They will tell you how much you owe, but only if you file incorrectly :P

For Americans, if you didn't know, you can check your IRS transcripts at https://www.irs.gov/ to see exactly how much the IRS thinks you've earned.

Thank you, I didn't know about this and it's great information to have for reference!

What you might consider doing is try contacting Ruby Central, or whoever it is that runs Ruby Gems. Even if they can't/won't give you access to the account, I'm wondering if they could/would freeze publishing updates to these gems until the account "owner" proves they are who they say they are. That way they don't risk giving control to someone who is hard to verify (you) and they prevent malware from being uploaded by the person who now controls your email until they verify the you are (which obviously they shouldn't be able to do).

Regardless of how you feel about taxation, increasing taxes will not fix out of control spending.

Regardless of how you feel about spending, decreasing spending will not fix out of control inequality.

There's nothing inherently wrong with inequality, unless you think everyone should have equal assets, enforced by violence (the government).

The problem is the floor (cost of living, standard of living) is too low for too many people.

> There's nothing inherently wrong with inequality

If you're talking about a spherical economy in a vacuum, no, there isn't.

When we actually turn our attention to the real world, we find that, in fact, there is. Because when the people at the top have sufficiently disproportionate power (and wealth is a kind of power), they use that power to increase the inequality by any means necessary. That includes, fairly prominently, redirecting resources that would otherwise have gone to ensuring the floor stays high to raising their own ceilings.

So it's not a binary—either there is perfect equality or everything goes to shit—but the levels of inequality we have today are demonstrably bad for society.

I like the concept of of everyone should have enough. I don't know if it's achievable, but I think it's a good goal to strive for.

It doesn't need to be perfectly equal. But to have some live in mansions while others sleep in cardboard boxes is immoral and unjustifiable.

My first thought was I bet I could get Sonnet to fix it faster because I got something back in 3 minutes instead of 20 minutes. You can prompt a lot of changes with a faster model. I'm new to Claude Code, so generally speaking I have no idea if I'm making sense or not.

If I were a corrupt government official I would:

- install these cameras everywhere

- make the data available for everyone via an API

- make content about how we're all being spied on

- form sponsorship deals from Incogni & DeleteMe

- profit

I'm not an H1-B, but I am on a skilled migrant visa in a different country. While I'm not constantly thinking about it, I'm keenly aware that my immigration status is directly tied to my job. No job, no residence permit. So at a minimum I would say I have an incentive to not get fired, and the best way to not get fired is to be someone worth retaining.

Most Americans are motivated to not get fired also as that means you lose your health insurance, group life policy, and ability to pay your mortgage or rent.

Both are violent, but one is an order of magnitude more violent.

I'm waiting for airlines to offer a budget First Class called Number Two Class. You get exclusive use the lavatory for the entirety of the flight.

Evolution of LinkedIn posts over time...

"Should you choose to inscribe the lexical designation 'DOMINATE' within the commentary section, I shall subsequently furnish you with my proprietary methodology for accumulating substantial financial wealth in the millions."

"Comment the word DOMINATE and I'll share my secret method for making millions of dollars."

"yo if u type DOMINATE in comments ill tell u how 2 get mad rich like millions n stuff fr fr no cap"

Idiocracy movie as a template? :)

DOMINATE

"Congratulations on tiur furst step towards financial independence. Next,you may sign up on our online pig-butchering trading platform, and make sure you buy and hold our new Dominus (INUS) shitcoin. We also have drops daily, make sure you hodl, and it will GO TO THE MOON soon. If you invest USD15000, you'll be a millionaire by 2029"

Lately I’ve been asking Cursor “what does the program do?” Was actually pretty helpful as a starting point.

Oh yeah, definitely. Great for my own "throwaway" or rushed projects that I want to revisit, too :D

I recently reported an email with “glint.email.microsoft” as a phishing attempt, but it turned out to be a corporate survey.

Well it's probably hard for anyone except Microsoft to get a domain with the .microsoft TLD.

what percentage of the online population do you expect to understand this?

I have often wondered why we don’t see more usage of the brand gTLDs, which many of these big firms own. I muse that this is (part of) the reason why – there simply isn’t the understanding or recognition outside tech circles (or even within tech circles) to comprehend that it is possible to use such a gTLD without a conventional .com or similar suffix tacked on the end. I tend to see it localised to use for marketing micro sites that do not ask for credentials so have no need to establish user trust, or occasionally internal technical uses that will never touch the typical customer’s eyeballs.

The other reason I hypothesise is that corporate big brother snooping systems that have whitelists for their trusted services – with entries like mail.google.com or calendar.google.com – are simply too painful at this point for big tech to break for their customers by dropping the .com suffix, so big tech doesn’t bother.

No hard data on any of that, though.

I don't think you can put cookies on a TLD. So if Google used mail.google and calendar.google , the login system would be more complex, because they can't share cookies.

Modern auth systems do not work by exposing multiple services on a single domain with shared cookies.

Instead, they authenticate using a common auth service (say, auth.google), which by virtue of being a single domain can persist shared cookies for all its consumers. This would yield a valid token (possibly a JWT) that the authenticating application can then use however it would like, including as a cookie on the application's own domain.

Whenever you go to a service that temporarily sends you to a different login domain (often just immediately redirection you back), this is why.

Some modern auth systems. Not all.

I created a separate Chrome profile, and logged in to gmail. Then I disabled javascript, then deleted all my google.com cookies (but left my mail.google.com cookies). Then I reenabled javascript and visited mail.google.com again. I was logged out. So Google is using the google.com cookies.

Yeah, it does make things more difficult in terms of teaching people a simple rule. Instead of "ends with @<company>.com", the rule is "ends with @<company>.com or .<company>".

OTOH, there were probably a lot of places already violating the "ends with @<company>.com" rule, e.g. by using subdomains, or even other domains. So very little of the online population was likely using the rule. And with email spoofing, even "ends with @<company>.com" can't be relied on to ensure the email is legit. So the rule of "don't click links in emails" is the only foolproof rule. Though you also need to add "don't copy and paste things from emails".

Yay for third-party email services that From: be a no-reply address from an entirely different company (and therefore only authenticity validation for that company), and a Reply-To: to some obscure mailbox from the supposed sender. I'm sure that makes perfect sense to most people.

> So the rule of "don't click links in emails" is the only foolproof rule.

The only truly foolproof rule is "don't open emails". Also helps a lot on mental health and associated expenditures!

legit.

I could imagine something like x-mucrosoft.email etc. being used and the users would just be like well there was email.microsoft so same thing!