97 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 173 ms ] thread
I hope the sentence is that he is forced to follow through on eating his d!#k
He’ll say he would have but national TV isn’t allowed to film in prison.

I think he still has 85 days or something.

So he hid money from taxes. Shameful, but not unexpected with his libertarian streak.
I'm not sure political sway has ever affected a persons motivation to hide taxes!
That's actually an interesting question I don't think I've ever seen any real data on. Anecdotally, I find libertarians and Republicans to be far more likely to subscribe to anti-tax rhetoric than Democrats, but I don't know if that translates to any meaningful action in practice beyond the fringes.

...although in this specific case, McAfee is, well, kind of a fringe unto himself.

> That's actually an interesting question I don't think I've

> ever seen any real data on.

For sure, not exactly the sort of study you can get people to sign up to. Are you measuring how successfully they hide their taxes or how prevalent it is in that political sphere?

> Anecdotally, I find libertarians and Republicans to be far

> more likely to subscribe to anti-tax rhetoric than

> Democrats, but I don't know if that translates to any

> meaningful action in practice beyond the fringes.

I would guess that you might be a Democrat voter then? The reason I ask is because you might vote for them because they seem trustworthy, or they seem trustworthy because you vote for them.

This was an interesting week for sure.

After republicans being unable to detach themselves from white supremacists, I assume that any republican jew, latino, asian or black, feeling a minimum of respect by themselves, wouldn't want to touch the party with a ten-foot pole at this moment.

But many of they would not vote democrats either, so could be a sort of republican exodus in search of a party at this moment.

It seems that the most popular alternative options are the Libertarian Jo Jorgensen or the Green Howie Hawkins.

This is the first time that I see the Libertarian party mentioned in all those months, and it seems that McAfee identifying as libertarian is having consequences for him, -just right now-, and his money was blocked.

That is really interesting if we think about it.

Ironically, the most valuable contribution to Donald Trump to US democracy could be to allow a third party (or more independent actors) to put a foot in the door. Something that clearly would benefit the system, and an once-in-life opportunity.

(comment deleted)
Wow, I guess my whole Jewish republican family has lost their right to be considered self respecting jews!

It's amazing how frequently the attempt to hurl the white supremacy card, is actually patronizing, condescending, and racist in itself.

I guess so too. Any self respecting jew distances themselves from things that have harmed them in the past. But they don’t have to, and they don’t have to be self respecting either. It’s a choice after all.
Don't you love when the worlwide terrorists go to foreign sovereign nations to make arrests? Rememebr Kim dotcom? Same crap.
Are you against extradition? You want people to be able to commit crimes and as long as they get out of the country they’re untouchable?
There should always be somewhere to go, just in case you're being prosecuted unjustly. Snowden is a great example. Assange is another.
Many countries refuse to extradite for "political" crimes.

I'm in favour of extradition provided due process is respected, no cruel or unusual punishments are involved, and the crime is a crime in both juridsictions (and not political).

(comment deleted)
Yeah but there's a difference between seeking asylum and not feeling like paying taxes.
Seeking asylum for the repercussions of not paying taxes.
Except that per your comment above, we're talking about the broader subject of "commiting crimes", not paying taxes.
A black and white for or against extradition is too simple when you consider some countries like the US (or China) have extremely expansive views of their jurisdiction to enforce political or compliance violation crimes.
A US citizen being charged with not paying taxes owed to the US is not an expansive view of jurisdiction.

It's pretty much par for how extradition is supposed to work.

My point has not about McAfee, of course tax evasion is illegal pretty much anywhere. I’m just saying extradition looks pretty different when its for violence or murder vs a powerful state enforcing its laws on non citizens or political refugees.
McAffe should have known better. He has enough money to buy any banana republic citizenship that does not have extradition treaties.
> McAffe should have known better. He has enough money to buy any banana republic citizenship that does not have extradition treaties.

IIRC, the citizenship of the person to be extradited is completely irrelevant, so having a "banana republic citizenship" would no change a thing. Countries indite foreign citizens all the time, a notable recent example is Meng Wanzhou.

> the worlwide [sic] terrorists

Who are you talking about?

In general, EU countries only extradite for things which are crimes locally (and to places where the extraditee won’t be executed). This fits both criteria so it’s fairly normal (and who’d want to hold onto McAffee?)
why didn’t he just renounce citizenship. he hasn’t been to america in a long time has he
renouncing US citizenship is a taxable event itself if you have a net worth greater than $2mm. IIRC, you have to pay what the capital gains would be on all your assets if you sold them that day. you also have to settle any other unpaid obligations. if john mcafee already doesn't feel obligated to pay taxes, I don't see why he would go through a formality that just triggers another tax obligation.
Even if you don't have a high net worth it triggers a 5 year tax audit and fees. My mate just handed in his passport even though he's been doing his W2's annually and he still had to pay $2k to renounce.
Yeah, that’s how US Americans can get dual citizenship in Germany. If the fee for renouncing is an "unreasonable burden" for you.
The $2k is the filing fee. Seems punitive when compared to other government fees.
Then why did Facebook’s cofounder do it to save $600M?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielmitchell/2012/05/11/faceb...

I don't understand why he got the citizenship in the first place, it's not like he was born there. If you have a green card already, there's no reason to go for the citizenship. The cons far outweigh the benefits. You're always on the hook with American citizenship.
Eh, it's not that much worse. With a green card, you're still subject to the 5-year tax thing after you leave.

IMO the green card isn't worth it.

He didn't have a choice. His parents moved here and got US citizenship when he was under 18, and so he automatically became a US citizen.
>He didn't have a choice. His parents moved here and got US citizenship when he was under 18, and so he automatically became a US citizen.

That's just not true.

While I was born in the US, my (British) father moved here with two small children, and neither were made citizens "automatically."

50+ years later, my sister is a citizen, but she had to proactively do so. My brother still has a green card.

The applicable law didn't take effect until the Clinton administration....

So it would have applied to Sauverin but not to your siblings.

I was unaware of the change in the law.

I assume you're referring to the Child Citizenship Act of 2000[0], yes?

Thanks for setting me straight.

But I'm a little confused about that. I assume you're talking about Eduardo Saverin[1] the Facebook co-founder.

According to his Wikipedia page, he turned 18 (born 19 March 1982) before that law went into effect on February 27, 2001. As such, are you sure he was automatically made a citizen rather than going through the naturalization process?

[0] https://www.passportvisasexpress.com/news/article/child_citi...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Saverin#Early_life_and...

you gotta love the impartial quality of the Forbes op-ed section

"It is very sad that America’s tax system is so onerous that some rich people feel they have no choice but to give up U.S. citizenship in order to protect their family finances. I’ve written about this issue before, particularly in the context of Obama’s class-warfare policies leading to an increase in the number of Americans “voting with their feet” for places with less punitive tax regimes."

guy makes it sound like some immigrant father with 10k in the mattress was going to get fleeced by the authorities

Sauverin wasn't originally a US citizen to begin with. He acquired US citizenship when his parents moved here when he was a child and he got citizenship automatically.

He left the US in 2009 and renounced his US citizenship several years later.

While he saved a lot of money on taxes by doing so, he had been living overseas prior to renouncing his citizenship and has remained overseas since doing so.

(comment deleted)
the answer is in the article you linked. he expected (correctly) that his equity was going to be worth considerably more after the IPO, so he renounced his citizenship before that happened. I have no idea what mcafee's portfolio looks like, but I'd guess he's not in the same situation. plus like he said, he doesn't feel obligated to pay taxes in the first place.
Maybe because he is running for president? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McAfee_2020_presidential_...
Well, "running" for president. Under a slogan of "Don't Vote McAfee", and with neither himself nor many of his campaign staff physically located in the country. (Indeed, it's likely that he would have been arrested upon entry, under the same charges that just got him arrested in Spain.) One gets the sense that he didn't take his "campaign" particularly seriously.
It isn't easy to do if you are rich, basically.
(comment deleted)
SEC hit him with civil charges too, btw those are dispelled by simply having a disclaimer, or another paragraph in a disclaimer so it hard to the position of the SEC and the character assassination in these charges seriously.

You can have the same tweets that also says *sponsored with 50,000 tokens and cash and speculators wont care and you are magically legal.

"Gringo: The Dangerous Life of John McAfee" is an eye opening view into his world and the history of the McAfee corporation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gringo:_The_Dangerous_Life_of_...

Heard many of the accusations made in this film are fabricated. For example, I heard that the film makers paid some of the women in the film to say stuff that MacAfee never engaged in. So I would watch this documentary with a skeptical mind but it is an entertaining documentary none the less, just don't take it 100% serious.
Was the part where they said he probably paid to have his neighbor murdered true? Because that was not a very good look for him.
(comment deleted)
Yes. I am so tired of this somehow rebranding from murderer/rapist to eccentric security expert.
Not according to Mrs McAfee on Twitter: https://twitter.com/theemrsmcafee/status/1313238348438401024
(comment deleted)
(comment deleted)
Today's announcement was merely that he was indicted back in June and the indictment is now unsealed.

He was arrested in June and presumably may be out on bail in Spain while the extradition hearing proceeds.

As far as unsealed indictments go, this one isn’t very entertaining. Barely longer than the press release. There’s gotta be more pages to be released.
He is too old to be prosecuted, it's unethical . . .
McAfee, the marketing nightmare that just keeps on giving. I genuinely don't understand why McAfee the company hasn't changed its name yet.

In the meantime, some greatest hits:

How to Uninstall McAfee (NSFW-ish) https://youtu.be/bKgf5PaBzyg

The McAfee guide to bribery in the third world http://www.whoismcafee.com/the-travel-guide/

McAfee, like Symantec, has a Compliance driven sales cycle. No one likes the software, few think it's useful, but businesses must buy it due to their regulatory burdens.

The name doesn't matter. The marketing doesn't matter. The features don't matter. The performance doesn't matter. Laws and Industry Groups matter.

That's true. Compliance - we went with clamav for what we do - it was easy to set up on cloud.
Perhaps there is a market for antivirus software that literally does nothing.

- Enterprise ready - runs on premise

- Vastly faster than the competition

- Huge profit margins due to minimized developer costs

A bit like http://vanilla-js.com the Javascript framework of 0 bytes (25 bytes compressed), but that antivirus would have the upside of having exactly 0 added risk, which distinguishes it from the rest of its industry.
Compliance to what? I’m genuinely curious about who would mandate antivirus.
Any regulated industry where money or lives are at stake. An example is finance where regulations specifically state that you must have antivirus installed, even on servers.
what class software as antivirus for the legislator?
Doesn't Defender qualify as satisfying the regulatory burden?
(comment deleted)
Even for smaller companies, when doing financial audit (required by law in many places) - consultant firms do highly encourage use of “endpoint protection across organization”. So in case of some IT screwup and financial losses, the auditors can say- “Well, they had Industry standard antivirus, so this shouldn’t have happened. Our financial risk assesment was still correct.”
PCI-DSS pretty much requires a malware protection solution. In practice - an antivirus.
Why Not Windows Defender? It’s really quite competent and it’s pretty lightweight.
That is just fine for PCI-DSS. Not a problem at all.
For a short period they actually looked like they were rebranding as Intel security. All their material stopped actually saying "McAfee". Intel selling them off again put a stop to that.

The other branding issue is no-one seems capable of spelling McAfee. In the last thread on John, multiple people referred to "mcaffee", something I regularly see from their own sales people.

The "How to Uninstall McAfee" video is amazing; it is also pretty NSFW for anyone considering clicking on it at work.

Apparently the woman giving him a lap dance/walking away with him in the end is his wife.

Mr. Most Interesting Man in the World.

The IRS is a fun entity to have to fight off... good luck with that.

So now who will be the next U.S. president?