they don't require 30 years saved up, only showing (somehow) that you will be able to generate such a pension equivalent over time. I suspect that will be very squishy in practice.
Seriously. That's such a fuzzy number. Why not just say X yen? None of us have a crystal ball to tell us if our investments will make the traditional 8% interest or not.
> Draft Revisions to the Guidelines for Permission for Permanent Residence (Summary)
...
> Regarding the positioning of the "Permanent Resident" status of residence:
> ・ Explicitly stated for the first time that, as it is "the most stable legal status—entailing no restrictions on activities or duration of stay and presupposing a lifetime spent in Japan"—there is a "need for particularly careful screening."
...
> Regarding "2. Requirement for Independent Livelihood"
> ・ Underlying Principle: Explicitly requires an economic status equal to or better than that of Japanese nationals, both currently and in the future.
> ・ Income: Whether income consistently meets or exceeds the average income level of Japanese households based on household size (raising the standard).
> ・ Pension: Whether the projected future pension benefit amount reaches the level corresponding to 30 years of enrollment in the Employees' Pension Insurance at the aforementioned annual income level (newly added requirement; however, financial assets that can cover any shortfall will also be taken into account).
The more welfare you have, the better of an idea this is. An aging country especially cannot afford to risk more wards of the state.
> and have enough money banked to live off of for 30 years
It's a confusing guideline but this isn't accurate. You need to show an expected future pension (could be savings) equivalent to a salaried worker who paid into an employee's pension for 30 years. That's strict, but there will probably be a bunch of ways to show that.
These are just very different things. OAI "hacking" anything isn't OAI telling the US Gov what they can and cannot do with their product. Maybe along all kinds of axes, one is more alarming than the other, but it's a canard in this topic.
>> These are just very different things.OAI "hacking" anything isn't OAI telling the US Gov what they can and cannot do with their product.
OAI hacking the chinese government will definitely raise alarms in DC and will be bad for national security. Just because the country that was hacked (australia) is a weaker one doesn't mean the underlying action is not troubling.
That does not, in itself, suggest they are a supply chain risk. It might label them a national security risk. And you might have your own creative definitions of every word related to supply chains. But we are talking about supply chain risks as the US Gov understands them.
>OAI hacking the chinese government will definitely raise alarms in DC and will be bad for national security.
That seems like it's too easy to abuse as a cudgel for whatever companies you vaguely hate. Is ExxonMobil a "supply chain risk" because the effects of climate change might cause geopolitical ructions in the next decade?
Hate is a pretty strong word here. I don't hate OAI. I am a paying subscriber. All I am saying is maybe its time to switch, show support for Anthropic because it is kinda getting bullied right now and the OAI is not getting enough punishment for their illicit actions. Is it too hard to understand?
I think you're playing dumb on purpose here but in general yes, you are missing out on all the friends and connections and interesting conversations you have not made. I don't know what those are for you, but they're transparently obvious for me in the counterfactual, and a lot of people on the site.
Twitter is far from special. So I guess you're missing out on all the friends and connections and interesting conversations you have not made on Threads, Facebook, Linkedin, instagram, tiktok, reddit, bluesky, mastodon, discord & tumblr.
Also twitter is the worst of all the things I've listed.
There is no world in which it makes sense to take this risk. There are plenty of great alternatives where you don't have to worry about playing russian roulette with your entire online identity.
I'd rather go the other way and entirely decouple my online identity from Google (or Apple/Meta/Microsoft). Much better than constantly worrying about some crappy AI deciding to ruin your life with no recourse.
Google can and will block any linked accounts as well. For some reason I'm not allowed on AdWords. I have tried making new accounts and they always block my ads. I don't know how they figure it out that it's me. Other people on the same wifi have no issues running same ads (for same YouTube videos).
> However, it is a precedent for governments deciding the names of things.
??? that's not true at all
> reminds me a lot of political/nationalist renaming of things like roads which is very common in parts of South Asia
Isn't that very common in... Canada?
Ottawa, Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway -> Kichi Zībī Mīkan (2023)
Winnipeg, Bishop Grandin Boulevard -> Abinojii Mikanah (2023–24)
Halifax, Cornwallis Street -> Nora Bernard Street (2023)
Montreal, Rue Amherst -> Rue Atateken (2019)
Vancouver, Trutch Street -> šxʷməθkʷəy̓əmasəm Street (2025)
Victoria, Trutch Street -> Su'it Street (2022)
Calgary, Langevin Bridge -> Reconciliation Bridge (2017)
It's not like the current US admin is the first in North America to decide to rename things for political reasons.
I have lived in South Asia and have never been to Canada and know little about it.
Are the Canadian examples nationalist? It looks like your first example was first renamed after a politician (which is like South Asia) and then renamed again after a pushback to that (which is not like South Asia)
Yes, this seems to happen a lot in small companies. It seems less inevitable in big ones but it still happens. You would think at a minimum AA would want to hire a journalist or similar simply to shadow him for a year, get him to dictate everything (so that he has to do as little extra effort as possible), and publish a sort-of manual from the accumulated wisdom.
The point of hiring someone specifically to do this is that he might simply want to keep on working, uninterrupted by apprentices or other demands, so the recorder must be a second person dedicated to knowledge maintenance.
> You would think at a minimum AA would want to hire a journalist or similar simply to shadow him for a year, get him to dictate everything (so that he has to do as little extra effort as possible), and publish a sort-of manual from the accumulated wisdom.
This is, pardon the cliche, the exact type of “outside of the box” thinking that is completely impossible in shareholder-driven (or PE-driven) corporate America.
More and more I believe that we associate people with great ideas not because they were exceptionally capable of great thought, but because they managed to impose their ideas upon others through force of will, political chicanery, and sorcery.
reply