Can’t tell if it is for the ad-girl. But I have to mention, that - ACKSHUALLY - this is not happening because of the focal length, but because of perspective, i.e. the distance between camera and subject.

In order to achieve the same framing on a subject, like the dude in that GIF did, with different focal lenghts, you have to adjust how far away you stand.

So for practical purposes, especially for portrait photography the focal length kinda forces you to do that, but it’s not the cause of perspective distortion.

You could achieve the same effect, by taking the sameish picture with a wide angle lens and moving away from the subject with each shot and then cropping the foto to get the framing/field of view to fit the first pic in sequence. Of course you lose resolution and image quality that way, so it’s not recommended.

That’s not whataboutism. It is making a point to illustrate, that this might not be an exclusive feature of communism.

And not everything bad that happened under a so-called communist system is a result of communism.

#notallmoulds

I don’t assume that, and I won’t argue for an entirely free market. I also agree with your observation that accumulation happens, however we might have different views on how long that actually takes. Atm the shift to renewables is disrupting the accumulation we already have in the energy sector, because it requires very little capital to build your own little solar powerplant compared to a fossil or nuclear powerplant (or large hydro, btw.). Same thing for battery storage units. So with renewables, there’s more potential for competition.

That might change again in the future through continued accumulation and shitty policies, but my point is: as long as we don’t have either monopolies or cartels and thusly competition in the market still exists, even large corporations can’t simply dictate prices to increase their margins.

Charging millionaires and billionaires with inheritance tax is better as there will be a continuous cycle of wealth redistribution and thus they won’t be able abuse their powers. But wealth tax is more efficient that way as it would prevent someone becoming obscenely wealthy in the first place.

And that is the point of inheritance tax. There might be other means to achieve that same goal, but I suspect inheritance tax is politically more realistic. In our western societies theres a deeply ingrained narrative of ‘rags to riches’ and how the rich earned their money because they contribute so much to society and worked hard for it, coupled with the wishful thinking of ‘it might be me some day’. I don’t have to preach, how flawed those ideas are, but it is much easier within that ideology to argue for an inheritance tax, where it is obvious that the heir didn’t have to do anything to really deserve it.

Wealth tax needs a bit more of a marxist understanding of economic mechanisms.

They can’t, if you have a functioning market economy. There should be competition and renewables, due to their more decentralized nature even incite competition.

You don’t pay VAT/GST on the money, you pay it on the product’s price

And how do you pay that price? With money. This is pure sophism.

And, duh, you can avoid paying taxes if you cheat… that’s not exclusive to VAT.

And you are further elaborating my point. You will be taxed on different occasions even when the money or asset doesn’t even change ownership. That’s my whole point. The argument that you already paid taxes on some money isn’t really a solid point against inheritance tax, it’s a common occurence in many areas of life. Yet it always comes up when inheritance tax is discussed.

Just like your example with the inheritance of a small home that will ruin the recipient. The example is always constructed in bad faith with a lousy tax policy in the first place. No one is trying to ruin the average joe who happens to inherit grampas house. A better design, and the one all supporters of inheritance tax I know argue for, is one with a reasonably high allowance, to avoid these scenarios, and even if you cross the allowance threshhold by a little bit, you only have to pay the fictious 20% on the amount exceeding the allowance. So say we have an (unreasonably low, but just for the sake of the example) allowance of 400K, now you inherit that 500K property you’ll have to pay (500K-400K)x0.2=20K.

If you wanted to protect small inheritances even more, you could design a progressive tax, too.

This, with a much more reasonable allowance sounds a bit like your so called ‘better solution’.

This bullshit-argument again.

Guess what, money will circle around the economy and it will be taxed on different occasions and often several times during its lifespan (whatever that means for todays mostly digital money anyways). Especially when things (or money) change owners, tax is to be expected.

When you got paid, you paid income tax, and when you buy stuff with it - oh my gosh! - taxes again!! (In the form of VAT) Outrageous!

This is such a common thing, that it simply baffles me how anyone could think that “that money has been taxed already” is a sound argument.

Dunno. Most of that collection I just got from a friend.

Seems to me like having the data just once in a folder is more space efficient than redundantly storing it in every single file’s metadata? I mean, its just a few kB each, but even that adds up.

And also there’s sometimes not just the cover artwork for an album, but also back-cover, an image of the disc itself and the whole booklet.

Does that also work for the album-art images I have in my mp3-collection? Or will it ignore the music as well?

Ah, yes, the internet. Now we’re having an argument about cabbage. But, alright, I’ll bite. Just for the fun of it.

You are revealing yourself with that comment. You don’t seem to be a real cabbage-enjoyer, if you simply describe it’s flavor as watery and nothing particular and simply tolerate it for its texture. Or maybe you should find a different source of cabbage.

I refuse to subscribe to your narrow minded views.

There are more varieties though. Cabbage soup comes to mind, for example, and some stuff that I don’t know an English word for.
Some of that can taste great as well, but if you don’t care for the taste of cooked cabbage, it’s probably not for you.

Sauerkraut is nice though. But that’s adding extra steps and I wouldn’t still call it cabbage when the cooking starts.

Isn’t that the water that’s inside my Alkaline batteries? It must be good to energize the body.

Caverns and Critters?

On Linux I have found my audio player of choice (Sayonara Player), I’m specifically asking for Winamp because I have nostalgia for it; and because I don’t know any player that has its extensive visualization features.

So the conclusion would be:

This world is awful! Let’s fix it, so it can be as awful as it used to be.

You’re still using Winamp?

Which version? I never really moved on to Winamp 3 (migrated to foobar back then), has it evolved further from that? Does it run on Linux?

I still sometimes miss my Winamp 2 days with a Calvin & Hobbes skin and spending hours with its visualization features as a young teenager.

Hilarious!