> I like to imagine what they could have done had they been at leisure to work and perform all day.

Probably nothing.

The idle rich and trust fund kids aren’t exactly know for producing, well, anything of value, really.

Getting paid to sit around all day and do fuck-all isn’t exactly character building.

He was in his 40s when he wrote his most famous work, that would qualify as a portfolio in Ireland and get the grant.

I reckon the 20 years as an iron puddler he had done by then had built his character already.

Yes they are.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Independent_scientist... - "An independent scientist (formerly called a gentlemen scientist) is a scientist with a private income who can pursue scientific study independently as they wish without excessive external financial pressures."

Including: Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin (Evolution), Ben Franklin, Robert Boyle (Boyle's gas law), Oliver Heaviside (electromagnetic theory, co-axial cables), Alexander von Humboldt (established modern Geography), Thomas Jefferson, Leopold Kronecker, Alessandro Volta (voltaic pile battery)

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_scientist - "Self-funded scientists practiced more commonly from the Renaissance until the late 19th century, including the Victorian era, especially in England, before large-scale government and corporate funding was available. Many early fellows of the Royal Society in London were independent scientists. "

Including "Charles Babbage, Henry Cavendish (discovered Hydrogen), Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, Thomas Young (Young's modulus of elasticity, eyeball focusing), Joseph Priestly (discovered oxygen)

Rene Decartes "arrived in La Haye in 1623, selling all of his property to invest in bonds, which provided a comfortable income for the rest of his life."

And basically any tenured professor paid to do whatever interests them, or academic or researcher, especially mathemticians, hired and paid for blue sky research, all the places like Bell Labs that HN loves.

I wouldn’t exactly call any of those people idle.

So you’re kind of refuting something I didn’t say.

If your claim isn't "rich people are idle" and is instead "idle people are idle" what possible interest or use is your comment?

What does the past have to do with the present quagmire we find ourselves in?

Surely no one would intentionally suggest we pay people to sit around with the hope they produce something anyone will be bothered to read (or whatever) in 2000 years.

If my colleagues phone can do all that, great - I don’t need mine to.

What is diverse about Switzerland?

Isn’t it largely made up of Swiss, Germans, Italians, and Portuguese?

Diversity of nationality isn't the only type of diversity.

It’s not real helpful to say that and also provide no examples as to what diversity could mean in this context.

Its not really helpful to leave snarky comments in bad taste neither, is it. I suggest you read up a bit on this country, its history (I mean proper history not some primitive blahs on qanon level) and educate yourself, its not that hard or long if you care about the topic.

Let’s not mince words.

If my device is “suggesting” a hotel or restaurant, or wherever, that’s advertising.

Advertising is largely self-praise.

And self praise is no recommendation.

Or perhaps I misunderstood, and you were suggesting ignoring the recommendations of one’s travel companions.

In my area lots of smaller accommodations don't show up on Google Maps already because they're not sold via OTA and Google can't earn their share.

1. Open Google Maps

2. Search "hotel"

3. Pick the first one

4. See "sponsored" just before the first link to a third party

If my phone ever starts not clearly separating "editorial content" and advertisements, it won't remain my phone for long.

There’s no “if” to it. LLM-driven features will be monetized. Investors/shareholders will insist.

You do realize that Google Maps prioritizes what's displayed on the map based on corporate relationships & money exchanged, right?

Majel Barrett Roddenberry, wife of Star Trek creator Eugene Wesley (Gene) Roddenberry Sr.

Did you report your neighbours for skirting covid rules to?

Also, there is nothing centre-right about Susan Ley.

She is the leftest left leaning leader of the Liberal party I’ve ever had the misfortune of having to live through.

She was absolutely on board with this recent Hitlerian “anti-hate” legislation that was rammed through with no public consultation.

Okay, that’s a bit uncharitable. We had 48 hours.

And the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security definitely gave the literal thousands of submissions due consultation before recommending the original, un-split bill pass.

And minor parties receive funding from the Australian Electoral Commission if they receive over certain percentage of votes.

It was 5% last time I cared to be informed by may be different now, and they would receive $x for each vote, or what ever it is now.

Currently minimum 4% of formal first preference votes, which gets you $3.499 per a first preference vote (indexed to inflation every six months)

Then you automatically get paid the first $12,791, and the rest of the funding is by reimbursement of substantiated election expenses.

This is per a candidate (lower house) or per a group (upper house). And this is just federal elections - state election funding is up to each state, but I believe the states have broadly similar funding systems.

https://www.aec.gov.au/parties_and_representatives/public_fu...

https://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/public_fu...

Note the US also has public financing for presidential campaigns, which is available to minor parties once they get 5% or more of the vote. But in the 2024 election, Jill Stein (Green Party) came third on 0.56% of the popular vote. The only third party to ever qualify for general election public funding was the Reform Party due to Ross Perot getting 18.9% in the 1992 election and 8.4% in the 1996 election. There is also FEC funding for primary campaigns, and I believe that’s easier for third parties to access, but also less impactful.

Excellent response.

Thanks!

Please don’t encourage people to waste their vote.

Encourage people to vote for the candidate they dislike the least, then try to work out ways to hold government accountable.

If you’re in Australia, at least listen to what people like Tony Abbott, the IPA, and Pauline Hanson are actually saying these days.

A spoiled vote is at least better than not voting at all.

Because now that means there's an indication of what percentage of the populace are saying "These candidates don't qualify for my vote"

In the U.S., I feel like the primaries are the place to vote for and work for the best candidate possible. That's the time to be idealistic and pursue the perfect candidate.

At the general election, you need to be pragmatic, and decide who is the least worst and vote for that candidate, because the nominee will probably never be someone who is your ideal choice. But in a two-party system, a vote for a third candidate at that level ends up being an effective vote for candidate you _don't_ want. That's not politics, that's game theory.

There's a lot more subtlety to it in a parliamentary system, and I can see some advantages to it, but at least here in the States where it's First Past The Post with a Two-Party system (which is mathematically inevitable with FPTP), sometimes you need to place strategy or ideals.