Melki Hassa's Blog

When a couple broke up, or there were "casual" relationships happening in the workplace, arguments or disagreements now it's harder to settle with setting up space between the people, there's got to be hierarchy. Contrast this to a person who's not involved, differences in opinion is to be expected and discussed, negotiated. By expected it means that it should be enough and the problem usually settles, so it is kind of sus that when such solutions wouldn't work anymore why is that the case?  Non meritocratic hierarchy as well makes things more difficult to pass... why? Am I right, or it's just me? Frictions that supposed to be normal and respected now becomes "betrayal" why so intense bro? When it had became a culture, hive culture, those who are not involved themselves got to be expected the same out of them... they'd be like we didn't sign up for this. ---------------------- Additional feature of the hive is that it could be a sanctuary

In my previous post I feel like some people are going to assosiate it with the internal issues in Indonesia because I'm a Chinese Indonesian. Could a gay man talk about a guy in the context of the topic only without being assosiated with his gayness? Could a person with a gunshot wound talk about guns without it being associated with his wounds? It's possible that people would want to do that. Could we have that in the world please? (Because obviously everything has its own context especially things that are intense needs its own context to be put in perspective. You can't steal from another context and then decide what other people are saying, idiots, and why do I have to take responsibility to talk about something in context just because I talked about something else? who gave me money to talk about your agenda? not you) All in all the culture of innuendo needs to stop. It's as if people spraying oil everywhere and one day somebody is going to light up a match for a c

Not being in the law, as if having money but just a paper, land certificate but by words of mouth, marriage certificates but mere romantic promises.  So is it really the lack of salaries that defines the whole slavery? Or is it the lack of order of freedom that opens up paths to consensus? Because these companies are actually exerting an effort to reach out, unlike other companies. Some of them are greatly immoral and irresponsible, but are they the representation of what's actually happening? These "slaves" are given chances and jobs.  Then through the cheapness of prices, haven't we opened up new kinds of jobs for ourselves? I'm not saying it is flawless but globalization is opening up new dynamics where the devastation of another place is being dispersed to another place. We must approach our conclusions with discretion, is it really the low salaries that's causing all of this? Or is it the tapping into the dire circumstances of other parts of realities? Pr

All of my contents are monetizable exclusively for me, for my own interests. In the event of my death no other exclusive monetization is allowed, all of my contents should be monetizable by everybody after my death. Terms that I've made still applies, don't get me wrong, including open source or similar because they were made to serve my interests.  However the future is beyond me, therefore people should not own my contents exclusively after my death (including such license that would be called "open source" then but had exclusive ownership clauses or made such).

Technology is born out of acknowledging and correcting mistakes. Being a child means something like this, even though children hate it when they're wrong, their world is full of mistakes and they're adjusting it all the time. So that's where we are still not getting it yet, the catalyst is to keep away the "political" image as if mistakes are not part of the equation for a "decent" person.  You have to always budget for mistakes.  Such political campaigns have gotten too far to the point where people expected it out of public figures and even their business partners. Albeit corruption is abusing that budget but so is the case for everything else that's corrupted. We should stop this stupid image that mistakes are not to be budgeted out of people, and start embracing new technologies

The scarcity of the world is not of time nor energy nor money but of mutual solutions. Solutions are unlimited but we are so limited because we are not giving back enough to our sources of solutions.  People make gangs and groups in order to secure resources, that's ok but we want to distinguisih the grain from the parasitic weeds. Let's acknowledge that the best kind of prosperity is when inventors could come together and make things better, at the same time exclusively obtained their rewards without being stolen or robbed. Gangs or groups are liable for non-inventors to get rewards as well and that's an incentive to break apart inventors from one another. These non-inventors could actually be people who are working together behind the scenes to keep inventors apart from each other, so that there's always excuses to get something out of royalties or what meant to be proper rewards.  Divide and conquer? Yes but the "conquer" is in a form of self sabotage as we

 I'm just going to get to the point: CPA if compared to medical doctors is a person who mastered all specializations and could recreated the whole body altogether. So he's an expert neurosurgeon, expert oncologist, expert eye surgeon, expert internist, etc. Accountants who work specifically in procurements, or salaries and taxes, taxes, sales, treasury, etc are like the specialists and there's the intern who's more like a GP.  Of course they are much less complicated and less stake to deal with compared to the medicine counterparts but as the time goes on the gap is getting closer and closer in different parts of the world / contexts. Pay attention to the distribution as well, the magnitude of responsibility that a CPA must take is much more closer towards that analogy compared to the gap between the lesser more simple encapsulations. So the distribution of responsibility here is getting skewed more heavily for the higher level accountants.  IASB in my opinion wants to

The Truth is the protocol that everything follows, therefore the True past is the past that is rendered exclusively using the Truth. Outside of the Truth is not the Truth therefore the past that's rendered with hybrid protocols is not holy (if it's represented as the True Truth).