I, in just about every case, give no attention to norm-based arguments. We as a species on a whole, proportionally, keep doing foolish shit all the time.
But it was after reading your comment that I noticed there was a time that many Germans were either proponents of or tolerating (not all of them absolutely; there were rebels) some extremely bad things. Some 85 years ago.
Elon Musk’s business in China sparks controversy
Did not spark adequate controversy would be a better fit.
Pornhub is more eloquent that those governments💀
In all seriousness, I hope this person will be fine. It is usually detrimental to self preservation, with either active or passive aggression, to openly state what things are. I hope this person can protect himself from any harm of any nature (even harassment).
Incidental, but the cause of Valery Legasov’s death is accepted to be suicide. Whether that is actually what happened I won’t argue for however, it is something I do not know anything about.
I do not agree with the method of Luigi Mangione, if he was indeed the one who killed Brian Robert Thompson, because it completely put him in the power of others. A better way is to be a pain in the backsides of all such as Brian Robert Thompson (which is not going to be even a tiny fraction affected by the politics of saying what should or should not be done as it is going to be by non co-operation, civil disobedience and boycotts), such that they can no longer do what they do and no one can simply replace them (which is what will probably happen now. I doubt too many are concerned about the deceased very badly, instead their own safety. The chances of a ‘better person’ taking the CEO role are low). That said, what he will face is likely to be anything but ‘justice’. On the surface, yes, but I would heavily doubt any claim made that he was not subjected to illegal treatment, and continues to not be subjected to it, while in custody. This is on the basis of the reaction of the authorities to the killing, mostly from the political and law enforcement. One would think that the most benevolent person was killed by one who is varying degrees of being evil. The authorities who control the process have mostly taken a side, and that is never the feature of a system which seeks to uphold ‘justice’.
This looks like the plot of Chernobyl, which was a TV show creation of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster which tried to portray what happened mostly, re-enacted. I hope this fellow does not face harassment as a result of this article. Though that is unlikely.
People with power behaving like people with power. There used to be concessions to logic, but that I see less and less.
And no matter how you keep avoiding the point, doing illegal remote tech work and handing the paycheck directly to the government, is not any different than doing legal remote tech work and handing taxes directly to the government.
Do not worry. People like me know to work around that, even with restrictions in place to stop doing basic work. The thing I ‘do’ is to write books which will be free to read and download for all. The plan was to make it CC BY, but the option of CC BY NC is becoming increasingly attractive. In either case I cannot monetize it, and will provide no ‘exclusive’ offerings behind paywalls on places like patreon. It is legally not the sale of goods in any way, and any earning will be extremely low. I’m not avoiding any topic. There are no taxes to be paid unless I make a substantial earning (even in an excessively taxed land for the not wealthy), which I say right now is less likelier than any work a thousand times worse with some marketing has a better chance to do. I’ve accounted for this already because I care about it—and the bitterness of such words does not go away.
On the other hand, the oppressed in North Korea who have not made that choice to join up with legitimacy at the cost of other people sure as hell have no way to complain to you about it. Just because they cannot be heard doesn’t make their lives but worse them the people who contribute to it for any reason whatsoever.
And about being arrested or killed is a bad topic to take up with me.
For 3 years I faced regular starvation, sexual harassment supported by the whole family and no good person gave an eff, and unbearable pain which made me want to die everyday. Because I was born in a house of religious fanatics in a place where there is not really interest in stopping these things rather than making a political headline after death. No one gives an eff because it is common. It is normal here. Such things are ‘fine’. This is after being emotionally and mentally abused for around 15 years without retort from the time I was a toddler (as far as I can remember is when I was a toddler), which increased till I was purely suicidal for years from around 10 years old. My mother tried to stab me dead when I was a toddler (which was revealed much later but I do not remember personally), tried to prove me legally crazy when I wasn’t an adult yet and handed me over to religious fanatics with the reason of me being possessed by demons—after I was forced into religion, which caused a number of issues I couldn’t deal with, since before I was in nursery school. Despite having good grades I couldn’t secure employment because of the issues I had—issues I have fixed in time by facing everything, no thanks to ‘good people’—which meant no employment and many attempts to, smugly, push me towards ‘living for myself’. No employment. No shelter. No preparedness. It is not absolute death but back then it more or less would’ve meant death to me. I couldn’t even get my own service offering of cheap books going because of regulation which is meant to stop solo businesspersons rather than aid them. The playing field of business is not levelled for those with nothing, it is set to crush those with nothing for those who have everything. The way I have survived, is by literally adapting to require less. For the sake of survival I eat around one meal every 24 hours—or more—these days. Nothing fancy and things I prepare with basic vegetables myself to ensure no nutrition is lost. I basically made a way to work in a profession in which I had no skill by developing the skill myself, because ‘support’ is a luxury in this endeavour I cannot rely on.
There is a person behind every comment and post you see. I have faced death for years now. In fact the lifestyle I live with the meal for an entire day is much safer than what I had in the past, even with more food to sustain myself back then. You could’ve done better than assume I have not faced death—or my situation is stable enough that I won’t face it in the next few years.
The people who suffer due to not making that decision will feel otherwise.
And it is nothing alike. Health Ministry and civil service are nothing like being employed in a military government where funds go directly to the government which aids in putting the systems of both suppression and oppression in place.
It isn’t quite in the level of North Korea but I live in a pretty bad place and pretty much on the opposite side of those who made the decision to join up. Those people might complain but the ones who have made the decision not to aid anyone who harms everyone else have it much worse. In my situation it is their fight for luxury against my, and others’, need for basic sustenance and protecting our basic dignity (which usually isn’t respected) due to that one choice. In a place like North Korea the difference will be much worse, however incomprehensible it may seem.
so I don’t understand why you’d reference the very same article as a justification as to why my suspicions are wrong.
Except I gave specific reasons for why your justifications are based on things which aren’t accurate rather than merely citing the article. You don’t have to believe it. You can question it. You, however, disputed it at the start but went on to express, and in a way that is almost entirely but not completely expressive with implication doing the rest, that both the article and the poster had malicious intention. That is not expressing doubt. That is disputing, that is stating that someone was wrong. That itself was done in both a manner which gives no proof, for all your demands of it so far that others prove what they say, that the article or the poster had malicious intention. This would not be required if you expressed genukne doubt and sought more clarification in good faith. Instead, you disputed and attributed malice.
But I do care for the defaulting assumption of bad faith on my part and repeated uncharitable readings of my posts. I at no point ever made any claims about Tardigrada, nor have I cast any doubt upon their character anywhere in this thread.
To quote you
In which case, this only really makes sense to get mad at if you find yourself having particular hate for things like “the North Korean economy having slightly more money in it,” or “U.S. sanctions getting bypassed.”
You can call it whatever you want and say that is indeed isn’t attributing any implied behaviour to the poster. You replied to the post expressing that the only real possibility of sense to be made is this is driven by having particular hate for an implied not-harmful activity. You expressed such a thing while directly replying to Tardigrada’s post while not mentioning that it wasn’t directed towards Tardigrada.
You also confidently made this claim on the basis that the North Korean economy runs on the primary basis of personal spending done by the civilians in a relatively free region where people are generally allowed to do what they want even with the presence of law, which is the kind of economy where governments would care about the (segments of the) general, non-affiliated with government populations having more money and encourage such situations.
I know of nothing whatsoever that proves this.
Yet you dispute things which reference it without trying to learn more about it yourself. Instead you ask others and dispute them like it is owed to you.
It is not anyone’s problem in particular that someone doesn’t know something. You could’ve ignored the post and comments, or you could’ve genuinely sought to know more if you cared. While putting in your own effort to supplement it.
simple and calm
Perhaps I could plaster everything you say with ‘how do you know’. Not that I’m going to do it because I know how malicious doing so would be. The lack of elaboration in dispute is anything but ‘simple and calm’ because your question puts the obligation on the person saying anything to absolutely answer to you without the assurance that you actually care about the topic and want to know more, and not that you do not care about the topic regardless. Elaborate more. That would be simple and calm, if the elaboration were put in a simple and calm manner.
I don’t think anyone is disputing that they shouldn’t be stealing identities, but are they in fact doing the work they’re being paid for? That’s just called having a job. It’s not like the US government isn’t using tax money to fund its continued arms development, including nukes.
The problem for the ordinary non-political person could still be that the allegation is the work was remotely done from North Korea using remote control software on computers in the US set up by people off paid in the US; no one other than the military-based government is capable of doing this as things are. A government not generous enough to let a decent share see it made back to ‘families’ anyway. It would be a small part at most.
Given that in North Korea military jobs are the most stable ways to provide for your family, I’d say both are likely true.
The model of North Korea is mainly oppressing its own citizens, and trying a bit to oppress others as well. I don’t particularly feel sympathy for those who feel it is justified and righteous to join such an endeavour such as its military for the same of ‘feeding families’. I rather feel sympathy for those these people oppress—whether the people harming them do so out of their own choice, or because they feel there’s no other way than to go along with it to survive while believing that as long as they themselves are not in a bad situation it is fine. Causing problems for others, aiding in causing problems for others, is never fine based on any sort of justification. Even if most (if not all) governments in the world are, in some way or another, engaged in it.
In the end every horrible deed done for gain by people who have people they care for can be said to be done for ‘feeding families’ in this sense. The powerless being oppressed certainly have more real concerns to worry about than the persons harming them possibly justifying it by doing it for feeding their families, and even I do not particularly see any merit in it.
There’s a height of feigned ignorance. There’s no chance the money goes anywhere than directly to the military government. Not to “families”.
Aside from using stolen identities to avoid detection, prosecutors said they paid people residing in the US to receive, set up, and host laptops provided by the US employers. They would then instruct those US residents to install remote access software allowing them to appear to be working from the US when they were actually overseas.
It is directly in the article. It is impossible for civilians to do this. In an absolute sense.
Lastly, the aggressive countering nature of this comment was unnecessary if you were merely seeking clarification.
The presence of remote working itself exposes the flaws with the arguer’s chain of comments. It is (and it is funny that I can actually make this conclusion) impossible that the money does not go directly to the North Korea regime. North Korean civilians have no internet.
From the article
They would then instruct those US residents to install remote access software allowing them to appear to be working from the US when they were actually overseas.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but North Korean civilians have no access to internet.
An entire comment based on an incorrect assumption when it is clearly stated that the persons are working for companies run from China and Russia, controlled by North Korea.
North Korea would not allow ordinary civilians to operate (clarification: by this, I mean control) such corporations internationally. If they did, it would be impossible for them to control the land in the way they do, because people would have an outlet, an alternative to escape any mandated way of doing things, in a way which would not have such a high chance of… severe consequence. Like death.
This comment expresses the post is akin to having a hatred for the North Korean economy having a little more money. North Korea doesn’t exactly follow that kind of economy. It relies less on people spending and more on people… working. Any money in the economy is not heavily channeled into civilian investment… like you have in most countries in the world. If it did, it would be impossible in a very absolute sense to have total control over a land to prevent most of the people who want to leave from leaving, setting aside even those who want to leave but cannot leave due to a number of personal circumstances.
Lastly, you could’ve made your two comments in a less aggressive way. You’ve implied an agenda from the poster without elaborating with a satisfactory reason. The article or the poster made no mention of US sanctions, and there is no indication the poster has anything against people from North Korea having money for personal use. The economy statement also relies on the assumption of the running of the North Korean economy from the perspective that it runs as a mostly public investment based economy.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a few in prison worship the wealthy and billionaires though. The kind of character, behaviorally, as shown in the character Léonard Koné in the TV show Lupin (not referring race here, because there are some here who accuse people of racism despite not being racist🤦 so do not do such stupid things). I know a more than a few people like that too. They’re direct family. Ah, I live in a shitty house where everyone wants to harm others for their own gain as long as it is not them who faces it. While supporting some pretty horrible people while aspiring to use the tag of ‘legitimacy’ by following ‘legitimate people’ (hahahahahaha) to give reasons why what they’re doing is justifiable, even right🤦. Everyone who agrees with them is just the same, no? No matter how many agree with them, I’m not just going to say something stupid like “maybe you are right”.
Inmate problems could be, but I’d worry about the staff more. It takes some real bad reasoning to be fine working in, and supporting, such a place. It would be another think entirely if the prison system was everything like it claimed to be.
Just what are you try to imply here