What is going on in Argentina?(memoirsandrambles.substack.com)
memoirsandrambles.substack.com
What is going on in Argentina?
https://memoirsandrambles.substack.com/p/what-the-fuck-is-going-on-in-argentina
183 comments
I did this with my sister who was digital nomading in Argentina a few months ago. The easiest thing we found was for me to send her $3k via western union, which converted into an ungodly amount of pesos she picked up down there.
It was super sketchy. When I sent the money, the western union person said there was a chance western union would block it because it was such a large amount, but luckily it went through. When my sister picked it up, they basically stuffed it into a backpack to carry around. Seemed very dangerous to be carrying that much cash (even in the US it would be), but it worked out ok.
It was super sketchy. When I sent the money, the western union person said there was a chance western union would block it because it was such a large amount, but luckily it went through. When my sister picked it up, they basically stuffed it into a backpack to carry around. Seemed very dangerous to be carrying that much cash (even in the US it would be), but it worked out ok.
Yep, western union do tend to have a long kyc check after your first transfer I think. Which can delay things a few days. But after that I never really had a problem. I never heard of anyone getting their transaction completely blocked though.
Argentina has been like this for a very long time. I studied abroad there in 2019 and it was exactly the same. I believe one of the reasons Brian Armstrong started Coinbase was because he saw how devastating inflation was to Argentina’s economy. Argentina was at one point a top 20 country in the world wealth wise and has obviously gone very down hill. It’s too bad, a lot of talented tech workers there.
Argentina didn't really go down hill.
Constant GDP per capita is up ~50% from 1960: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NYGDPPCAPKDARG
The GDP of the rest of the world went up a lot more than that [1] - and Argentina never did anything besides have decent weather and a roughly constant amount of fertile land.
It's kind of like a Dutch Disease: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_disease
[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=eMGt
Constant GDP per capita is up ~50% from 1960: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NYGDPPCAPKDARG
The GDP of the rest of the world went up a lot more than that [1] - and Argentina never did anything besides have decent weather and a roughly constant amount of fertile land.
It's kind of like a Dutch Disease: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_disease
[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=eMGt
People didn't really need smartphones, laptops and even personal cars in 1960s in Argentine. I believe they generated that GDP while being mostly rural, where it translates to a lot of amenities.
Now they would usually be cramped in a city where the effective cost of living is much greater (leading to villas), whereas their GDP and thus income didn't grow much.
Now they would usually be cramped in a city where the effective cost of living is much greater (leading to villas), whereas their GDP and thus income didn't grow much.
70-80%+ of the population was already living in urban areas in the 60s though.
Perhaps we've spotted a case for sloggy Argentinean growth, since the country doesn't strike me as being an industrial giant or a R&D hub - what would they all do living in urban areas?
?? Urban areas are just the default for the 20th century, let alone the 21st.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Argentina is surprisingly comprehensive. The sidebar has agriculture at 7% of the economy. The place is not without industry, it's just making and selling things at ""wrong"" prices because of the currency issue, which in turn comes from the balance of payments issue. There's clearly substantial local commerce, just not quite enough export.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Argentina is surprisingly comprehensive. The sidebar has agriculture at 7% of the economy. The place is not without industry, it's just making and selling things at ""wrong"" prices because of the currency issue, which in turn comes from the balance of payments issue. There's clearly substantial local commerce, just not quite enough export.
What % of exports, though, and what % of exports to the countries outside of the region (i.e. the globally competitive industries)?
Even by world standards, 70-80% of urbanization in the 60s and 92% now is quite a lot. Especially a lot for a country which mostly exports agricultural produce. Without checking, I would expect it to be 50% in the 60s and 70-80% today.
Even by world standards, 70-80% of urbanization in the 60s and 92% now is quite a lot. Especially a lot for a country which mostly exports agricultural produce. Without checking, I would expect it to be 50% in the 60s and 70-80% today.
A huge portion of the population in the cities doesn't do anything, quite literally living on the government budget.
Hence why the poverty rate near instantly skyrocketed after the huge cuts to government spending recently.
Hence why the poverty rate near instantly skyrocketed after the huge cuts to government spending recently.
2 small pieces of anecdotes
1) I used to work in a very large IT group in Latin America, and I worked with some EngManagers who hired and managed some folks in Argentina. One interesting dynamic was due to the inflation, we used to give to folks 'monthly' salary increases to offset. Since the company captured the inflation also in the prices, for a long time offer that offset with a small plus was a very huge retention factor for us;
2) After 2015/6, our IT director started to give 1 Bitcoin or USD 500 equivalent in Bitcoin for our argentine colleagues as part of their monthly salary, and eventually those guys ended up holding or selling it with more than 10x over it.
1) I used to work in a very large IT group in Latin America, and I worked with some EngManagers who hired and managed some folks in Argentina. One interesting dynamic was due to the inflation, we used to give to folks 'monthly' salary increases to offset. Since the company captured the inflation also in the prices, for a long time offer that offset with a small plus was a very huge retention factor for us;
2) After 2015/6, our IT director started to give 1 Bitcoin or USD 500 equivalent in Bitcoin for our argentine colleagues as part of their monthly salary, and eventually those guys ended up holding or selling it with more than 10x over it.
Inflation is a symptom, not the cause.
Not sure how Argentinians are supposed to do better using cryptocurrencies.
Not sure how Argentinians are supposed to do better using cryptocurrencies.
There is no federal agency or corporation that can inflate Bitcoin like Argentina's central bank has been doing. This is the major cause of inflation.
Currency was inflated to avoid defaulting on payments on debt.
So again, this is really a symptom of a deeper problem.
So again, this is really a symptom of a deeper problem.
Regardless, you can't print more Bitcoin.
With regards to out of control spending, I think Milei is trying to get that under control. No idea if it'll work though.
With regards to out of control spending, I think Milei is trying to get that under control. No idea if it'll work though.
People are usually being hurt harder by deflation than by inflation though, and it's demonstrably the best way to get overthrown (which usually doesn't happen with inflation) by a lunatic dictator. (Weimar Republic gets a bad rap for its hyperinflation period, but it survived it, and in the end that's Brüning's *deflation* in 1930-32 that caused the eventual demise of the republic and the birth of the 3rd Reich).
The kind of intermediate-level inflation (not tour typical inflation, but also not hyperinflation) that exists in Argentina (or Turkey for that matter) is typically caused by governments addressing underlying problems by driving inflation up (it's not an unintended consequence of poor monetary policy, they aren't oblivious). Sure it's not nice, but the problem is: how do you solve the underlying problem anyway. If you just say “I'm gonna play the "strong money" card no matter what” you're not solving the problem, you're tying your own hands and now you have two problems.
Be careful what you wish for.
The kind of intermediate-level inflation (not tour typical inflation, but also not hyperinflation) that exists in Argentina (or Turkey for that matter) is typically caused by governments addressing underlying problems by driving inflation up (it's not an unintended consequence of poor monetary policy, they aren't oblivious). Sure it's not nice, but the problem is: how do you solve the underlying problem anyway. If you just say “I'm gonna play the "strong money" card no matter what” you're not solving the problem, you're tying your own hands and now you have two problems.
Be careful what you wish for.
Agreed that deflation is scary and things can spiral out of control.
Just hyperinflating forever though seems to just be making the pop of the bubble that much worse.
Just hyperinflating forever though seems to just be making the pop of the bubble that much worse.
You can however still default on debt in Bitcoin. I wonder how that's supposed to work.
Well, at least you can save and not be in the need to spend your money soon, as it then devalues quickly, which helps to stop inflation :D
They could just search € or USD, which they do :D But the government used to have a cap of 200$ per person and month to exchange (not sure if that still happens now with Milei)
They could just search € or USD, which they do :D But the government used to have a cap of 200$ per person and month to exchange (not sure if that still happens now with Milei)
The inflation is still a symptom of the balance of payments problem. What cryptocurrency lets you do is evade the capital controls and get closer to dollar-referenced currency.
On the whole income be significantly lower because the state couldn't afford to pay them as much (or at all) anymore.
They'd be better off holding literally any _other_ currency. US dollars are hard to get in large quantities, and you'd be stuck holding a lot of cash. Bitcoin (or any crypto currency, BTC isn't unique here) is just easier to buy and hold as a hedge against inflation
I've never seen issues with obtaining any required quantity of physical US dollars cash, and that includes 2022 Russia.
Been there in 2014 with a group of friends. We ran out of cash. I took the ferry to Uruguay with 4 credit cards and for a day each 2 hours draw the max sum the ATM let me. Returned with 4k dollars in my pockets. Not before I bought something to smoke and smoked a big doobie on the beach in the sunset. God, I miss this muchileros life.
The Crystal language was written by gauchos!
So was Godot, the open source gaming engine.
I submitted a transcript from Javier Milei's address at the 54th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, which I think explains a bit about what is happening, and what is about to happen, from the eyes of the newly elected president who has pretty strong and "out of the ordinary" opinions and ideas.
It got some upvotes, but sadly no discussions at all. Highly relevant when discussing Argentina at the moment though, but keep in mind this is just one extreme perspective, one side of the coin so to say: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39436291 (https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/javiermileiworldec...)
It got some upvotes, but sadly no discussions at all. Highly relevant when discussing Argentina at the moment though, but keep in mind this is just one extreme perspective, one side of the coin so to say: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39436291 (https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/javiermileiworldec...)
I don't think it's that extreme of a perspective. I'm surprised that the perspective he's speaking against, which when implemented reliably causes citizen impoverishment and death should be spoken about more in those terms, I think.
Perhaps, if you have never been to the West - the object of Milei's criticism - it is possible to believe that it is a world where people are impoverished and dying through evil collectivists providing welfare states. For everyone else, that's a perspective as extreme as his chainsaw stunts.
Milei's bark is likely to prove more extreme than his bite, of course. He's already pointedly not abolishing the central bank and quietly mending relations with China.
Milei's bark is likely to prove more extreme than his bite, of course. He's already pointedly not abolishing the central bank and quietly mending relations with China.
> where people are impoverished and dying through evil collectivists providing welfare states
Your perspective is too non-collectivism skewed. The West is a mish-mash, but it's the bastion of economic liberalism and capitalism. Those are so effective that they can pay for all sorts of social policies without affecting the productivity too much of the people making the money.
You should be thinking about the millions starved and killed in China or Russia or now Argentina when you think of the problems of collectivism. Thinking of somewhere like Sweden as a collectivist paradise is wrong - there are plenty of billionaires there. It's easy to pay for "free" stuff when there's plenty to go round, and the plenty is generally not provided by a collectivist state.
There are plenty of people who think that eating the rich would pay for everything. They think billionaires actually have yearly billions in cash to pay for social entitlements, rather than one-off ownership of valuable companies. That's the worry that's being discussed.
Your perspective is too non-collectivism skewed. The West is a mish-mash, but it's the bastion of economic liberalism and capitalism. Those are so effective that they can pay for all sorts of social policies without affecting the productivity too much of the people making the money.
You should be thinking about the millions starved and killed in China or Russia or now Argentina when you think of the problems of collectivism. Thinking of somewhere like Sweden as a collectivist paradise is wrong - there are plenty of billionaires there. It's easy to pay for "free" stuff when there's plenty to go round, and the plenty is generally not provided by a collectivist state.
There are plenty of people who think that eating the rich would pay for everything. They think billionaires actually have yearly billions in cash to pay for social entitlements, rather than one-off ownership of valuable companies. That's the worry that's being discussed.
No, my perspective is based on actually reading the actual words of his actual speech which includes lines like "the main leaders of the Western world have abandoned the model of freedom for different versions of what we call collectivism".
He explicitly isn't saying anything about the Holodomor or the Great Leap Forward, and he is criticising the leaders of the United States, the EU, the UK and Sweden for being too "collectivist" (and suggesting that neoclassical economics is insufficiently supportive of capitalism because it concedes market distribution might not always be perfect!)
The world doesn't lack defences of capitalism or criticisms of the USSR and Latin American socialism, nuanced and otherwise. But the perspective of equating the policy stance of the Biden or Macron or Sunak administration on welfare and regulation with Stalinism or Maoism or even Chavismo is the definition of extremism, and not even high-quality, evidence-based extremism.
He explicitly isn't saying anything about the Holodomor or the Great Leap Forward, and he is criticising the leaders of the United States, the EU, the UK and Sweden for being too "collectivist" (and suggesting that neoclassical economics is insufficiently supportive of capitalism because it concedes market distribution might not always be perfect!)
The world doesn't lack defences of capitalism or criticisms of the USSR and Latin American socialism, nuanced and otherwise. But the perspective of equating the policy stance of the Biden or Macron or Sunak administration on welfare and regulation with Stalinism or Maoism or even Chavismo is the definition of extremism, and not even high-quality, evidence-based extremism.
Exactly!
We are driving our future off a cliff by allowing collectivism to return over libertarianism.
For example his perspective would be very consistent with the perspectives of the founding fathers of the United States. The Founding Fathers would have widely agreed with the speech’s support for free-market capitalism and its critique of collectivism, socialism, and excessive state intervention. Advocating principles that promote economic freedom and prosperity would resonate with them as a reflection of their own efforts to create a government that promotes individual liberty and economic opportunity. celebration of the entrepreneur as a hero of prosperity and its warning against state overreach would likely find broad support among the Founding Fathers. They were, after all, establishing a new nation built on principles of liberty, property rights, and opposition to tyranny. The speech’s call for economic freedom and limited government intervention mirrors the Founding Fathers’ debates on the proper role and size of government. Many of the Founding Fathers, like Alexander Hamilton, would likely support the speech’s endorsement of free-market capitalism. The emphasis on economic freedom and the role of free enterprise in lifting people out of poverty would resonate with his and similar Founders’ views on economic development.
Yet somehow this is generally considered the majority opinion today of his speech:
> has pretty strong and "out of the ordinary" opinions and ideas
We are driving our future off a cliff by allowing collectivism to return over libertarianism.
For example his perspective would be very consistent with the perspectives of the founding fathers of the United States. The Founding Fathers would have widely agreed with the speech’s support for free-market capitalism and its critique of collectivism, socialism, and excessive state intervention. Advocating principles that promote economic freedom and prosperity would resonate with them as a reflection of their own efforts to create a government that promotes individual liberty and economic opportunity. celebration of the entrepreneur as a hero of prosperity and its warning against state overreach would likely find broad support among the Founding Fathers. They were, after all, establishing a new nation built on principles of liberty, property rights, and opposition to tyranny. The speech’s call for economic freedom and limited government intervention mirrors the Founding Fathers’ debates on the proper role and size of government. Many of the Founding Fathers, like Alexander Hamilton, would likely support the speech’s endorsement of free-market capitalism. The emphasis on economic freedom and the role of free enterprise in lifting people out of poverty would resonate with his and similar Founders’ views on economic development.
Yet somehow this is generally considered the majority opinion today of his speech:
> has pretty strong and "out of the ordinary" opinions and ideas
That whole debate wouldn't have made sense to the founding fathers. Yes they were liberals, but "capitalism" wasn't coined until the 19th century.
Milei is quite extreme when he claims that markets can't fail. He's trying to move Argentina in the right direction. I would have voted for him. But that's an extreme claim and is rejected by most economists.
Milei is quite extreme when he claims that markets can't fail. He's trying to move Argentina in the right direction. I would have voted for him. But that's an extreme claim and is rejected by most economists.
I respectfully disagree in that perhaps some vocabulary would need altering to use words they were more familiar with, but free markets and free enterprise, along with property rights and low taxation was exactly their founding perspective.
Regarding “most economists” it would depend on how broad you allow the claim of being an economist is a valid one. We have literal socialist and marxists claiming to be economists. That’s as absurd as creationists claiming to be evolutionarily biologists. Those are perspectives that are empirically proven to be rubbish yet due to human instinctual biases persist for long periods of time. Eventually collectivism, socialism, and marxism should be banished to the gutters of history, the only question is how much more pain and suffering will it take before human civilization decides to include proper social and economic science as part of core education curriculum, like evolution is taught in most places today.
Regarding “most economists” it would depend on how broad you allow the claim of being an economist is a valid one. We have literal socialist and marxists claiming to be economists. That’s as absurd as creationists claiming to be evolutionarily biologists. Those are perspectives that are empirically proven to be rubbish yet due to human instinctual biases persist for long periods of time. Eventually collectivism, socialism, and marxism should be banished to the gutters of history, the only question is how much more pain and suffering will it take before human civilization decides to include proper social and economic science as part of core education curriculum, like evolution is taught in most places today.
You're ranting about marxists...but the question is whether markets can fail. Milei says no. But there are plenty of examples of markets failing so, if we take that idea seriously, it reduces to something like "free markets have never been tried". What does that remind you of?
Please provide the examples of market failures and I suspect on closer examination you will discover State failure, not market failures.
The speed with which you moved from dissenters-from-economic-orthodoxy-are-creationists to rejecting the possibility of imperfect information, transaction costs or natural monopolies for not confirming to the dogma that the market is always right is truly impressive...
Monopolies are legitimately debatable topic for government intervention.
However what is the reason governments should be involved in imperfect information or transaction costs?
Please provide specific market failures.
Additionally creationists is the perfect analogy for collectivists, socialist and marxists, their ideas require magic fairy dust to have any chance of working.
However what is the reason governments should be involved in imperfect information or transaction costs?
Please provide specific market failures.
Additionally creationists is the perfect analogy for collectivists, socialist and marxists, their ideas require magic fairy dust to have any chance of working.
Government isn't involved in imperfect information or transaction costs: responsibility for those failures of the market delivering suboptimal results lie entirely with the market participants. Obvious examples include the highly profitable sale of products that avoid the R&D overhead and additional manufacturing expense to actually do what they claim to do, and the inability of various disparate individuals each receiving small negative side effects to their health to coordinate to stop a local polluter even if a tort system for restitution (a government intervention!) actually exists.
Creationism is also the perfect analogy for people who either are ignorant of or deny basically anything past the first page of an economics textbook in favour of the dogma that if markets fail to deliver optimal results it must be the fault of state intervention. Much like Marxism, the economics of Mises needs a lot of fairy dust
Creationism is also the perfect analogy for people who either are ignorant of or deny basically anything past the first page of an economics textbook in favour of the dogma that if markets fail to deliver optimal results it must be the fault of state intervention. Much like Marxism, the economics of Mises needs a lot of fairy dust
It’s always so confusing when anti-markets debaters bring up pollution and product safety, because it’s like the only thing libertarians actually agree with them on. We absolutely believe the primary role of the government is to protect shared rights like the environment and health of products sold. What libertarian capitalist don’t want is redistribution and confiscation.
It's even more confusing when libertarians decide a few days after insisting that there was no such thing as a market failure that the canonical examples of market failures are actually something they strongly believe the government must step in to regulate because the market can't do it...
(I imagine the libertarians campaigning to abolish government involvement in product and environmental regulation would also be confused by the insistence they absolutely believe that the role of the government is to protect the environment and regulate products. Next minute you'll be telling me poor people deserve medical treatment!)
(I imagine the libertarians campaigning to abolish government involvement in product and environmental regulation would also be confused by the insistence they absolutely believe that the role of the government is to protect the environment and regulate products. Next minute you'll be telling me poor people deserve medical treatment!)
I don't see how that's a market failure.
Everything depends on infrastructure that releases a lot of carbon into the atmosphere: oil, cars, beef farming, etc. This is despite the fact that climate change is exacerbated by releasing carbon. No individual or company wants to be at a disadvantage by not using these things, so no one stops. It's a tragedy of the commons situation. It's only through government regulation and investment into cleaner energy that allowed the alternatives to become viable in the market.
> You're ranting
There's no need for this. Marxism seems to be a re-growing school of thought, taking various angles in modern society and culture. No ranting has happened, and your mischaracterisation of things is revealing.
There's no need for this. Marxism seems to be a re-growing school of thought, taking various angles in modern society and culture. No ranting has happened, and your mischaracterisation of things is revealing.
I’d like to mention an interesting phenomenon on HN as you might notice it as well.
When I make a pro-libertarian comment I’ll initially get many upvotes, I know this because I refresh HN periodically and so I notice my points go up.
Then many hours or even days later I’ll be downvoted heavily and even go negative. I’m not sure what to make of it tbh.
Wanted to mention it because now your comment is faded which I think means negative feedback.
How this is relevant in general is that I find it disappointing that the tech community in general somehow has a very poor education in economic history and in particular seems to not be aware of the tragic consequences of collectivist and socialist policies. Which is clearly an indicator of problem within the education system.
When I make a pro-libertarian comment I’ll initially get many upvotes, I know this because I refresh HN periodically and so I notice my points go up.
Then many hours or even days later I’ll be downvoted heavily and even go negative. I’m not sure what to make of it tbh.
Wanted to mention it because now your comment is faded which I think means negative feedback.
How this is relevant in general is that I find it disappointing that the tech community in general somehow has a very poor education in economic history and in particular seems to not be aware of the tragic consequences of collectivist and socialist policies. Which is clearly an indicator of problem within the education system.
That's interesting. It's only at -1 at time of writing this comment.
But yes, I think there is a set of people - who you can spot by their vocabulary - who think that sawing off the root of the branch that causes us to even be able to develop the advances that we have.
But yes, I think there is a set of people - who you can spot by their vocabulary - who think that sawing off the root of the branch that causes us to even be able to develop the advances that we have.
> I think explains a bit about what is happening, and what is about to happen
There is a lot of distance between promising economic changes and getting a positive outcome. His path seems to include a lot of reducing income to the government, privatization of government services and shuttering government branches that promote sciences, etc.
I think he wants to recreate Alabama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Javier_...
There is a lot of distance between promising economic changes and getting a positive outcome. His path seems to include a lot of reducing income to the government, privatization of government services and shuttering government branches that promote sciences, etc.
I think he wants to recreate Alabama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Javier_...
I'm sure a lot of Argentinians would love to live in a place as stable and prosperous as Alabama.
I'd agree that Alabama can't thwart all of the prosperity it gains from being one of the weakest components of the largest economy in history. Without that massive, continuous boost, it seems difficult to imagine AL rising to even the worst assumptions of Argentina.
Compare the inflation rates between Alabama and Argentina. Alabama is significantly better. Compare the GDP per capita. Oh that is right, Alabama is better. Is there any spot where Argentina is more stable or prosperous than Alabama?
Sure. Because even as the ~weakest part of the US, it's still part of the US and gets to ride that tide.
Fully severed and deprived of any US privilege, it's leadership could quickly face any number of newsworthy options like mass die offs due to minimal health care and low vaccination rates, being overthrown by a Latin / South American interest or dying in a bloody coup because they couldn't muster enough resources to complete their 10000 Sweltering Gulags plan fast enough.
Fully severed and deprived of any US privilege, it's leadership could quickly face any number of newsworthy options like mass die offs due to minimal health care and low vaccination rates, being overthrown by a Latin / South American interest or dying in a bloody coup because they couldn't muster enough resources to complete their 10000 Sweltering Gulags plan fast enough.
Do you have any proof to anything you said? It just sounds like you hate the people of Alabama and are fantasizing about how dystopian it would be more than anything based in reality.
I go on about leadership and you instead construe that I have disdain for the people. That's an interesting substitution to make.
Who elected the leadership?
Interestingly Cowen and Tabarrok follow this topic closely on Marginal Revolution. also some interesting insights in the comments section there, which is mostly economics-oriented.
https://marginalrevolution.com/?s=Argentina
(advise: skip all other random talk about AI, LLMs and ML stuff, you may easily get outraged)
https://marginalrevolution.com/?s=Argentina
(advise: skip all other random talk about AI, LLMs and ML stuff, you may easily get outraged)
This speech has no legs to stand on. His key premise conflates the industrial revolution with a special definition of capitalism. Which for his ideology has perfect price discovery and a world where no large corporations collude with other. His main course is your usual slab of blaming socialism, sprinkled with side blame at feminists and environmentalists.
I don't see anything worth reading here. It is deceptive with intent and fundamentally unhinged.
I don't see anything worth reading here. It is deceptive with intent and fundamentally unhinged.
I don't necessarily agree or disagree with Milei, I think my understand of the space and the country is too low to be able to do so.
But I disagree with "I don't see anything worth reading here", even if it's unhinged and you fundamentally disagree with their point of view.
He is the democratically elected president of a country in despair, and trying to understand what will happen to the country requires understanding the motivations behind the actions, which are laid bare in his speech, no matter how factual his points are.
But I disagree with "I don't see anything worth reading here", even if it's unhinged and you fundamentally disagree with their point of view.
He is the democratically elected president of a country in despair, and trying to understand what will happen to the country requires understanding the motivations behind the actions, which are laid bare in his speech, no matter how factual his points are.
I half agree. It is helpful up to a point to know what demogogues might be hatching. But I don't agree that his words describe the actual sources of Argentine despair, even among those who voted for him.
thanks, this is great
They elected a freakin' maniac and they're gonna pay a heavy price for that.
In Brazil we have a saying "pior que tá não fica", which translates to something like "it cannot get worse than this". Belive me when I say this: it can (and probably will) get worse. It can (and probably will) get SO MUCH worse.
We tasted this poison with 4 years of Bolsonaro trying to get away from the establishment. What did we get in return? 700k brazilians died to COVID, we now have a huge anti-vax problem and after the piece of shit lost the election he attempted a COUP. Luckily he's going to jail on the next few months, but the damage is done.
In Brazil we have a saying "pior que tá não fica", which translates to something like "it cannot get worse than this". Belive me when I say this: it can (and probably will) get worse. It can (and probably will) get SO MUCH worse.
We tasted this poison with 4 years of Bolsonaro trying to get away from the establishment. What did we get in return? 700k brazilians died to COVID, we now have a huge anti-vax problem and after the piece of shit lost the election he attempted a COUP. Luckily he's going to jail on the next few months, but the damage is done.
Also unlike here in Brazil, from some interviews I felt like all (ok, most) argentinians were rooting that Milei's measures have a positive impact, even people that didn't vote for him. That did strike me as a very mature position.
> That did strike me as a very mature position.
Perhaps. But it might not be the kind of maturity that comes from 40 years of witnessing what politician promises are worth.
There are never politicians that ought to be adored.
Perhaps. But it might not be the kind of maturity that comes from 40 years of witnessing what politician promises are worth.
There are never politicians that ought to be adored.
The alternative was the economy minister largely responsible of how we got to where we are now. Minister of a president who basically said "you know what I'm out" in 2022 and basically gave the government to said minister.
> The alternative was the economy minister largely responsible of how we got to where we are now.
That's the problem though. It's completely understandable to vote against that. But to have one option to the status quo, and that option is this?
It's basically like you have lived beyond your means for a long while and you live in a too big house and the sensible solution might be to get another job, sell the car and move to a smaller place. But see that choice doesn't exist. Your choice is to keep aggregating debt, OR you burn the house down and live in a tent.
The problem with very bitter medicine like this is that it risks swinging back the other way just as fast when people become angry enough.
That's the problem though. It's completely understandable to vote against that. But to have one option to the status quo, and that option is this?
It's basically like you have lived beyond your means for a long while and you live in a too big house and the sensible solution might be to get another job, sell the car and move to a smaller place. But see that choice doesn't exist. Your choice is to keep aggregating debt, OR you burn the house down and live in a tent.
The problem with very bitter medicine like this is that it risks swinging back the other way just as fast when people become angry enough.
[deleted]
> They elected a freakin' maniac and they're gonna pay a heavy price for that
LMAO like the previous twenty years didn't exist eh?
Signed: an Argentinian
LMAO like the previous twenty years didn't exist eh?
Signed: an Argentinian
"700k brazilians died to COVID, we now have a huge anti-vax problem"
That sounds like a common world problem, not anything specifically Brazilian. In my country of 11 million (including Ukrainian refugees), we've had 45 thousand deaths. And anywhere where people frequent Facebook, the anti-vax movement thrives. It is not even specifically far-right, a lot of the crowd belongs to the organic green bio-mom milieu. I can't even begin to count all the middle-aged ladies in colourful ethnic clothing who hate vaccines based on very flimsy arguments.
The coup thing is fairly unique, though.
That sounds like a common world problem, not anything specifically Brazilian. In my country of 11 million (including Ukrainian refugees), we've had 45 thousand deaths. And anywhere where people frequent Facebook, the anti-vax movement thrives. It is not even specifically far-right, a lot of the crowd belongs to the organic green bio-mom milieu. I can't even begin to count all the middle-aged ladies in colourful ethnic clothing who hate vaccines based on very flimsy arguments.
The coup thing is fairly unique, though.
>That sounds like a common world problem, not anything specifically Brazilian.
Before the pandemic I personally never saw a single person denying vaccines to their children. Our health system had one of the most successful vaccination programs in the world, we were nearing 100% rates on a country with a scale of continent. Since Bolsonaro our rates are dropping on a very alarming rate and on the streets you see people trash talking vaccines all the time, even solved diseases and infections are returning because of this.
And about the 700k deaths, a lot of studies have been published proving that if the piece of shit bought the vaccines earlier hundreds of thousands of lives could've been saved, or if he did not made a public campaign AGAINST the vaccine we could've saved countless lives.
Before the pandemic I personally never saw a single person denying vaccines to their children. Our health system had one of the most successful vaccination programs in the world, we were nearing 100% rates on a country with a scale of continent. Since Bolsonaro our rates are dropping on a very alarming rate and on the streets you see people trash talking vaccines all the time, even solved diseases and infections are returning because of this.
And about the 700k deaths, a lot of studies have been published proving that if the piece of shit bought the vaccines earlier hundreds of thousands of lives could've been saved, or if he did not made a public campaign AGAINST the vaccine we could've saved countless lives.
"Before the pandemic I personally never saw a single person denying vaccines to their children. "
In that sense, you were lucky before. In the Western world, widespread anti-vax paranoia dates at least back to the infamous Wakefield paper (1998) linking vaccination to autism. It was probably just a matter of time until it skipped over the ocean to Brazil as well. Language barrier might have protected you temporarily, but with the advent of automatic translation, it has been significantly lowered.
Ironically, there is no vaccine against bad ideas such as anti-vaxxery.
In that sense, you were lucky before. In the Western world, widespread anti-vax paranoia dates at least back to the infamous Wakefield paper (1998) linking vaccination to autism. It was probably just a matter of time until it skipped over the ocean to Brazil as well. Language barrier might have protected you temporarily, but with the advent of automatic translation, it has been significantly lowered.
Ironically, there is no vaccine against bad ideas such as anti-vaxxery.
Anti-vax existed in the US long before that. It was common in the hippy alt health movement for decades. Bullshit is a powerful force. So much so that it might be the norm not the exception.
> The coup thing is fairly unique, though.
Not as much. It was heavily inspired by the events in the USA.
Not as much. It was heavily inspired by the events in the USA.
> it was heavily inspired by a Russian-Chinese coalition trying to create a powerbloc in Latin America, and who also pushed for the same thing in the US
Lol Lula da Silva is much more pro-Russia and pro-China than Bolsonaro ever was
Yeah GP seems to have gotten a bit lost in ideology.
It's especially interesting since the whole thing with Steve Bannon & co. is pretty widely knwon.
It's especially interesting since the whole thing with Steve Bannon & co. is pretty widely knwon.
Did you read the article? It’s all about the currency problems and disparate exchange rates that have resulted in the country for the last 20+ years and has nothing to do with the president who’s been there for hardly 2 months. One of his first acts actually tackled that problem by slashing the artificial government exchange rate so that it’s much closer to the true black market rate.
We've tested many different ideologies and organisational structures just in the last few hundred years.
Currently we have a successful but pretty crappy form of capitalism. Some countries have experimented with Communism, fascism, oligarchy (ism)?), feudalism ect ect.
Why not give libertarianism a shot?
Currently we have a successful but pretty crappy form of capitalism. Some countries have experimented with Communism, fascism, oligarchy (ism)?), feudalism ect ect.
Why not give libertarianism a shot?
We did. Until the 1950s. We gave the states so much power under a confederacy the government didn't work and we had to go back to the drawing board to make a new constitution.
Things weren't regulated for a long time, and that's why there were literal snake-oil salesmen blowing literal smoke up your ass while their 10 year old kids worked 7 days a week. It was only around the 1900s that we really started regulating things -- and for good reason.
Things weren't regulated for a long time, and that's why there were literal snake-oil salesmen blowing literal smoke up your ass while their 10 year old kids worked 7 days a week. It was only around the 1900s that we really started regulating things -- and for good reason.
>Why not give libertarianism a shot?
Because it's capitalism on steroids? Are you not aware of the world we're living in? Every major forest destroyed, countless species exctinct, climate change reaching point of no return, etc.
We urgently need to slow down, not speed up.
Because it's capitalism on steroids? Are you not aware of the world we're living in? Every major forest destroyed, countless species exctinct, climate change reaching point of no return, etc.
We urgently need to slow down, not speed up.
The most developed countries should show us an example then. I am not Argentinian or from South America at all, but we have the same problems. As long as an average American keeps their consumption levels at more than 10× of ours, I am not listening to what they think we should or shouldn't do. Same for other poor countries, I guess.
That's the spirit. There really is no other way than development. If we try to go back to 19th-century resource consumption and CO2 emissions we also need 19th-century population numbers. If the "degrowth" (a euphemism for poverty and societal collapse) movement got absolute power that will be precisely the result, intentional or not.
This is such a tired argument. The socialist block was, at least by the 1980s, much more wasteful and destructive to the environment than the capitalist world. I encourage you to search for videos like "1980s krakow winter" or "Elbe river GDR" to see a few examples. Then for comparison research when capitalist countries passed their various environmental protection laws.
More than that, it's easy to make abstract statements like "we need to slow down", but how do you imagine that could be done? Who decides which sectors need to be frozen and how do we make sure we don't accidentally starve millions of Africans while doing it (look up food self-sufficiency numbers)?
More than that, it's easy to make abstract statements like "we need to slow down", but how do you imagine that could be done? Who decides which sectors need to be frozen and how do we make sure we don't accidentally starve millions of Africans while doing it (look up food self-sufficiency numbers)?
> Then for comparison research when capitalist countries passed their various environmental protection laws.
Then, for comparison, research the position people describing themselves as libertarians hold and held on the existence of these laws...
(I'm not a big fan of blanket statements on growth like "we should slow down" either, but libertarians deserve no more credit for the enactment of environmental laws they campaigned against than Stalinists do for the reunification of Germany)
Then, for comparison, research the position people describing themselves as libertarians hold and held on the existence of these laws...
(I'm not a big fan of blanket statements on growth like "we should slow down" either, but libertarians deserve no more credit for the enactment of environmental laws they campaigned against than Stalinists do for the reunification of Germany)
My comment was specifically a response to the "because it is capitalism on steroids" line of reasoning which implied that global warming and environment destruction are consequences of capitalism.
Do you know why the USA is the richest country in the world while being full of homeless, or has the strongest army in the world while having the shittiest healthcare of all developed countries?
Because liberalism, I/E shrink the state so that ~the corporations can rule~ the invisible hand of the market can fix everything.
Even Adam Smith recognised that you need a state to limit the power of the big actors in the invisible hand of the market.
Because liberalism, I/E shrink the state so that ~the corporations can rule~ the invisible hand of the market can fix everything.
Even Adam Smith recognised that you need a state to limit the power of the big actors in the invisible hand of the market.
The American healthcare system is not libertarian.
The US has the highest total health spending per capita in the world, more then France and the UK combined. [1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...
> Do you know why the USA is the richest country in the world while being full of homeless, or has the strongest army in the world while having the shittiest healthcare of all developed countries?
Yes, its in the post you're replying too. The USA run an oligarchy system where by the vast majority of money, power and influenced and controlled by an impossibly small interconnected group.
But its ok because every four years the peasants get to chooses which billionaire is the least worse and cast their vote.
What does anything in my post have to do with liberalism?
Yes, its in the post you're replying too. The USA run an oligarchy system where by the vast majority of money, power and influenced and controlled by an impossibly small interconnected group.
But its ok because every four years the peasants get to chooses which billionaire is the least worse and cast their vote.
What does anything in my post have to do with liberalism?
Well, oligarchy is the eventual result of liberalism. Even though we may have started equal, some people, through luck or questionable methods, have attained a position of power, possibly by being owners of a company that has a monopolistic status. And now, via regulatory capture and targeted actions against competitors, looks to subvert the "free" hand of the market.
Why can't you get decent internet in the States? Because on each location there are two or maybe three companies that collude to keep prices high. And when you try to start your own ISP, suddenly these companies offer crazy good/under cost prices so that your new ISP is unable to survive, and then jack up the prices again.
Of course, at any point, as a consumer, you are absolutely free to enter into a contract with whatever ISP you want. If only there were a few more...
Now tell me how do you fix that without bigger state imposing specific regulations.
Why can't you get decent internet in the States? Because on each location there are two or maybe three companies that collude to keep prices high. And when you try to start your own ISP, suddenly these companies offer crazy good/under cost prices so that your new ISP is unable to survive, and then jack up the prices again.
Of course, at any point, as a consumer, you are absolutely free to enter into a contract with whatever ISP you want. If only there were a few more...
Now tell me how do you fix that without bigger state imposing specific regulations.
Ok just to be clear, your the only one here talking about Liberalism.
Liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.
Liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.
Sure, can you explain the differences? Google is not being helpful here, it seems both words have quite a bit of propaganda behind them.
GP seems to be using the "classical liberalism" definition of liberalism, which largerly overlaps with what's generally considered libertarianism.
It seems like you are confusing two different terms, liberalism and libertarianism.
Can you explain the difference? Googling it is quite hard, as it mostly throws me biased views.
In the U.S.:
"Liberalism": Broadly, what other countries call social liberalism, i.e. liberty, individual rights, equality, all rooted in Locke's notion of the social contract.
"Libertarianism": An American revival of what's formally called classical liberalism. Broadly: Small government, strong individual rights, free market capitalism, etc.
"Liberalism": Broadly, what other countries call social liberalism, i.e. liberty, individual rights, equality, all rooted in Locke's notion of the social contract.
"Libertarianism": An American revival of what's formally called classical liberalism. Broadly: Small government, strong individual rights, free market capitalism, etc.
No, they are using the term “liberalism” in its historic meaning, not the current, US meaning.
>Why not give libertarianism a shot?
You'll soon see.
You'll soon see.
Did you read the article?
It's a shame to see people like you taking a stance on the matter without 0 knowledge speaking out emotionally
So, a regular Tuesday in Argentina. You grow insensitized to it through the years. Last time I got surprised (and laughed hard at the evil genius) was when last administration kept the conversion rate artificially low, but created a tax for buying dollars for saving.
> Just please let’s do better lunches than milanesa con papas next time, deal?
Science hasn't made that breakthrough yet :)
> Just please let’s do better lunches than milanesa con papas next time, deal?
Science hasn't made that breakthrough yet :)
Some background: https://www.ft.com/content/09e9e924-5ba9-11e9-9dde-7aedca0a0... "Argentina’s foreign exchange regime is broken" and https://www.elibrary.imf.org/display/book/9781557753649/ch01... "Multiple Exchange Rate Systems: The Case of Argentina"
Fixed exchange rates are effectively an import subsidy. This staves off the problems of massive price spikes in things like petrol and medicines, but devalues the (already struggling) exports. At least Argentina is self-sufficient in food.
Fixed exchange rates are effectively an import subsidy. This staves off the problems of massive price spikes in things like petrol and medicines, but devalues the (already struggling) exports. At least Argentina is self-sufficient in food.
"In Brazil, there is a frequent rhetoric about “we don’t want to become like Argentina” or “this politician will turn us into Argentina”. So I was left wondering: how bad is it over there really?"
In the 80s Brazil, there was a TV ad from Orloff vodka[1] where the guy talked to future-himself. The catchphrase was "Who are you?" "I'm you, but tomorrow".
That was it. Every news outlet started using the term "Orloff effect" to scare viewers and readers about brazilian government policies that would, in their opinion, inevitably make Brazil become an Argentina.
1. https://youtu.be/r5-Tsp1nLJU
In the 80s Brazil, there was a TV ad from Orloff vodka[1] where the guy talked to future-himself. The catchphrase was "Who are you?" "I'm you, but tomorrow".
That was it. Every news outlet started using the term "Orloff effect" to scare viewers and readers about brazilian government policies that would, in their opinion, inevitably make Brazil become an Argentina.
1. https://youtu.be/r5-Tsp1nLJU
>And Argentinians, thank you and best of luck. Just please let’s do better lunches than milanesa con papas next time, deal?
Milanesas are a godsend tbh though
Milanesas are a godsend tbh though
Knew this would be a bit of a contentious point! Have you seen how we do lunches in Brazil though?
(search for images about 'self service brasil' for instance)
(search for images about 'self service brasil' for instance)
Milanesa is about simplicity. Search "milanesa napolitana a caballo".
But to be honest: empanadas > milanesas
But to be honest: empanadas > milanesas
Note: I actually like milanesas quite a bit. Just struggled with the fact that lunch was either grabbing a few empanadas or milanesa con papas :D would have loved a bit more diversity!
Damn, they look amazing, planning to visit our neighbours soon, will be sure to find a place with something like that.
I think we are simpler fellows regarding food but we enjoy them a lot :P
I think we are simpler fellows regarding food but we enjoy them a lot :P
For those not keeping up with the news, Argentina used to be an extremely wealthy country, but went the reverse route many decades ago and has embraced peronism for awhile (kind of a mixture of socialism and fascism) that has led to rampant inflation.
They recently elected Javier Milei (an economist and former sex guru) who although some media claim is a radical rightwing candidate, center-right Libertarian might be more descriptive. He essentially wants to radically reduce government's role and put the country through (economic shock therapy) in the short term so they can have a chance of making a turn around. He has fired a huge amount of government staff he calls the "parasitic class" and I think they just recently actually balanced the budget for the first time in a decade. We'll see how things go. He's trying to get the country on the dollar and off the peso, so they'd just have to deal with the more sensible American inflation rate. It also makes some sense as everyone wants to use the dollar anyway and are basically doing it illegally. He is also removing a lot of government red tape for businesses.
He recently flew to Davos and basically told off those in attendance. Some of the things he says I agree with, but many others not so much. He seems to take a lot of Austrian economics views and if you're not familiar with this, it is essentially the ideology that folks like Ron Paul and a lot of the libertarian think tanks (e.g. Cato institute) proclaim. He said a lot of things that are counter to basic economics like "market failures don't exist". I think he believes that given no regulations, things would always sort themselves out, but zero regulations brings about another kind of hell IMO. He also pulled Argentina out of the BRICS negotiations (kind of a very loose federation of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) as he didn't want to get involved with communists. Only time will tell if this will be a huge failure or just what the country needs.
They recently elected Javier Milei (an economist and former sex guru) who although some media claim is a radical rightwing candidate, center-right Libertarian might be more descriptive. He essentially wants to radically reduce government's role and put the country through (economic shock therapy) in the short term so they can have a chance of making a turn around. He has fired a huge amount of government staff he calls the "parasitic class" and I think they just recently actually balanced the budget for the first time in a decade. We'll see how things go. He's trying to get the country on the dollar and off the peso, so they'd just have to deal with the more sensible American inflation rate. It also makes some sense as everyone wants to use the dollar anyway and are basically doing it illegally. He is also removing a lot of government red tape for businesses.
He recently flew to Davos and basically told off those in attendance. Some of the things he says I agree with, but many others not so much. He seems to take a lot of Austrian economics views and if you're not familiar with this, it is essentially the ideology that folks like Ron Paul and a lot of the libertarian think tanks (e.g. Cato institute) proclaim. He said a lot of things that are counter to basic economics like "market failures don't exist". I think he believes that given no regulations, things would always sort themselves out, but zero regulations brings about another kind of hell IMO. He also pulled Argentina out of the BRICS negotiations (kind of a very loose federation of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) as he didn't want to get involved with communists. Only time will tell if this will be a huge failure or just what the country needs.
I think this is a pretty fair assessment of Milei.
Do you feel the sex guru part adds much though? Maybe he is in an open relationship, or actually gay, or xyz... does it matter in his economic reform plans for Argentina?
Do you feel the sex guru part adds much though? Maybe he is in an open relationship, or actually gay, or xyz... does it matter in his economic reform plans for Argentina?
He isn't a lifelong politician, so when the media describes him, they refer to his career in the private sector which as far as I'm aware includes two jobs. One was as an economist and the other as a "sex guru" of some kind. I have no idea what all that involved (mainly been following the economic reforms). If he had been an electrician beforehand they would have said economist and electrician. Some may try to use it to try to throw shade i suppose. I was using it in the sense of being complete.
> they refer to his career in the private sector which as far as I'm aware includes two jobs. One was as an economist and the other as a "sex guru" of some kind.
He was an economics professor for more than 20 years.
And he has also been a semi pro football player, played in a rock band, and been a tantric sex instructor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javier_Milei
He was an economics professor for more than 20 years.
And he has also been a semi pro football player, played in a rock band, and been a tantric sex instructor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javier_Milei
tantric sex instructor
I think it expresses the depth of his character. He’s been good at a few things - one of them just happens to be sex guru. It’s also about as far away as you get from economists (sorry economists).
it is essentially the ideology that folks like Ron Paul and a lot of the libertarian think tanks (e.g. Cato institute) proclaim
That's unfair to Milei. He actually practices what he preaches.
Ron Paul would talk the talk but when it came to saying no to pork...
https://www.latimes.com/archives/blogs/top-of-the-ticket/sto...
His son is the senator from Kentucky...a state that wouldn't survive without "handouts" from the federal government...
Also..BRICS is a joke. It was made up by Goldman Sachs..
https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelligence/archive/building-b...
That's unfair to Milei. He actually practices what he preaches.
Ron Paul would talk the talk but when it came to saying no to pork...
https://www.latimes.com/archives/blogs/top-of-the-ticket/sto...
His son is the senator from Kentucky...a state that wouldn't survive without "handouts" from the federal government...
Also..BRICS is a joke. It was made up by Goldman Sachs..
https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelligence/archive/building-b...
Sound fiat central bank managed monetary policy is now libertarianism? Sheesh...
I mean I guess he could talk about floating a gold standard, but dollars seems like 1.) Something people already use there and understand, and 2.) The Fed has inflation, but it's far far more stable than what they're used to. So it's a decision of practicality.
this is a pretty good post
if you're interested in what the fuck is going on in argentina, you might try
one minor problem with the post: 'the white rate' is a phrase this blogger made up; if you talk to people about 'the white rate' or 'el dólar blanco' or 'el tipo de cambio blanco' nobody will have any idea what you're talking about
if you're interested in what the fuck is going on in argentina, you might try
git clone http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/pavnotes2.git
one minor problem with the post: 'the white rate' is a phrase this blogger made up; if you talk to people about 'the white rate' or 'el dólar blanco' or 'el tipo de cambio blanco' nobody will have any idea what you're talking about
Beware, exploits have been found in the past where cloning a repo allows remote code execution.
interesting; i hadn't heard about that
it looks like there was one in 02018: https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/es/security/news/vulnerabil... and another one in 02021 which only affected macos users with a non-default configuration https://portswigger.net/daily-swig/git-vulnerability-could-e... and more worryingly two in 02022 https://www.infoq.com/news/2023/01/git-remote-code-vulnerabi...
hopefully there aren't any new ones
it looks like there was one in 02018: https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/es/security/news/vulnerabil... and another one in 02021 which only affected macos users with a non-default configuration https://portswigger.net/daily-swig/git-vulnerability-could-e... and more worryingly two in 02022 https://www.infoq.com/news/2023/01/git-remote-code-vulnerabi...
hopefully there aren't any new ones
(just to point out what ought to be obvious, this is a vastly lower risk than opening a web page in a browser, in the sense that remote code execution vulnerabilities are found in browsers at a much higher and constantly increasing rate)
I wouldn't be so sure about that, more RCEs are found on browsers because it's just such a popular attack vector. An RCE in git repos could go undetected for far far longer probably.
the git codebase is roughly 100× smaller than chromium, so, all else being equal, you'd expect 600× more bugs of any kind in chromium — more bugs per day in chromium than bugs per year in git
there are design considerations to consider, but it's not clear to me which way they shift the balance: chromium's sandboxing layer means that you need a sandbox escape, but, on the other hand, chromium intentionally downloads and executes malicious code all the time, and that's inherently riskier than what git does, which is efficiently synchronizing a merkle graph of blobs. it's hard to imagine that this matters more than the sheer size of the codebase, though
chromium's churn rate is also much higher, so the rate of new bug production is higher
there are design considerations to consider, but it's not clear to me which way they shift the balance: chromium's sandboxing layer means that you need a sandbox escape, but, on the other hand, chromium intentionally downloads and executes malicious code all the time, and that's inherently riskier than what git does, which is efficiently synchronizing a merkle graph of blobs. it's hard to imagine that this matters more than the sheer size of the codebase, though
chromium's churn rate is also much higher, so the rate of new bug production is higher
Sure, but this does not take into account the appeal for trying to exploit said codebases. Who pulls from an untrusted git instance ? Very very few people, hence the very low incentive to look for exploits. Who uses Chromium ? E-ve-ry-one.
i'm pretty sure people clone git repos from unknown github users all the time. i can't be the only one. and there's a special incentive to exploit those people: they're the ones who build the software that runs everywhere else, so if you can own their laptops, you own the world
regardless, the nonexistence of security holes is a much, much better protection than insufficient incentives to find the undoubtedly numerous security holes
regardless, the nonexistence of security holes is a much, much better protection than insufficient incentives to find the undoubtedly numerous security holes
I said git instance, not repo.
I would imagine that by directly manipulating the cloning process and not just the repository, a larger attack vector could be exploited.
But yes, I agree with the rest of your points
I would imagine that by directly manipulating the cloning process and not just the repository, a larger attack vector could be exploited.
But yes, I agree with the rest of your points
there's no such thing as a 'git instance'
haha sure. so when you git clone something, it arrives to you through divination, and there is no larger attack vector once you can meddle with the entire communication part and not just the blobs and refs.
in this case it arrives to you through apache, which gives git the contents of the files it requests, just like the filesystem does when you clone a repo off a usb pendrive. there's no git-specific code running on the server when you clone that url
there is, however, a faster 'smart http' git cloning protocol which apache can't participate in, and that is indeed a potential attack surface. i don't think any of the bugs i linked upthread were in that protocol though
there is, however, a faster 'smart http' git cloning protocol which apache can't participate in, and that is indeed a potential attack surface. i don't think any of the bugs i linked upthread were in that protocol though
I'm not going to clone a git repo to read a file, but I did waste some time clicking around your site trying to find this file that you mentioned, to no avail. Just FYI.
yeah, as far as i know, it's only available by git cloning. it doesn't benefit me if you read it, just you, so it's fine with me if you don't read it. i'm only mentioning it for the sake of the people who would find it interesting
i mean, in theory, you could do this in Python
reading the file is going to take you an hour or two, so if spending an extra thirty seconds to clone the repo is a significant cost in this context, you probably shouldn't start
i mean, in theory, you could do this in Python
>>> print(zlib.decompress(urlopen(
'http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/pavnotes2.git/objects/03/220089fdc6713fc459ac71da35d6c8abb5b110'
).read()).decode('utf-8'))
reading the file is going to take you an hour or two, so if spending an extra thirty seconds to clone the repo is a significant cost in this context, you probably shouldn't start
OK - I wont bother. Just letting you know, as you were downvoted a bunch when I commented.
im not going to clone a repo and import code just to read a text file.
put it in a pastebin or get a blog man. substack is a thing for a reason.
put it in a pastebin or get a blog man. substack is a thing for a reason.
that's good, you aren't my audience
there's no code
there's no code
“To give you have an idea, within the first 2 days in Argentina, I dealt with over five different rates. A restaurant actually offered me the proper blue rate (1100) to pay for the bill, whereas one cueva (informal exchange house) offered me 1050 and another 1070. The kiosk where I bought a SIM card from had it at 1060, and Uber, who did the currency conversion themselves rather than leaving it up to my credit card, did it at 1000.”
Ah, no. You do the cambio in downtown Buenos Aires once for the whole trip. Random restaurants offering you different rates or inflating your bill is simply people trying to take advantage of a foreigner.
Ah, no. You do the cambio in downtown Buenos Aires once for the whole trip. Random restaurants offering you different rates or inflating your bill is simply people trying to take advantage of a foreigner.
There's that thing about the largest bill being 2000 pesos atm, and even that being rare.
You might need a bag to carry cash for the whole trip, and it will attract the wrong kind of attention?
You might need a bag to carry cash for the whole trip, and it will attract the wrong kind of attention?
This is very accurate. Normally western union will give you notes of 1000 pesos, which is just about manageable in pockets if you're getting a few hundred dollars.
I had one instance where there was only one western union I could use (because of the weekend) and they only had 100 and 200 peso notes. I walked out with 300 dollars worth of notes in a black bin bag and hurriedly tried to find a taxi before anyone noticed...
I had one instance where there was only one western union I could use (because of the weekend) and they only had 100 and 200 peso notes. I walked out with 300 dollars worth of notes in a black bin bag and hurriedly tried to find a taxi before anyone noticed...
Actually we found we got better rates elsewhere (El Chaltén hotels for example would exchange at the daily blue rate from DolarYa) plus the random restaurants were the ones usually offering the legit rate. Unlike the cueva, they actually don't have leverage, and would love to get their hands on some dollars.
We never exchanged money like this, but were happy to pay the bill in dollars at the end (prices were never set in dollars). And the math checked out completely.
Note we also came with a similar-ish mentality. Let's exchange early on and be set. But this misses out a key point (that hopefully will become less relevant). The currency devalues fast. Exchange early on and you might find yourself holding a lot less than you got.
We spent a month in Argentina, and had we done this, we'd have taken a 9% hit just on devaluation.
We never exchanged money like this, but were happy to pay the bill in dollars at the end (prices were never set in dollars). And the math checked out completely.
Note we also came with a similar-ish mentality. Let's exchange early on and be set. But this misses out a key point (that hopefully will become less relevant). The currency devalues fast. Exchange early on and you might find yourself holding a lot less than you got.
We spent a month in Argentina, and had we done this, we'd have taken a 9% hit just on devaluation.
I’m with ya if you’re going to stay for a prolonged duration or exchange significant sums.
A month for me was <$500 so the hassle was not be worth it (time, risk) but ymmv of course.
There’s also FB groups for expats to get a slightly better rate from shifty brits.
A month for me was <$500 so the hassle was not be worth it (time, risk) but ymmv of course.
There’s also FB groups for expats to get a slightly better rate from shifty brits.
[deleted]
What's wrong with that? In my country you'll get all the kinds of rates when trying to exchange your dollars. They'll probably be within few % of each other, but that's the market. Every exchange and every bank sets their own rates.
I guess some US cards also charge a lot for foreign transactions? I always paid in pesos on card, and in fact I don't think anyone ever even tried to charge me in dollars.
Also, with Uber, you're not likely to get many rides if you pay by card.
Also, with Uber, you're not likely to get many rides if you pay by card.
[deleted]
I am told as of last year, if you pay for things with Visa or Mastercard credit, they give you the blue dollar rate as well.
[deleted]
That volatility is common
Exactly, EUR/HUF rates would be infuriating in Hungary if I wanted to pay with EUR in restaurants.
I've been there in 2011. Wonderful place. At the time Brazil was recovering from the 2008 crises, which was very light for us, and our economy was probably at its top. I had my first job as a programmer and was very well payed compared to locals. I saved all the money to travel there and pay all expenses for me and my girlfriend in about just 4 months; that's how strongly we were economically. At the time 1 Brazilian real was worth 2 Argentinian pesos and 1 USD was worth less than 2 BRL.
At the time, Cristina Kirchner had just won elections and BsAs was full of her posters. Being there at the time felt like being in Europe HDI with south american prices; it was that good and cheap. Cities were beautiful, clean, organized, I spent some time in La Plata which seemed designed in simcity, felt much safer than Brazil and although there were already some signs of decadence like some poor people around, it still looked much better than Brazil.
Around 2014 Argentina had already entered in crises, and so did Brazil. At my job, a new colleague was from Argentina. I think he was a level-headed liberal, he sometimes talked about something like how the situation there was. By that time, 1 BRL was worth around 4 pesos and 1 USD was worth 2.35 BRL.
Two years ago (2022) I talked with a friend. I explained him how in 2011 I could save all the money to travel Argetina in just 4 months, I couldn't do the same now even if I get twice the salary I had at the time: our prices increased a lot and even though at the time 1 BRL was worth more than 30 pesos!
Now, here we are in 2024: 1 BRL is worth around 170 pesos, 1 USD is close to 5 BRL. The article says: "We were mostly left with the impression that it wouldn’t be so bad to turn into Argentina after all.", " I felt safer in most places than I do anywhere in Brazil", "I had an incredible time in Argentina. The country is absolutely stunning, and the people are also fantastic.". Actually it is not Brazil who may turn into Argentina, but Argentina which is turning into Brazil after a long effort to keep social indexes high... artificially or not.
We in Brazil also had our own hyper-inflation period. It happened during the 80's. Prices were so volatile that my father bought things and wrote in boxes what the price was in liters of gasoline, so he could have an idea of how much it had really cost. We took a long time to reach stability, from the 90's to early 2000's, but we got there and I hope Argentina will be able to do the same.
Although Brazil and Argentina are seen as rivals, I really love that country and people and wish them the best.
At the time, Cristina Kirchner had just won elections and BsAs was full of her posters. Being there at the time felt like being in Europe HDI with south american prices; it was that good and cheap. Cities were beautiful, clean, organized, I spent some time in La Plata which seemed designed in simcity, felt much safer than Brazil and although there were already some signs of decadence like some poor people around, it still looked much better than Brazil.
Around 2014 Argentina had already entered in crises, and so did Brazil. At my job, a new colleague was from Argentina. I think he was a level-headed liberal, he sometimes talked about something like how the situation there was. By that time, 1 BRL was worth around 4 pesos and 1 USD was worth 2.35 BRL.
Two years ago (2022) I talked with a friend. I explained him how in 2011 I could save all the money to travel Argetina in just 4 months, I couldn't do the same now even if I get twice the salary I had at the time: our prices increased a lot and even though at the time 1 BRL was worth more than 30 pesos!
Now, here we are in 2024: 1 BRL is worth around 170 pesos, 1 USD is close to 5 BRL. The article says: "We were mostly left with the impression that it wouldn’t be so bad to turn into Argentina after all.", " I felt safer in most places than I do anywhere in Brazil", "I had an incredible time in Argentina. The country is absolutely stunning, and the people are also fantastic.". Actually it is not Brazil who may turn into Argentina, but Argentina which is turning into Brazil after a long effort to keep social indexes high... artificially or not.
We in Brazil also had our own hyper-inflation period. It happened during the 80's. Prices were so volatile that my father bought things and wrote in boxes what the price was in liters of gasoline, so he could have an idea of how much it had really cost. We took a long time to reach stability, from the 90's to early 2000's, but we got there and I hope Argentina will be able to do the same.
Although Brazil and Argentina are seen as rivals, I really love that country and people and wish them the best.
Is it true the Brazil Real is named after that currency crisis. Meaning the real rate of the currency or just urban legend?
Yes it is true. And before the new bills came, we a value unit which was called URV: "unidade real de valor" which is portuguese for "Unity of real value".
Source:
"Por que o 'real' ganhou esse nome? Por que ele matava dois coelhos também. Tem fundo histórico, já que é o nome da moeda anterior ao cruzeiro, e remete à ideia de uma moeda com 'valor real'."[1]
Translation: How 'real' got its name? Two birds in one stone. There's also a historic background, since it is the name of the currency befrore cruzeiro and brings the idea of a currency with 'real value'".
[1] https://super.abril.com.br/coluna/oraculo/por-que-a-moeda-br...
Source:
"Por que o 'real' ganhou esse nome? Por que ele matava dois coelhos também. Tem fundo histórico, já que é o nome da moeda anterior ao cruzeiro, e remete à ideia de uma moeda com 'valor real'."[1]
Translation: How 'real' got its name? Two birds in one stone. There's also a historic background, since it is the name of the currency befrore cruzeiro and brings the idea of a currency with 'real value'".
[1] https://super.abril.com.br/coluna/oraculo/por-que-a-moeda-br...
The currency was named "real" as in "royal", not as in "actual". And it was what the Portuguese and later Brazilian currency was called from the 1400s until the 20th century. (or at least that's the actual etymology of the currency, even though "real" does also mean "actual" in portuguese now.)
This is really true. Renaming the currency did actually help to stabilize the inflation spiral.
Once financial systems collapse a lot of things stop making any sort of sense. Behaviours and incentives change. You saw the same in Zim
I visited the Soviet Union right at the tail end, and it sounds similar. Official exchange rate (4 rubles to the dollar), street exchange rate (12+ rubles), a mix of shops and restaurants taking dollars unofficially, and people were generally ... fine with it? The economy obviously wasn't working, but everyone was housed, fed and clothed.
The ruble was not convertible to foreign currencies prior to that though. If you lived there you could only exchange it for dollars/marks/etc. if you were travelling and only a very limited amount (and of course only well-connected people were allowed to do that anyway).
Besides international trade which was fully controlled by the state the USSR wasn't a part of the global financial system. The ruble was more like a token or a scrip (with very limited uses) rather than a real currency. Which is why the state managed to keep a lid on stuff there, there was almost no way for goods/money/people to get in or out at any significant scale.
Besides international trade which was fully controlled by the state the USSR wasn't a part of the global financial system. The ruble was more like a token or a scrip (with very limited uses) rather than a real currency. Which is why the state managed to keep a lid on stuff there, there was almost no way for goods/money/people to get in or out at any significant scale.
I remember that time. The prices were often set in “UE” (uslovniye edinitsi) translated as “conventional units”, which were of course understood by everyone to be USD. Because using any non-ruble currency for official purposes was illegal.
Zim's inflation was several orders of magnitude worse than this though.
> It also didn’t just stop there. January saw a 20% inflation rate, meaning from the day we crossed the border from Uruguay to Argentina to the day we crossed the border back to Brazil, about a month later, prices were about 20% higher.
That’s not a 20% inflation rate. It’s a monthly amount.
That’s a 1.2^12 - 1 = 791.60% inflation rate.
That’s not a 20% inflation rate. It’s a monthly amount.
That’s a 1.2^12 - 1 = 791.60% inflation rate.
"inflation rate" does not necessarily means annual rate, so it will depend on the context. For those that never lived through hyperinflation, they rarely see it discussed in terms of month-over-month comparison, but someone in Argentina, Venezuela or 80/90s Brazil would just assume that "20% inflation" means "monthly".
Unless otherwise specified, rates are assumed to be annualized. That’s standard for everything from mortgages to inflation as it allows for an apples to apples comparison.
My point with showing the annualized calculation was so that those of us in the rest of the world, the majority of people on this site, could better grasp the severity of the problem.
In the USA we’ve had about 20% inflation in consumer goods (or at least according to CPI) in the past three years and it’s been a hot topic. The Argentina numbers are staggering.
My point with showing the annualized calculation was so that those of us in the rest of the world, the majority of people on this site, could better grasp the severity of the problem.
In the USA we’ve had about 20% inflation in consumer goods (or at least according to CPI) in the past three years and it’s been a hot topic. The Argentina numbers are staggering.
Not sure if I'll call this hyper inflation though?
At it's peak, Zimbabwe had a month-on-month inflation of ~80Billion %.
At it's peak, Zimbabwe had a month-on-month inflation of ~80Billion %.
The current blue rate is 1100 but it was 13 when we visited Argentine 10 years ago. Back then, 100 peso bank note was actually quite convenient.
Peso lost value hundredfold in a decade. Go figure.
The whole country has left a disorganized feel back then, so when we hopped the border over to Chile we felt we're having a vacation in a vacation.
Peso lost value hundredfold in a decade. Go figure.
The whole country has left a disorganized feel back then, so when we hopped the border over to Chile we felt we're having a vacation in a vacation.
It’s the shock doctrine again.
Argentina has been both badly treated by the international financial system AND completely failed to fix their own problems. After agricultural export collapsed mid-century they've failed to develop better export industries except a bit of tourism.
We have two problems: corruption and some organizations pushing against us.
https://www.greenpeace.org/argentina/campanas-ganadas/
Greenpeace helped ban salmon farming.
They also tried to stop offshore oil exploration, they just delayed it. This is the kind of things we cannot accept
https://www.greenpeace.org/argentina/campanas-ganadas/
Greenpeace helped ban salmon farming.
They also tried to stop offshore oil exploration, they just delayed it. This is the kind of things we cannot accept
Booking.com shows the price in official pesos, thats why she charged 200usd as 160k ars, when you pay domestically. She didnt make you a cut.
I spent 4 weeks in Argentina and you can perfectly pay with Mastercard or visa and get the unofficial tourist fx rate. Everybody accepts card.
May get downvoted.
The author talks about the people being very friendly.
If the author is white, that is a very different experience than if you’re a person of color.
Hollywood gives tall while people a special perception in places that don’t have white folks.
You could be super wealthy and black, and most countries would still treat you as a poor African.
The biases based on color are very real.
The author talks about the people being very friendly.
If the author is white, that is a very different experience than if you’re a person of color.
Hollywood gives tall while people a special perception in places that don’t have white folks.
You could be super wealthy and black, and most countries would still treat you as a poor African.
The biases based on color are very real.
JojoFatsani(6)
The other thing to note is that Mastercard (and Visa I believe) have a newer rate specifically aimed at tourists (the MEP rate), which normally stays closer to the informal rate (blue dollar rate). Annoyingly they tend to charge your account with the official rate, and then refund the difference a few days later.
There's also this website which has a view of all the different rates: https://bluedollar.net/