I think this "stupid" and choice discussion that comes up quite often for this subject is somewhat of a distraction. There's plenty of people who eat relativly healthy not because they are "smart" about it, but because that's how they grew up. They are just "dumb" in the right direction. I doubt people were more knowledgeable about food when everyone smoked and there was lead in everything.
I think I agree with your overall point, but not really with this phrasing. Say you apply the hacker concept to food. You can make some cool food at home while bending the rules and everything is fine, but if you open a restaurant and make all your customers sick as a result, then you're just a bad chef.
Hackers hack hacks. Bringing a hackers mindset to something else means that you can see when a hack is appropriate, not that you "hack" things that aren't.
It's like this popular quote... "Rebels learn the rules better than the rule-makers do. Rebels learn where the holes are, where the rules can best be breached. Become an expert at the rules. Then break them with creativity and style". Not "Be lazy, claim rebel".
"But really, at the end of the day, they did this because it was a rush"
Diving isn't really compatible with "a rush", especially not cave or other technical diving. You have to be focused, methodical and patient. It's more meditative than anything, you can't even breath too quickly without risk. While still having to keep track of a lot of things. In "rush" type of activities it's the sensation of almost losing control that is fulfilling, while in technical activities like this it's rather the sensation of being in control.
It's mostly a propaganda things, but in special operations (from were many things in the military gets appropriated) it has a purpose. Which isn't about "comfort" as some has suggested, but rather about accountability. If you don't speak up about something and someone gets in trouble, you will have to go and get them. Which works both ways. But also if you make a mess, your friends will have to risk their lives (more than usual) to come get you and that is a horrible rather than comforting thought.
It's basically "we are all in the same boat", which is true (sometimes literally) when you're engaged in high-risk activities. Note that high-risk in this case doesn't mean that you might get killed, but that there is a low margin for error leading to catastrophic failure. Special operations are not about being a fair fight, it's about using your advantage and once you loose that you're often in big trouble.
Say you're doing recon on enemy territory and calling in airstrikes. You're a small mobile force that is hard to find having disproportionate impact on the battle, which is good. Then someone drop a glove or breaks his leg or anything else that compromises the mission and now you're just a small force soon to be a disproportionate loss, which is bad.
While the postal address is annoying, I think (currently) having to go there to open a bank account is a bigger deal, since it will be hard to open one anywhere else. Even if you can get a bank account, many payment providers want you to have your business, bank account and residency in the same country (something e-residency won't do).
So while I think the are moving in the right direction, it's still reminds me of government startup programs disconnected from reality. My suggestions would be that they, other than sorting out banking/payment processing:
a) Allow companies to register as LLC or Limited, for increased customer confidence.
b) Give foreigners a income tax holiday, so they can become resident without worrying about paying taxes on worldwide income.
c) Generally make it easier to go there. Last time I tried to figure out how much it would cost to go there for a month and work I couldn't really find any (at least cheap, upfront) prices for serviced apartments and coworking spaces. They need to do more "outreach" (tourist board for entrepreneurs please) than just "look how good we are".
1) law change for allowing bank account opening without physically coming to Estonia is in the government and should be in force by Autumn
2) our customers are successfully using different payment providers
3) LLC is the "de facto" incorporation type for our customers
4) Becoming an e-resident won't make you an Estonian tax resident, so you don't have to worry about your worldwide income. But when you start an Estonian company then the company finances/taxes have to be done by Estonian laws/rules.
5) Going to Estonia is like going to other European countries. You need transportation and a place to stay and you get them via normal means online :). Visa requirements depend on your real residency. Being an e-resident doesn't change this. For more info: http://www.visitestonia.com/en/
6) For physical coworking space, just google "coworking tallinn" or something similar. Should be plenty of spaces available. If you wan't to see the other end of Estonia, then "coworking tartu" :).
1) Yes, still have to see what the results are in terms of KYC etc. though.
3) What I mean is that they should allow companies to identify themselves as a LLC/Limited instead of a OÜ so your customers see "Webshop LLC" instead of "Webshop OÜ". While it might not be feasible to enact in Estonia, some jurisdictions do this.
5/6) It's not that I can't go to Estonia, it's that I won't because it's not very high up on my list. If it was cheap, easy and/or I had some special reason (like a conference, which there also are plenty of) that might move it higher, but I'm not going to go out of my way just to find out when there are plenty of other places on that list. Might sound harsh, but that is how it is.
UK probably. But resident requirements for starting companies are somewhat rare these days. Getting a bank account or sorting out your taxes is another story though.
To start a UK company, it is not necessary. To be in line with accounting compliance requirements, you need to be able to issue invoices from a UK company bank account. In order to obtain that, you need management to be based in the UK (i.e. be resident).
"The first is obviously easier and kinda more convenient but if you look at what it does to your health then maybe not so convenient at all."
Presumably for the same reason you drank too much sugary drinks, there was an immediate reward and you didn't comprehend the long term effects i.e. it wasn't an informed decision. I doubt that the doctor was very surprised with the outcome.
The latest episode of americas test kitchen radio touches on this topic and while I don't agree with everything they do have some good points.
