The Virtue of our time v.02

I think that we are living in a world of massive regulation of speech (being applied). This limits spontaneity, appreciation of genuine personalities, and efficiency/effectiveness of communications. 

Again I'm talking about innuendos. Because it is spiraling out of control already, every negative meaning that could be (unreasonably) derived out of your words will be considered valid. No matter what the grammar, no matter what your true intentions, it doesn't matter... what matters are, I mean the one who's going to be prioritized are, offended people. 

Can't you see that we are catering for being offended?

You said something, a generalization, just for the sake of making a point... then other people took it differently and did something bad. The current trend is to held you responsible. This would not happen if we refuse to care for innuendos. 

So I ask you whoever you are, please consider this... be spontaneous, don't give a care. If you were to express something, the first way of saying it that came out of your mind, just say it the way it is. I'm telling you no matter what it is IT WILL BE offensive. Why? because the world has gone mad. So it is virtuous for us to push back like that. Just keep on being offensive "accidentally", don't do it maliciously though. 

It is not your responsibility of other people's behaviors and feelings when you were just being honest/genuine, especially if the limitations are not well defined/articulated. 

And if people held other people responsible for offensive things that were "interpreted", realize that in the world of lies, the Truth is offensive. If you're offended by the "interpretation" of something, that was Truthful, then it is your mind that is doing that, as much as other people would think the same way... as much as the speaker would know that that would be the case, it is your realm of self control not others'

Do you even know what is going on in someone's mind when he/she uttered something liable to "interpretations?", why restrict the freedom of expression in your environment? why insult the complexity of human's thoughts by imposing dumbed down standardization of meanings? (and the standard was so dumb articulating it would be a disaster of justice). If a mob had an objection of what could be an innuendo of something, then the mob should ask for confirmations, if the mob decided not to ask and be collectively offended nonetheless, don't shift the responsibility to the utterer. It is an unnecessary restriction that's spiraling out of control, making things worse and worse for our relationships. 

STOP

----------------------------------------

Justice is always number one in human relationship, how do I came up with these things? From which a$% did I pull these thoughts from? My sense of Justice... being many doesn't make you as a collective, the embodiment of Justice.

Why is no one calling this out? v.04

Why no one competes with IFRS? Why?

No one can be acknowledged as an auditor if not because of them? That is too much power don't you think? Like a pile of sugar on the ground with ants just passing by

Audit is a human thing, no one gets to be human (officially) if not acknowledged by them?

I'm not saying they are bad people, I'm saying the situation is hen(変) big time. 

XBRL accommodates the integration of multiple standards, we should have multiple standards, multiple point of views... why are we no competing with IFRS?

--------------

CPA I meant the CPA for Auditors, I don't know why it slipped like that out of my thoughts. But yeah the certification business is a monopoly, even though they are just "organization" as if it is distinct from "businesses", they monopolize and monetize.

Why are we not competing with these organizations? Not blaming them but a working formula is hard to renew even though there might be others that are as good. And we are poorer as the harder and the harder those are to transform. 

Picture this, if we had multiple standards, open source databases of ways they were translated to each other around the world, and an application that enabled us to project them into our financial statements... wouldn't that be such a powerful way to assess a financial statement?

With only one audited standard, we could click, click, click, to see possible different versions of it. If we were to compare between different financial statements, we could do the same as well. Read between the versions instead of just take one standard at its face value. Haven't we already doing that for the secondary market share prices analysis? Why can't we do that for financial statements as well?

Personally I wouldn't value the variations' presentations to be inferior to those results produced by a single monopoly system.

--------------

So lets say a standard regulate that this industry should use the weighted average method for their inventory instead of LIFO, and another standard said that any methods are fine. Based on open information on how the other standard usually would differ from the current standard, for the type of industry, the software could simulate possible variations of the figures in the current financial statement.

At first you would need data from expert auditors of both standards to fill the database. Then when the database was good enough, the easier it would be to perform the translations. After that it would be quite seamless for all auditors to produce electronic financial statements that are dynamic and accommodates different standards. 

If we could reach that stage, from there on, users then could start to reliably click between standards for electronic financial statements analysis. To compare between industry, to create projections and compare the results, to learn or research the power of predictions of the different interpretations, preferred interpretations between different types of users as well as the usage, and wiser decision making by the respective company management.

We need different standards, we need different point of views. When we are dealing with many variables, confusion is more intuitive than certainty. 

Male Priviledges

Male are Monsters, Female are Chemists

When we crossed the line, we could destroy important delicate assets making things worse for other people. 

When the chemists crossed the line, she could drugged another person into abandoning their reason and senses of Justice, making it worse for other people. 

But the modern society is always ready to correct us from our Monster. That's our privilege