Earlier quoted context omitted.
A wealth tax than caps one's inflow to something like a million a year makes a lot of sense. To all the billionaire sympathizers who worry about incentives and technological progress, this here is a perfect (and not the only) example of how intrinsic motivation can beat extrinsic motivation by a huge margin. There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation…
>There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation of extrinsic ones. Society will do well to structure itself primarily around such people. Europe has developed no new big companies in the past two decades precisely because this isn't true. The vast majority of successful companies and products are developed by people motivated by money, and if you try to…
Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
61–70 of 112 posts
Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#62Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#63Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#64Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#65The executive compensation is pretty shocking https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/460...
Actually crazy that Linus just takes home 1.5M per year for one of the largest contributions to tech of anyone in the world. Obviously nobody needs more than that per year, but this pay is 1/100 or 1/1000th of many tech executives that have contributed very little comparatively.
What's the smallest amount per year you'd say it is obvious that no one needs?
Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#66Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Obviously nobody needs more than that per year ... You are, of course, in a position to know what everybody on Earth needs. What if someone wants to give $10 million away per year to worthy charities? Will you tell them they can't? Or... what if someone wants to own something you consider wastefully expensive? Is it your job to tell them they shouldn't? Or is it wiser to adopt the position of humility and say "Well…
There is a big difference between 'needs' and 'wants'. I'll defend the argument no one 'needs' more than 1.5 mill per year. I agree with you greed is endless and lots of people want more and will rationalize their hoarding while others, often in their own communities, suffer.
Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Obviously nobody needs more than that per year ... You are, of course, in a position to know what everybody on Earth needs. What if someone wants to give $10 million away per year to worthy charities? Will you tell them they can't? Or... what if someone wants to own something you consider wastefully expensive? Is it your job to tell them they shouldn't? Or is it wiser to adopt the position of humility and say "Well…
Opponents of obscene wealth/income inequality are typically not motivated by envy – that is your own projection.
Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually crazy that Linus just takes home 1.5M per year for one of the largest contributions to tech of anyone in the world. Obviously nobody needs more than that per year, but this pay is 1/100 or 1/1000th of many tech executives that have contributed very little comparatively.
> Obviously nobody needs more than that per year ... You are, of course, in a position to know what everybody on Earth needs. What if someone wants to give $10 million away per year to worthy charities? Will you tell them they can't? Or... what if someone wants to own something you consider wastefully expensive? Is it your job to tell them they shouldn't? Or is it wiser to adopt the position of humility and say "Well…
Since it was not my intention to engage in ideological battle (you'll notice I framed it as "good for your soul and peace of mind" rather than make any kind of political argument for it), I'll leave it there and not reply to any of the answers I got. But it was quite enlightening to see how people reacted to that comment.
Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux
#70A bunch of folks decided to get off their butts and gather donations to support Linux... and then it snowballed. Cool. The creators and members get to decide how they contribute, and projects get to decide if they want to participate. There are alternatives for projects that need to "raise and spend", and some are 501(c)(3).
(Also keep in mind that techrights.org has been an unhinged shit sheet attacking individuals and companies for insufficient purity for decades now.)