I can't imagine any major government would willing give its citizens anonymity when they have such a perfect excuse for ratcheting up surveillance with a database of our entire financial lives.
We're actually (i.e. here in Sweden) having big pre-proposal investigation to determine what can be done to keep cash available, for reasons of anonymity and security against, let's Russian interference with banks or fibre cables.
But I prefer an electronic solution and do not want physical cash. This is of course a slightly risky view, but I believe that it can save us huge amounts of money and strengthen our economy.
Is it much more complicated than to prefer the predominantly northwest side in the morning and northeast side in the afternoon (for northern hemisphere)?
I haven't seen any "digital nomad visas" that make much sense for a typical nomadic remote worker. Why go through all the bureaucracy when I can just quietly work while on 30-90 day visa-free (or cheap and easy visa-on-arrival) tourist entry stamps?
Going for a 30-90 days to a country usually means you rent a short term overpriced Airbnb. With longer visa you can get a normal one-year lease, for most likely the same price.
Staying a year often makes your tax resident which is exactly the kind of headache nomads moving around are trying to avoid.
For example if you own any stocks and become tax resident, then leave and break tax residency, you may often owe an "exit tax" on your unrealized stock gains.
Even stocks in your retirement accounts like IRA may not be treated as tax advantaged by another country.
Still cheaper than going through gov. bureaucracy and having a higher tax exposure. In many other places, you can still rent long-termish and still visa-run regularly.
It's illegal, and also in Korea it's extremely annoying, as many online or daily services work with an Alien Registration Card, which you don't have with a simple tourist visa.
As long as your source of income is entirely outside the country, which it typically is, then in most cases you're fine. You're essentially just like a travelling investor. It's earning income from within the country that you can't do legally without a visa.
That's not true, and it's often not well known, but your own physical location is also a factor, not only your source of income. Most countries would never detect this anyways, but you shouldn't think that it's legal at all.
Well then I guess the lawyers I hired in country were all lying to me? As long as I didn't overstay my visa, didn't stay more than the required time for physical presence test tax liability (typically 180 days), and didn't work for firms inside the country, I was legit.
Please let me know if I was given bad legal advice, because I don't want to get thrown in jail in the future.
If they told you the legal advice they were giving you for a specific country was valid in all countries, and that all countries treated this income the same way, then yes, they lied to you.
This is not correct if you are doing actual work in the country. What's happening is, many of these countries are low income ones; and this kind of work is far removed from their economies. So they are turning a blind eye to it.
I don't know how the whole digital nomad model works, but I'm guessing that it's kind of a hassle to have to spend money every 30-90 days to cross out of the country and back in. Plus, some countries have policies to counteract this "infinite visa glitch" and can punish people for doing this.
Most digital nomads I know (including myself) do not go back to the same country at the end of their 30-90 days though. They hop to another country or do a stop at home for a while to do anything they may need to at home before heading somewhere else.
I regularly stay somewhere for 90ish days, then go home for a while to do anything I need to back home days and then somewhere else.
This is also why a digital nomad visa for a year or more doesn't make much sense. I know very few true digital nomads who even have a desire to stay the same place for more than a few months. At that point you're not a digital nomad anymore.
I'm curious - since the individual stops are so relatively short, how do you manage to stay on top of it all? How do you consistently find short-term housing every 30-90 days at a reasonable price?
This model sounds pretty appealing to me as something to consider doing in the future, but I'm not sure on just how much hassle this would introduce.
I usually plan it out way in advance. Usually I have accomodations booked at the least 6 months out for the next trip.
Example: right now I'm somewhere in the middle of a 90 day stay. We also were somewhere else just before for the holidays for ~30 days, but mostly for vacation. I plan to go back home at the end of March for ~2 months or so to get things straightened out there before then heading out for another 4-5 months afterwards. I've already booked that trip. Usually just as one trip is starting I book the next one for 6 months later.
I travel with my wife so we either book private rooms in a hostel or AirBnB's, though we've been trending away from this.
To be fair, we're both software devs so our salaries together make living basically anywhere "reasonable" depending on how you look at it. We know we're paying a premium but since we can afford it we don't really look at it as unreasonable. Most places we stay come out to ~$2000 USD per month for AirBnB's, and much less for most hostels.
I also keep a cheap studio apartment back in the US for when I'm back for a while, so I don't have to plan where to stay when I'm back. But I know many digital nomads who just use their parents places or another close family member.
Though this is just my experience, many digital nomads I know don't have things planned out as far as we do. And literally just plan things on a whim less than a month out.
There should be footnotes in forms that tourist visa works for business trips. It's often ok in that sense, not as in throwing in the straw hat and Hawaiian shirt to trash can just past the border control is ok or not
I'd rather ignore it since tourist visas are short. The alternative is to add rules to stress some people out, and have others willingly ignore them as it gets you into the idiotic space of having a rule that's not really enforced or worse, not even enforceable in a reasonable way.
The human body has trillions of cells. Surely there are enough copies of our DNA to recover its original form even if individual copies have extensive damage.
Yah, I don't think it's the loss of information, but a related concept: it's a decline in order.
We have a whole lot of redundancy and mechanisms to restore/repair redundancy. But even so, there's a march of entropy upwards; oxidation, genetic damage, cell death, tissue damage, neuron loss, etc.
We don't have repair mechanisms for everything the body knows how to build, and the repair mechanisms that we do have become less effective to use (and often less safe) as the body ages.
While the thermodynamic and the information theoretic concepts of entropy are related, it's not really applicable here. All the "real" information in the system is highly redundant (except perhaps neurological)-- we have billions of copies of the "information". The system's ability to restore itself to the order specified in the plan is lacking.
$8 trillion is ambiguous and forces me to understand whether you're using long or short scale (particularly for me, coming from a long scale culture, it trips me up often) [1]. I've often wondered though why scientific notation or SI prefixes have never caught on for currency. 8 T$ or $8e12 feel both shorter and less ambiguous.
> 8 T$ or $8e12 feel both shorter and less ambiguous.
To be honest, I wrote it out longhand because I think it's important not to make it feel shorter or somehow less significant. It is an enormous sum of money that humans are not equipped to comprehend, so anything we can do to covey the scale more clearly is important.
I feel that issue with AI is similar to issues with AI cars.
AI car won't ever reach its destination in my city. Because you need to actively break the rules few times if you want to drive to the destination. There's a stream of cars and you need to merge into it. You don't have an advantage, so you need to wait until this stream of cars will end. However you can wait for that for hours. In reality you act aggressively and someone will allow you to join. AI will not do that. Every driver does that all the time.
So when AI will try to integrate into human society, it'll hit the same issues. You sent mail to manager and this mail got lost because manager does not feel like answering it. You need to seek him, you need to face him and ask your question, so he has nowhere to run. AI does not have physical presence, neither he have aggression necessary for this. He'll just helplessly send emails around, moving right into spam.
There's gonna be a lot of context implied in project docs based on previous projects and the LLM won't ask hard questions back to management during the planning process. It will just happily return naive answers from its Turing tarpit.
No offense intended to anyone, but we already see this when there are other communication problems due to language barrier or too many people in a big game of corporate telephone. An LLM necessarily makes that problem worse.
Previous projects can be fed into LLMs either by context window (those are getting huge now) or fine tuning… but of course it's not a magic wand like some expect it to be.
People keep being disappointed it's not as smart as a human, but everyone should look how broad it is and ask themselves: if it were as good as a human, why would companies still want to employ you? What skills do you have which can't be described adequately in writing?
