Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | informatimago's comments login

Well, the digital nomad doesn't spend a lot of money. Some on accommodation, some for internet, some for food, and that's it. He spends his time remote working on his laptop. His income is paid offshore.

Apart from the tourist aspect of it, the point of a digital nomad is to save money on rent, food and taxes, not to spend all your money in a foreign country.

Of course, a business hub, or a technological hub can attract digital nomads punctually, even if accommodations are more expensive.

Now Japan has a problem with its age pyramid and desertification of its country side. So it should be possible to attract digital nomad for longer and cheaper stays, even if they don't have a lot of money (to spend in Japan), at least that's good for the young body count, and perhaps they'd eventually fixate and have families. But again, this wouldn't be a six-month thing, they would have to add more incentive (free or $1-house in the countryside with minimal occupancy, good internet connection (I don't know if Japan has 100% territory fiber coverage) (that said nowadays there's Starlink), etc.


I would have thought that the point of spending 6 months in Japan was to experience Japan in a deeper and more relaxed way than a short-ish trip as a tourist.

Spending money on living expenses, including rent, and touristy stuff is indeed spending money in the country. And if you are well paid then that may be more than the average local: the threshold for this visa is $68k while the average annual pay in Japan is apparently $41-45k.


Why would a nomad spend less than a resident?


- In biology: unknown -> useless.

- In archeology: unknown -> religious.

- In egyptology: unknown -> tomb.

- In astrophysics: unknown -> dark.

- In mathematics: unknown -> x.

- In computing: unknown -> NULL.

;-)


The final nail for X's coffin, could just hide the final nail for Apple, if this makes Elon make Tesla Phones...


Or a Tesla Phone!



Indeed. 500 years is about 16 generations, so any ancestor of that age may have 65536 or even more descendents. You'd need to locate them and ask them all permission. How does it work, is it majority vote? Unanimous vote?

All European people have a unique male ancestor 300 generations away. If you locate remains of that age, do you have to ask nobody or everybody? (Depending on whether it's the male ancestor of all of us, or some other male whose last descendent died long ago?)


Human societies have elaborate processes to solve this issue: inheritance laws. In case no heirs can be located anymore (body can't be identified, records are missing, the line has died out, etc.) the state is the heir by default and makes the rules.


It is a political and societal choice.

I could understand that a people decides that it should be governed with pure human processes, and therefore that its government and civil servant has to use only human brain power (and compassion) to govern and administrate.

I would be afraid to miss some good or even just rational decision making, but I think we can all agree that a 100% AI government or administration would be a bad idea, so how to ensure that there's always a reasonable and informed human to decide, even with the help of AI and computer models?

The wiseness of this decision should probably spread largely, for example, when considering the decision making that has been done and keep being done around things like climate change MODELS, and COVID spreading MODELS.


Best proof that we need more people in the world! ;-)


While I understand the sentiment, I think we might not necessarily need more people in the world, but enable more people who already came to life to live up to their potential. Too much human potential is wasted in under developed regions.


> Too much human potential is wasted in under developed regions.

Too much human potential is wasted in highly developed regions as well, but it's not a question of access to resources, it's a question of living in a dysfunctional society driven by a lot of things that aren't "hey, how do we make the world better?"


Was always the case. Adding more monkeys with typewriters will get you Shakespeare sooner which is why I’m excited for the future of entertainment & software.


Also gets you better firefox (kidding, kudos to the guy who fixed this bug)


conversely it also gets you nukes faster


But like all history, this young kid is fixing the ills of his parents.


While adding to the foundation they built.


If the liquid didn't move, it would kind of magically find itself OUTSIDE of the container. So yes, when you shake a container (move it with strong if short accelerations), the liquid inside will too move accordingly, being subject of the acceleration provided by the container (thru compression waves).


I think the OP meant to ask whether the liquid moves relatively to the container.


There is no space, unless you left a vacuum, and sealed the container under this vacuum. And even then, the liquid will evaporate to fill the empty space with gas, up to some pressure (that depends on the composition of the liquid and temperature).

That said, if there are thus more than one phase in this container, what happens is dictated by Archimedes. When one phase is less dense than the other, then it will be sujected to a force equivalent to the "weight" or acceleration of its volume filled by the more dense phase. That, plus the surface tension of the interphase surface will dictate how bubbly the phases will change position during your shaking acceleration. This can lead to the creation of lots of small bubbles, up to mixing an "emulsion" with the right surface tension.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: