone pay for keeping a sorry ass kid on poverty wage.
Ok, so you'd argue that by pushing the cart back, then you're the one doing the same meaningless job for free. Good point, right?
But here's the catch: Nobody ever needs to return a cart.
There are at least two ways to do this.
One: We can all accept that the cart doesn't have a home to be returned to and just leave them wherever and pick them up at the same place. This is obviously the chaotic neutral way.
Two: Pack your groceries in bags in the cart after (or while) paying. When you push the cart back towards the car, you walk by the cart corral, pick up your bags and walk to the car while leaving the cart in the corral. It's fucking magic.
He's missing some punctuation, but the point is that the burden of proof ought to be on the people making the claim instead of as it commonly happens, that people state something wild and then spend their time arguing against the proofs against it. The secondary point is that people who do this are already blind to this, so they are basing their arguments on something that only they believe, and strongly believe without proof.
It makes discussion futile, because the people believing in random stuff are asking for evidence against something untrue that is based on something untrue which is based on something untrue. It's 2 or more steps away from logic.
I don't know if that made any more sense, so let's make an allegory with math.
Let's say a person wrongly believes that 2=3. This belief is unknown for anyone besides themselves. Based on this, they conclude that 2x3=4 and state that openly. So a sane person would argue that 2x3=6. The first person then claimss that 6 is wrong, and the second person will attempt to prove it logically. It does not matter how much proof the sane person provides of the 6 because the first person does not understand that from their belief. The 2=3 belief is never discussed, only the 6.
The result is that they will never agree.
The best way to counter this kind of stupidity is not by logical argumentation. It's better to simply ask "why?" until the wrong person argues themselves into a position of belief, which can then be countered by a final "why?" to which they have no answer and are forced to reevaluate their belief, and hopefully come to a better one, or at least start questioning that instead.
❤️Heart of Miami ❤️
Jeg kan huske at Reddit for nogle år siden gjorde at man udelukkende kunne deltage i deres "Place* aprilsnar ved at installere deres app, som alligevel ikke virkerde. På lemmy har samme event kørt uden problemer i både browser og apps flere gange.
Her er det en smagssag om man bruger browser eller app. Jeg foretrækker app'en fordi jeg hurtigt kan swipe up/down votes osv. og komme videre til næste post (i en lind strøm af internet brainrot).
Mit indtryk af den lokale instans er at det er et fåtal som poster det meste,og at flere aktive vil være meget velkomne.
Jeg er selv skyldig i ikke at poste ret meget her udover kommentarer, fordi jeg primært følger andre communities fra andre instanser og ikke altid husker at komme hjem omkring. Jeg læser dog det hele.
Slå dig bare løs. Det kan da godt være at vi allesammen allerede har læst nyheden på dr.dk, men vi har jo ikke hørt din mening før du skriver den i kommentarfeltet.
Og vi kan også godt diskutere. Men vi behøver ikke blive Facebook-uvenner over det.. På det punkt er det en brun bodega. Vi ses i morgen, jo.
view more: next ›
In the photo, his head is tilted a little more forward. Perhaps from leaning or sitting or whatever. Anyway, it causes the upwards eye roll for him to look straight ahead.
In your painting his face appears more straight vertically and the eye position is looking weirdly upwards.