Yes, but then you might conceivably still measure temperature in degrees Réaumur, if it's a rather traditional brewer. Or so I was told by a Reliable Source(tm).
Close enough for government work, actually. And it's not just flesh. Lots of things behave approximately like water, which is handy for all sorts of back-of-envelope estimates.
What you're ignoring is that a hundred plus or minus is a good range for average humans to grapple with and Fahrenheit splits the temperature swings in a given region across an approximately 100deg range.
So using Fahrenheit results in a pretty decent "as high as it can be without being clumsy" measurement system that covers just about all earthly temperatures.
If we only cared about increments of five or so degrees you could go higher resolution and it'd be fine because rounding would occur like we do with vehicle speeds. Or we could go lower resolution and just make the degrees bigger, which is basically what celsius is.
Eh, all the degrees (Celsius, Fahrenheit, Réaumur, etc) are all about equally bad. Nicest thing that can be said about Celsius is that it's decimal, connected to water (0=freezing, 100=boiling) so it plays well with the rest of metric.
Kelvin is actually the most practical of the lot, FSVO [1]. It's not a 'degree', because it's anchored at absolute zero. It's just a bit unwieldy for our day-to-day, with room temperature at 293K. But I can imagine if people were to grow up with it, it wouldn't be too bad even then.
[1] eg. "Why can an aircon still heat the house at ten degrees below zero?"- "Well akshually, you still have 263K of heat energy to pump, not an actual problem"
Right, we are just arguing which is the most practical range. It's like choosing a calendar: we could define one using entirely metric time units, but nobody would want to use it as long as human civilization is anchored on Planet Earth.
The difference between a yard and a meter adds up quickly. Already a 25 yard swimming pool yields significantly different times to cross it than a 25 meter one.
Yes please! I tripped over this recently. It's a bigger deal than it might seem.
You'd be surprised at some of the weird things that can happen in the current systems in the EU if you try to do business across borders.
Like: your company suddenly automatically becoming deregistered, or you might get a sudden huge tax bill, or you might even inadvertently get charged with fraud.
Hasn't happened so far knock on wood, but it's a lot more work to stay on the light side than you'd really like.
This is all because the national systems still sort of assume that you'll live and work and stay inside one EU country. You end up constantly fitting square administrative pegs into regulatory round holes.
A lot of the EU's promise is actually theoretical without a proper pan european legal entity.
> A lot of the EU's promise is actually theoretical without a proper pan european legal entity.
Yeah, I feel a bit the same way.
Just to make it clear to random passerby's, this is exactly what the proposed EU-INC is for, to create this "pan european legal entity", in case it wasn't clear from the context. I initially asked myself "But that's exactly what it is..." so maybe others end up thinking the same :)
Finally something that feel like removing some borders. On the long term it could bring a lot of positives changes, even breaking or displacing nationalism.
And here I am picturing what could look like the new European far right and far left...
What issue? VAT is paid by the user (collected and remitted by you) and differs by country (used to be hassle, easy today), but the taxes you pay in your country for your company is the same regardless of where the users who paid you are based (assuming there isn't something country-specific about that), it's more about where your company is tax-resident.
Unless there are permanent-establishment issues, withholding taxes, or other country-specific digital tax regimes, where your users are based shouldn't affect how/what taxes you pay.
Otherwise, if you don't have any employees or presence in other EU countries and only doing digital services B2C, you shouldn't have to do anything specific about the taxes you pay.
Yes the issue is i form company in Estonia because i like their non distribution taxes. Or in czechia because i live there. Then move to spain. And they decide to tax the company in spain… with high taxes.
I mean if you now live in Spain, then you need to pay taxes in Spain, because that's where you live. This makes sense, does it not? Or is the expectation that you shouldn't pay taxes where you live, only where your company that you work for/in is based?
FWIW, I also live in Spain, and also pay "high taxes" as I'm in the highest income bracket, and it sucks to see large parts of your income and capital gains disappear. But then I've also experienced the health care here, and see everyone being taken care of, and I sleep well again :)
I think they mean that the Estonian company they run now has to file tax returns and pay taxes not only to Estonia but also Spain.
The company lives in Estonia. Yeah if they are taking income personally locally then that should go to the country of residence, as is normal.
But then if what Estonia considers acceptable standards for tax reporting differs from what Spain considers acceptable, or what they consider 'profit' etc, well good luck!
Indeed, the current state of affairs is rather sad.
To employ a regular (non-management) employee in Spain (and it applies anywhere else in Europe), an Estonian company would to at least have a local address, then register and maintain regular contact with several authorities there (chamber of commerce, social administration, tax office). The bureaucratic overhead makes it practically impossible to have employees across several countries (definitely as a small company), the only practical option is to pay an employer of record ~600 EUR/month extra (significant salary difference) only for the joy of maintaining the employment paperwork.
The really fun part happens if a managing director moves. Then the company is considered to have a permanent establishment in Spain, needs now to maintain ALL administration like a Spanish company, and to comply with Spanish corporate law, in parallel to what it was already doing at home. Both countries' laws apply, both expect taxes, and it is not even clear cut how much of the company activity and profits should be taxed by the company's home country and how much by the director's country! And having multiple managing directors in several countries is probably an exercise in frustration.
Then, if the director has enough and moves somewhere else, it all starts again in the new country (and you also have the headache, costs, and risks of closing the Spanish entity).
The EU may have free travel, but you can basically forget actually freely moving around as a small business owner, the company administration is prohibitively complicated.
This is why I don’t get what the EU brings to the table at all. I’ve considered starting something, never quite yet pulled the trigger, but I may as well do it in the UK because it’s extremely cheap, gives access to a great number of services, and I can do it all in English there.
It’s not like the company itself is going to be queuing at an airport or whatever.
I’ll have to file in Finland for the company anyway then, but I can skip all the stuff about starting an organisation here.
The actual practical option people end up using in practice (speaking as someone who've moved around in Europe, working for various other European companies) is that you ask them to self-employ in the country they live, then you treat them as contractors, offset any extra costs that'd come with compared to full-time, and do the best you can with that.
It's not ideal, and not a real solution by wide margin, and there is plenty of stuff that can get better, but I think it's the most "practical" and pragmatic option you can make use of today.
Yes, but some companies need employees on paper. When they do custom based software and want to apply for a job, there is often a number of heads you need to employ.
> the Estonian company they run now has to file tax returns and pay taxes not only to Estonia but also Spain.
Yes, this again makes sense to me. You have a company in Estonia, so that pays taxes in Estonia. You work for this company from Spain, so you pay taxes in Spain. Doesn't it work the same elsewhere? What other ways could it work, assuming we want taxes somewhere?
> But then if what Estonia considers acceptable standards for tax reporting differs from what Spain considers acceptable
Yes, that also makes sense, different countries have different systems? Again, if you open a company in Estonia, the ground assumption has to be that you're up for understanding Estonian tax laws. If you're living in Spain while working for that company, the ground assumption is that you're up for understanding both Spanish and Estonian tax laws, because they should of course get their taxes.
As long as I don't get taxed on the same money in both countries (which there are a lot of bi-lateral agreements solving that), I don't see the issue here.
> As long as I don't get taxed on the same money in both countries, I don't see the issue here.
That's exactly one of the current issues. The general rule is something like 'taxation happens where the company creates value'. Registration in Estonia just means taxation starts in Estonia. But at any point can Spain say 'we consider this a Spanish company'. After Spain taxes too, you can request a tax refund in Estonia. That's assuming they agree. Both countries will only communicate with the company, not with each other.
So while double taxation treaties are great, they are not doing much upfront in this respect.
The above is about company taxation, not personal taxes. For SMB that line is often confusing.
The Estonian company pays the Spanish resident money to them personally. Indeed it is normal that the Spanish resident has to deal with the Spanish taxes on this money only.
If the Estonian company is supposed to be considered a separate legal person based in Estonia, it shouldn't have to deal with anything Spanish.
> If the Estonian company is supposed to be considered a separate legal person based in Estonia, it shouldn't have to deal with anything Spanish.
If the Estonian company has employed a person located in Spain, shouldn't the laws of both countries apply to this employment then? The employee lives in Spain, so obviously Spanish labor laws should be followed, and the company is in Estonia, so obviously Estonian law should apply.
I'm not sure why the Estonian company wouldn't have to follow Spanish law if they've decided to employ a Spanish person? What laws should cover the person living in Spain, Estonian laws, although they don't live there?
For labour - the laws of where that labour is actually being conducted are the ones that are followed. Spanish prosecutors can for sure bring a case against an Estonian company if they are not. In theory at least.
But for company tax law, that company is a tax resident in Estonia, not Spain.
Also, we harmonise laws such as traffic laws (for example, in Finland, all solid yellow central lines were painted white) so that people have the chance to work across the whole union as transport operators, why not do the same for entrepreneurs?
> where that labour is actually being conducted are the ones that are followed.
So in that particular case, would be in both Estonia and Spain, just so we're on the same side?
> But for company tax law, that company is a tax resident in Estonia, not Spain.
Indeed, and I don't think the Estonian company would pay Spanish taxes, correct? Unless they have a presence (subsidiary for example) in Spain, then they would have to pay Spanish taxes. But if not, it's only the employee who pay Spanish tax. Or did I understand incorrectly?
> why not do the same for entrepreneurs?
I think this is exactly what we're doing right now :) Small steps, but EU-INC seems to be one of those steps in that direction.
> So in that particular case, would be in both Estonia and Spain, just so we're on the same side?
It sounds like we are. If labour is being conducted in both of those countries then yes. And the same anywhere else where someone might join the party.
And on the tax thing - yes again, but what I see happening now in European countries, is that, if a person of significant control resides in another country, then that other country considers the company a tax resident of that country too.
E.g: I live in Finland. If I were to open an Estonian company and have it literally do nothing all year, not only would I have to file a company report in Estonia, (fine, that's why I chose to start a company there, perhaps it's really easy) but also file a company report in Finland as if the company were a Finnish company.
I think this is an overreach of bureaucracy and adds a friction to entrepreneurship. Others might think differently - which I completely accept. Unfortunately for me, I do not think that this initiative here will change this, much. Perhaps I am mistaken. Either way, it is in the right direction and I support it.
Yeah, you should pay taxes from where the company is run. Basically if you have one person company. In a place it “does” business. But i want estonian company for the ease of doing business and for to hold profit, for reinvestment later. I dont want to deal with spanish/german authorities if i move around and want to grow business. No government competition is what they want. Because they cant win in square fight.
https://fairvote.org has info on Ranked Choice Voting. It is, to me, the single most bang-for-buck reform we should have in government.
A voting system where voters give preferences to multiple candidates on a ballot takes away the "spoiler effect", where a candidate too similar to the two main candidates will split the vote.
We need a freer market of political parties for a number of reasons. People need to feel like political change is possible. The two main parties need more pressure to evolve or die within their section of the political spectrum. Allowing more political parties to exist allows splinter parties to have a chance. Imagine a "sane Republican" party, or a progressive party, or some hybrid-centrist party that likes unions and public education but doesn't like massive social services, and so on.
MAGA would be polling at 15% or less, I think.
---
SCOTUS term limits is just an idea I heard once. Most other democracies have it in place.
---
I am skeptical of the Senate's utility in a modern federal government - the difference between the population of Virginia and Rhode Island was far less extreme than the difference between California and Wyoming today. The electoral inequality is too much.
---
Electoral college has to go for obvious reasons, as does gerrymandering.
As far as I know only Gigaset and HMD manufacture in Europe. And even those two only do final assembly in Europe, the components are still made in China.
Technically Fairphone could ship you a box of parts and have you assemble the phone yourself. Then it would be "Made in Europe" (or where-ever you live).
I'm fairly sure they don't; at least historically, the goal has been to improve the situation on the ground, not to move production elsewhere. (I think this was the post in which they explained that thinking, but I didn't reread it just now: https://www.fairphone.com/en/2025/10/15/lets-talk-about-fair...)
The default OS is not de-googled Android though, but regular Android. You have to buy the /e/OS variant, which is slightly more expensive (or flash it yourself).
But with the long-term support and access to spare parts (the university can stock them), this seems like a good move. Also happy for FairPhone that they are getting more traction.
> The default OS is not de-googled Android though, but regular Android. You have to buy the /e/OS variant
For some definition of de-google, though. /e/OS is based on LineageOS which is based on AOSP which is developed by Google. And microg contacts the Google servers, doesn't it? My understanding is that it's just an open source implementation of the Play Services.
You really don't want /e/ on Fairphone. That's frankly worst of both worlds.
Insecure hardware with limited patches and updates, running insecure software with much patches skipped or delayed.
Most recent fairphone is based on Android 15, while 16 is available from mid-2025. Yes, that matters, releases is not only eyecandy, but also some security patches (ie: not many patches are back ported from 16).
Technically correct but Holland has long been used as a strong branding name for the entire country. It wasn't until recent that they started to make a better distinction between the two.
Philips, ASML, Inventum and many other companies used "Made in Holland" on their products despite not being in the provinces of North and South Holland.
Sometimes it's better not to think of it as the human neural net 'failing to notice things'. You're just setting yourself up for a long list of exceptions.
Instead, consider it as attempting to extract singular pieces of information that fall outside the norm.
(And do so from a complex, noisy, or even outright adversarial environment,under suboptimal conditions, possibly even below the noise floor. )
With that framing it's actually pretty amazing that people DO notice as much as they do! ;-)
But does Claude understand Arithmetic? This is an empirical experiment you can try right now. Try ask Claude to explain an arithmetic expression you just made up. Or a math formula.
For example, try
x_next = r * x * (1 - x)
A function of some historical significance O:-) (try plotting it btw!)
Ha. Well I'm OK with being accused of bias towards biological life and intelligence. I know Larry Page and friends think this is 'speciesist' -- I strongly disagree.
I think that's compatible with optimism towards LLM's though. It just removes all of the nonsensical conflation with humanity and human intelligence.
reply