7 ms·
If its got Mitchell, I’m in. To make it more relevant: right now I mostly rely on tmux. Before that I’ve been a long time user of screen (irssi over ssh people
by vanagandr 2mo ago
If its got Mitchell, I’m in.
To make it more relevant: right now I mostly rely on tmux. Before that I’ve been a long time user of screen (irssi over ssh people know this play). Looking forward to this.
- asymmetric 2mo ago[flagged]
- misiti3780 2mo agomore info please!
- jawngee 2mo agoHe thinks ability to vote (and the number of votes you get) should be based on income. https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/business/article/shopify-ceo-draws-criticism-for-apparent-support-of-giving-wealthy-more-voting-power/ https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/business/article/shopify-...
- ecshafer 2mo agoTaxes paid was actually what was said.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- catlikesshrimp 2mo agoI may be going astray, but I can see a way to degenerate "taxes paid" to "taxes before deductions" to "income since it relates to taxes anyways"
- p-o 2mo agoIt doesn't have to be that complicated. Just absolute terms could have the desired effect. - 1% tax of 10 million = 100k - 20% tax of 100k = 20k Hence, the rich pays more tax.
- catlikesshrimp 2mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_returns_of_Donald_Trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_returns_of_Donald_Trump "Trump paid no net federal income taxes in 11 of 18 years of the past two decades. After the refund, Trump had an average tax bill of $1.4 million per year over the 18 years.[52][176] In 2016, Trump paid only $750 in federal income tax, and in 2017, he paid another $750 in federal income tax." If there was an unequal vote, I am pretty sure rich people would want votes as heavy as possible.
- win311fwg 2mo agoIf you read it again you will notice that technically he thinks that, to satisfy those who believe the wealthy don't pay tax, Canada could use a system to encourage the wealthy to claim income, where that is incentivized by being able to vote. Often the wealthy have no need for income as they already have so much wealth and can easily borrow against that wealth as cash needs present themselves. It is believed (at least as far as the thread went) that the wealthy currently don't pay tax, and thus would be unable to vote, or their vote would count for little, under the proposed since they don't have sufficient income to qualify.
- Lalabadie 2mo agoThat would be true if he advocated for votes according to effective taxation rate or something similar. He caps his example at 800k reported income, if I remember, which is a rounding error to his income class. Instead, he makes sure to include the idea of stripping low-income people of all voting rights.
- win311fwg 2mo ago> which is a rounding error to his income class. Not at all. The idea is that his class claim very little income, if any income. His income class is ~$0 (or believed to be, at least). You can certainly make an argument that the claim isn't true, that the ultra-wealthy are actually already paying huge sums in income tax, but then you cannot take the thread out of context. It was clearly directed at those who believe the wealthy pay no income tax. It literally says so. Did you skip step one and not go back to read it again? > He caps his example at 800k reported income, if I remember You are correct, approximately, but there would have been no need to remember given step one, so that was clearly ignored. Why? What is the purpose of replying without even reading the comment you are replying to?
- Lalabadie 2mo agoLutke's own post was about pension = no votes, which I identify as the thing he decided to actually spent time on. His other tweet is a Musk-like "Good idea" reply to someone else's proposal regarding tax brackets, no? I don't think memory fails me on the main points. If you think ranking the same read facts differently from you means faulty reading, I don't really owe you the labor of explaining where that fails.
- throwaway-blaze 2mo agoMaybe worth mentioning that the founding fathers in the US believed only property owners should vote.
- nullstyle 2mo agoNot the most important(IMO) of our founding fathers, Thomas Paine.
- summarybot 2mo agoLet's make everyone a property owner by default at birth
- Yokohiii 2mo agoFranklin also practiced air bathing instead of hygiene.
- dragonwriter 2mo agoFranklin also supported universal male suffrage, wrote Pennsulvania’s 1776 constitution which adopted universal male suffrage, and condemned property requirements for the franchise, reportedly arguing: “Today a man owns a jackass worth fifty dollars, and he is entitled to vote; but before the next election the jackass dies. The man in the meantime has become more experienced, his knowledge of the principles of government, and his acquaintance with mankind, are more extensive, and he is therefore better qualified to make a proper selection of rulers — but the jackass is dead and the man cannot vote. Now gentlemen, pray inform me, in whom is the right of suffrage? In the man or in the jackass.”
- otterley 2mo agoThey also didn't forbid slavery. It doesn't mean they were right.
- dragonwriter 2mo ago“Didn’t forbid”, if referring to the framers of the Constitution, is a bit of an understatement, given that they created multiple layers of protection to prevent dismantling slavery at the federal level into the future.
- dismalaf 2mo ago[flagged]
- contagiousflow 2mo agohttps://fortune.com/2026/07/27/shopify-ceo-voting-rights-stripping-americans-19th-century/ https://fortune.com/2026/07/27/shopify-ceo-voting-rights-str... Along with a myriad of different controversies. Just searching his name will bring up many articles about his chronically online Elon Musk wannabe takes.
- collabs 2mo agoI found this just when I googled his name plus controversy > Shopify CEO Tobias Lütke faced fierce online backlash in July 2026 after endorsing a social media proposal for a tax-tiered voting system that would strip voting rights from non-taxpayers and give multiple votes to high-income earners. but if we go as far as to say > If it’s touched by Tobias Lütke, I’m out. does it mean control or sponsored, for example ladybird web browser...
- contagiousflow 2mo agoLadybird contributors have their own controversies that make the project hard to stomach
- ksec 2mo agoOk, what is the new drama this time around?
- soupbowl 2mo agoIt is a good thing you can use Google chrome instead which has zero contributors with stances you disagree with... I guess.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- dgellow 2mo agoThat vague posting is a bit frustrating to be honest. Are you talking about the fact they do not accept pull requests? If yes, they had good reasons for doing so, LLMs make it really time consuming and exhausting to manage an open source community, I completely understand why they decided to stop accepting PRs for now
- ecshafer 2mo ago[flagged]
- sirtaj 2mo agoThis is literally what capitalism tells us to do though, isn't it? If you don't like it, don't buy it.
- slowin 2mo agoI don't think "citizens have a right to vote" is anywhere near the realm of ideological purity or "Brooklyn based journalist" thinking. It's literally just democracy. Freedom of speech seems like something Lutke would pretend to like, and him getting torched for his anti-human opinions is a great demonstration of that principle.
- e_outofme 2mo ago> Lutke made a mortal sin of disagreeing on suffrage requirements I think this is a very tame and apologetic and dishonest way to put it. Suffrage and voting is how people have a voice in the future of their democracy. He advocates for a policy that materially removes that right, that say in the future, from those who already have little power. I don’t know how else to emphasize that it’s more than “they disagree a bit with him and now he’s an impure sinner”, it’s more akin to “this rich dude wants to rewrite the rules to give himself more power and us less”, which is a sober assessment of his policy. I think people actively trying to avoid giving him any more money or power is a very understandable reaction to that I think ultimately some parts of ideology are bound to and by the reality we live in, and acknowledging that reality gives a good answer here for when _it seems like_ people freaking out at an “impure idea” - is there a documented harm that we can look at? Many people boycott Elon and his products. Do you raise this same “moral purity” complaint about them? Does it ever go in the other direction? I think technology and how we build it is deeply tied to us as social, communal beings. Tech can be a reflection of our capabilities, our values. Tech shapes our reality in turn. It’s worth thinking about, being critical of, and believing people when they say what they believe
- moralestapia 2mo ago[flagged]
- bluerooibos 2mo agoSeems to have gone full on right-wing fash, similar to DHH. Related post on Reddit from this week which discusses DHH's journey from left to right - https://www.reddit.com/r/rails/comments/1v95spw/what_the_hell_happened_to_dhh_i_did_some_digging/ https://www.reddit.com/r/rails/comments/1v95spw/what_the_hel...
- slowin 2mo agoYep, a lot of toxic investors in this. Not touching it with a ten foot pole and lost a lot of respect for Mitchell. A couple of the other investors: * https://x.com/rauchg/status/1972669025525158031 https://x.com/rauchg/status/1972669025525158031 * https://x.com/search?q=from:lennypruss%20israel&src=typed_query&f=live https://x.com/search?q=from:lennypruss%20israel&src=typed_qu...
- nodesocket 2mo ago[flagged]
- slowin 2mo ago[flagged]
- arvid-lind 2mo agowhy are you bringing your socialist boogeymen into this. what's absurd is that this is somehow louder for you than the real, life-changing actions of the genocidal maniac.
- supern0va 2mo agoYou may be surprised to hear that the famously socialist paulg might also have a problem with this.
- jasonvorhe 2mo agoYuck.
- qmr 2mo agoJust linking to a login nag.
- constantius 2mo agoThanks for surfacing this. As another user says below, Mitchell had more leeway in choosing his investors than most anyone. His is a dispiriting choice.
- efficax 2mo agoVCs tend to be a toxic bunch. Hard to avoid that in our business
- civilchaos 2mo agoin this case mitchell is an exited founder with a net worth of over $1B so he can be choosier than almost anyone in this regard. Deeply disappointing he is taking money from Guillermo
- efficax 2mo agothings look different from Billionaire Island than they do to us plebs down here. it's crazy to expect such people to do the "right" thing, they're too far gone.