Scipitie

Ahhhh ok, verstanden! Danke für die Erklärung!

Sowohl im allerersten Absatz steht, dass das Chaos durch den Nachsendeauftrag ausgelöst wurde und der vorletzte Absatz lautet:

"Ich bin im Begriff, einen weiteren Nachsendeauftrag einzurichten, weil ich morgen nach Bayern ziehe", sagt Julia Meyer (35)

Von daher verstehe ich deine Frage (in dir ich implizit rein gelesen habe, dass mein Kommentar nicht zum Artikel passen würde) nicht.

Edit: oder ging es dir darum, dass das genau das Problem sei? Weil mein Punkt war gegen das "sag allen bescheid" den Punkt zu bringen, dass das echt viel Arbeit bis unmöglich ist, je nach Behörden und Firmen Situationen - ich wollte nicht sagen, dass das die Lösung sei.

Nachsendeauftrag.... So ein Teil macht schon Sinn, wenn du nicht alle Menschen und Firmen abklappern willst :)

I agree so much that a simple upvote would be insufficient! That's the sole purpose of this comment :)

I'd like to invite you to watch V for vendetta. A good actor can do magic even behind a mask!

Edit: I'm not sure how Downey Jr would perform, just want to point out that a mask alone is not a blocker for a great performance.

Oh your description is fitting but the headline is... Well I perceive it as poisonous, especially with the knowledge that headlines are often the only thing being read.

And France has a shitload of jobs!

I bet that even your ass is still on your backside so three of three wrong.

The first link goes into amazing detail on that. In short: all your information concerning location as well as current IP and some other metadata gets send to a basically unknown company with no transparency on how that data is handled.

I highly recommend reading the first, linked post though!

Hey friend,

I want to be very straight forward here in the hope that it'll give you an additional perspective:

The scenario you're describing I'd describe as "make the life of my surrounding as easy as possible when I bite the bullet".

. That does not include making my system or even the home server easy to use or maintain. My interests don't matter in that case only what those people need and would want. In my case: my non tech savvy wife would want to get rid of a big desktop PC but would most likely struggle because I enjoyed using it.

This means:

• For all data there are encrypted files with passwords and/or instructions.
• For all things no one would want there is a "this is how you get rid of it most easily" guide, including "call an electrician for the following recabling to pull out the shellies.
• for the one thing not easily ripped out there is a maintenance guide and a replacement guide (a bus system monster" temporarily" installed due to good reasons).

To be clear: no non tech savvy person I know would want to use my (and I guess your) custom systems. Not one. They'd rather have a "this is the ebay description" or a "this is how you install windows".

Your legacy will find other ways to life on - it won't be your tools and toys though.

Because all data points prove that axiom wrong - if any alternative would've been agreed as "better" than it would be established.

So yes: we do need to reiterate advantages of alternatives when criticizing the status quo - because we're the ones wanting others to invest energy (for their own good but how far did this get us in the past?).

The author of course doesn't have to provide anything. I support OPs point though that the message would be stronger if giving actual examples.

Hast du zufällig eine Quelle für das Zitat? Finde das traurig schön auf den Punkt gebracht.

Kurze Suche hat ganz viel Arbeitsrecht ergeben, aber darum ging es mir gar nicht.

Wieso ist "aufgeben ist kein thema" ohne Analyse ok aber "aufgeben muss" nicht?

Das ist der Teil, den ich nicht verstehe. Die Analysen sind kritisch - und davor darf es keine Filter in irgendeiner Form und Richtung geben. Am Ende ist es eh eine Kalkulation. "Was sind der Gesellschaft die Menschenleben vor Ort wert" vs "was nehmen wir für eine de facto Vertreibung in Kauf"?